Archive for the ‘Gun Rights/2nd Amendment’ Category

Anti-gun Health Draft Includes Annual Fines Up To $3800

September 11, 2009

*GOA

Baucus Health Care Draft to Fine Reluctant Gun Owners up to $3,800

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
http://www.gunowners.org

Thursday, September 10, 2009

By now, members of Gun Owners of America should have received pre-written postcards opposing the anti-gun health care bills that are floating around on Capitol Hill.  

Please send in those postcards — as it’s very important for legislative offices to see mounds of gun owners’ mail being dumped on their desks

Now that Congress is back in session — and the President has given his televised push on health care — it is time for us to redouble our efforts. 

To review the bidding: 

Every major health care bill being considered in Congress would require many (if not most) Americans to be covered by insurance policies written by the Obama administration — so-called ObamaCare. 

Among other things, ObamaCare will almost certainly require, by regulation, that all gun-related medical data be fed into a federal health database — pursuant to a $20 billion program Obama insisted be included in the $787 billion stimulus bill. 

So, as a gun owner who doesn’t want this data to be trolled by the BATFE from a federal database, you might say: 

* “I’m not going to buy an ObamaCare policy.” 

or

* “I’m going to buy the type of insurance that I want to buy.”

Well, anti-gun Democrat Max Baucus (D-MT) has a question for you:  “How would you like to pay a $3,800 a yearfine?”

That’s right.  In a legislative draft released this week, Baucus would fine you up to $3,800 for not buying preciselythe insurance policy which Barack Obama orders you to buy. 

So, what’s going to be required under ObamaCare?  And how much is it going to cost? 

Baucus isn’t going to tell you that until after the bill is passed.  We do know that, under the Baucus draft, a lower middle income family could be forced to pay up to 13% of its income to buy an ObamaCare policy. And, presumably, a middle income family would be required to spend much, much more. 

Take into consideration that the Baucus draft — with its $3,800 per year fines and its ObamaCare -related gun databases — is the so-called “conservative” bill.  This is the one that they’re trying to get Republicans to sign onto because it’s so “conservative.”  The final Pelosi-written conference report will be much, much worse. 

Incidentally, Obama opposed forcing Americans to purchase government-approved insurance during the campaign, but guess what?  He lied. 

ACTION:

1. Write your Senators. Ask them to oppose the anti-gun Baucus draft, with its requirement that Americans purchase an Obama-approved insurance policy or pay a $3,800 annual fine.  This legislative draft has not yet been publicly released; however, several news agencies have reported on its key features — and these reviews are widely available on the Internet.  

You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Centerathttp://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm
to send your legislators the pre-written e-mail message below.

2. Distribute this email far and wide. There are people that you know who should be involved in the fight against socialized health care who are just sitting on the sidelines.  Please forward this email to them and get them involved in the fight!

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear Senator:

Please oppose the open-ended anti-gun mandates contained in the Baucus health draft. Among other things, Baucus-mandated policies, which would have to be approved by the Obama administration, will almost certainly require, by regulation, that all gun-related medical data be fed into a federal health database — pursuant to a $20 billion program Obama insisted be included in the $787 billion stimulus bill. 

So, what if a gun owner insists on buying the type of insurance he wants to buy? Sen. Baucus would fine him up to $3,800 a year.

That’s right.  In a recently released draft, Baucus would fine gun owners up to $3,800 for not buyingpreciselythe insurance policy which Barack Obama orders them to buy. So, what’s going to be required by this Baucus-mandated policy? And how much is it going to cost? 

Baucus isn’t going to tell us that until after the bill is passed. We do know that, under the Baucus draft, a lower middle income family could be forced to pay up to 13% of its income to buy an ObamaCare policy. And, presumably, a middle income family would be required to spend much, much more.

Incidentally, Obama opposed forcing Americans to purchase government-approved insurance during the campaign.

In short, please oppose the anti-gun, anti-freedom Baucus “compromise” and please let me know exactly where you stand on this issue.

Sincerely,

(Your Name)

Advertisements

Yet Another Anti-gun Obama Nominee

September 9, 2009

*GOA

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

Just when you thought the news about the Obama administration couldn’t get any worse, gun owners find themselves needing to rally the troops once again.

This time it’s the proposed “Regulatory Czar” who will be coming to a vote this week in the U.S. Senate.

His name is Cass Sunstein, and he holds some of the kookiest views you will ever hear.

Interview with this dip shit:  http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=7207

cass-sunstein



For starters, Sunstein believes in regulating hunting out of existence.  He told a Harvard audience in 2007 that “we ought to ban hunting.” And in The Rights of Animals: A Very Short Primer(2002), he said:

I think we should go further … the law should impose further regulation on hunting, scientific experiments, entertainment, and (above all) farming to ensure against unnecessary animal suffering.  It is easy to imagine a set of initiatives that would do a great deal here, and indeed European nations have moved in just this direction. There are many possibilities.  (Italics are his emphasis.)

If that’s all Sunstein believed, he would be dangerous and extreme, but not necessarily kooky.  Unfortunately, when you look at WHY he wants to restrict hunting, this is where he goes beyond extreme.  

In Sunstein’s world, animals should have just as many rights as people … and they should be able to sue humans in court!

“We could even grant animals a right to bring suit without insisting that animals are persons, or that they are not property,” Sunstein said on page 11 of Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions(2004).

Well, that’s a relief … he is at least willing to concede that animals are not persons!  But he would still have animals suing humans, apparently, with more enlightened humans representing the cuddly critters. 

Imagine returning from a successful hunting trip … only to find out that you’ve been subpoenaed for killing your prize.  Who knows, maybe Sunstein would have the family of the dead animal serving as witnesses in court!

By the way, if you’re wondering what he thinks about the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, you won’t be surprised to know that Sunstein is a huge supporter of gun control.  

In Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts are Wrong for America(2005), Sunstein says:

Almost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine…. [O]n the Constitution’s text, fundamentalists [that is, gun rights supporters] should not be so confident in their enthusiasm for invalidating gun control legislation.

Hmm, what part of “shall not be infringed” does Sunstein not understand?

Imagine the power that Sunstein could have as the Regulatory Czar — the nickname for the person heading the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the White House.

As the Regulatory Czar, he could bring about changes in the regulations that affect hunting, gun control and farming.  In short, he could make your life hell.

Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) objected to his nomination several weeks ago, preventing him from being unanimously confirmed.

That means that the Senate will now need to garner 60 votes to confirm this radical, kooky choice to the OIRA.

No doubt, many of the people our President wants to associate with are radical kooks.  First, there was the Rev. Jeremiah Wright … then there was the self-avowed communist (Van Jones) who was nominated for the Green Jobs Czar … now, there’s an extreme animal rights activist who wants to take away our guns and get Bambi to sue us in court.

It’s time to take a STRONG STAND against this radical administration.

ACTION: Please contact your Senators right away and urge them to vote AGAINST the Cass Sunstein nomination.  You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Centerat http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your legislators the pre-written e-mail message below.  



—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear Senator:

I urge you to vote AGAINST Cass Sunstein as the head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, as I am very concerned about the impact this “Regulatory Czar” would have upon firearms and hunting.

Sunstein told a Harvard audience in 2007 that “we ought to ban hunting.”  If that were all Sunstein believed, he would be dangerous and extreme, but not necessarily kooky.  Unfortunately, in Sunstein’s world, animals should have just as many rights as people … and they should be able to sue humans in court!  

Moreover, he is a firm supporter of gun control.  In Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts are Wrong for America(2005), Sunstein says that, “Almost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine.”

I wouldn’t be surprised if Sunstein is part of the small minority — 11% of Americans, according to a Zogby/O’Leary poll in August — who opposes licensed concealed carry. 

I hope you will understand that Cass Sunstein’s views are WAY OUT OF THE MAINSTREAM of American thought and that you should vote NO on this radical, kooky nomination.

Sincerely,

(Your Name)

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

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

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

Once Again… To Send All You Gun Control People Hurdling Back To Reality… Cause God Knows You Chose Not To Live In It:

Full Spectrum Dominance

September 4, 2009

by: F. William Engdahl

Don’t Need No Trojan Horse — when Troy is your Home

August 26, 2009

obama-laughing

By Joe Bageant (about the author)

Almost a year after the Great Giddy Swarming of the Obamians last November, some of the revelers are waking up with one booger of a hangover. And they are asking themselves, “What were we thinking when we had that 10th drink of Democratic Party Kool-Aid?” It was a clear cut case of seduction and date rape. The spike in the drink was of course, hope. Poor pathetic American liberals. Forever doomed to be naive freshmen at the senior beer bash.

Corporate interests? Yup. It’s like this. Congress and the president hands the public treasury to elite financial corporations, via bailouts, special tax breaks and cash stuffed aircraft carriers bound for their fortified French20villas. Then Congress and the administration go looking for some new scheme to the pay for the Congressional Country Club out there in Bethesda, MD, the White House heating bill and money to keep Air Force One in toilet paper and armengnac marinated quail breasts.

This newest Social Security shell game is quite a bit slicker than the previous one. The old one consisted of simply ripping the money out of the SS fund, and replacing it with bad paper — IOUs repayable in up to 100 years. Since our Social Security checks cannot be cut by law, the boys on the Hill had a problem. The solution was to raise the Medicare prescription drug premium deducted from SS payments. Now I ask you, could the old zombie war hero and the semi-slutty Alaskan have come up with anything like that? I doubt it. It takes a Harvard degree in constitutional law and a devil on your shoulder named Tim Geithenr whispering the game plays in your ear.

A poster on AlterNet named monkeywrench observed that Obama couldn’t have handed the corporate owners of this country more if he had been a Trojan Horse candidate. So prescient was the poster that I have highjacked his chain of thought herein. Could Obama be a Trojan horse? Maybe, but it would be a waste of time and effort. Trojan hoses are not necessary in a country that has only one political party anyway – Big Business. You don’t need a Trojan Horse when Troy is your home. The Republicans vs. Democrats mock combat are mere bread and circuses for the clamoring crowd. Personally, I have no problem with that. I fully understand I was born under a corpocracy. But I do wish our masters grasped the importance of free alcohol in the suspension of disbelief.

Continue Article

Anti Gun N. C. State State Senator Shoots A Home Invader

August 25, 2009

42

North Carolina State Senator R.C. Soles, 74, the longest-serving lawmaker in the General Assembly, shot an intruder as he tried to break into his home Sunday. He shot 22-year-old Thomas Kyle Blackburn in the leg as Blackburn and another man allegedly tried to break down his door. They apparently were both legal clients of the senator.
The Senator, who has made a career of being against guns for you and me, didn’t hesitate to defend himself with his own gun when he believed he was in immediate danger, and was the victim of a crime against himself.

In typical hypocritical liberal fashion, the “Do as I say and not as I do” anti gun Democrat picked up his gun and took action in what apparently was self defense ahooting, something he doesn’t want you be able to do.

His life must and personal safety must be be far more valuable than yours or mine.
But, this is to be expected from those who believe they can run our lives, raise our kids, and protect our families better than we can.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/

“Common Sense 2009” by Larry Flynt

August 24, 2009

rockefeller4

Here’s what Rockefeller said in 1994 at a U.N. dinner: “We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order.”

They’re gaming us. Our country has been stolen from us.

Larry Flynt

Publisher of Hustler magazine and free speech advocate

Posted: August 20, 2009 08:15 PM

The American government — which we once called our government — has been taken over by Wall Street, the mega-corporations and the super-rich. They are the ones who decide our fate. It is this group of powerful elites, the people President Franklin D. Roosevelt called “economic royalists,” who choose our elected officials — indeed, our very form of government. Both Democrats and Republicans dance to the tune of their corporate masters. In America, corporations do not control the government. In America, corporations are the government.

This was never more obvious than with the Wall Street bailout, whereby the very corporations that caused the collapse of our economy were rewarded with taxpayer dollars. So arrogant, so smug were they that, without a moment’s hesitation, they took our money — yours and mine — to pay their executives multimillion-dollar bonuses, something they continue doing to this very day. They have no shame. They don’t care what you and I think about them. Henry Kissinger refers to us as “useless eaters.”

But, you say, we have elected a candidate of change. To which I respond: Do these words of President Obama sound like change?

“A culture of irresponsibility took root, from Wall Street to Washington to Main Street.”
There it is. Right there. We are Main Street. We must, according to our president, share the blame. He went on to say: “And a regulatory regime basically crafted in the wake of a 20th-century economic crisis — the Great Depression — was overwhelmed by the speed, scope and sophistication of a 21st-century global economy.”

This is nonsense.

The reason Wall Street was able to game the system the way it did — knowing that they would become rich at the expense of the American people (oh, yes, they most certainly knew that) — was because the financial elite had bribed our legislators to roll back the protections enacted after the Stock Market Crash of 1929.

Congress gutted the Glass-Steagall Act, which separated commercial lending banks from investment banks, and passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which allowed for self-regulation with no oversight. The Securities and Exchange Commission subsequently revised its rules to allow for even less oversight — and we’ve all seen how well that worked out. To date, no serious legislation has been offered by the Obama administration to correct these problems.

Instead, Obama wants to increase the oversight power of the Federal Reserve. Never mind that it already had significant oversight power before our most recent economic meltdown, yet failed to take action. Never mind that the Fed is not a government agency but a cartel of private bankers that cannot be held accountable by Washington. Whatever the Fed does with these supposed new oversight powers will be behind closed doors.

Obama’s failure to act sends one message loud and clear: He cannot stand up to the powerful Wall Street interests that supplied the bulk of his campaign money for the 2008 election. Nor, for that matter, can Congress, for much the same reason.

Consider what multibillionaire banker David Rockefeller wrote in his 2002 memoirs:

“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure — one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Read Rockefeller’s words again. He actually admits to working against the “best interests of the United States.”
Need more? Here’s what Rockefeller said in 1994 at a U.N. dinner: “We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order.” They’re gaming us. Our country has been stolen from us.

Journalist Matt Taibbi, writing in Rolling Stone, notes that esteemed economist John Kenneth Galbraith laid the 1929 crash at the feet of banking giant Goldman Sachs. Taibbi goes on to say that Goldman Sachs has been behind every other economic downturn as well, including the most recent one. As if that wasn’t enough, Goldman Sachs even had a hand in pushing gas prices up to $4 a gallon.

The problem with bankers is longstanding. Here’s what one of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, had to say about them:

“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation, and then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their father’s conquered.”

We all know that the first American Revolution officially began in 1776, with the Declaration of Independence. Less well known is that the single strongest motivating factor for revolution was the colonists’ attempt to free themselves from the Bank of England. But how many of you know about the second revolution, referred to by historians as Shays’ Rebellion? It took place in 1786-87, and once again the banks were the cause. This time they were putting the screws to America’s farmers.Daniel Shays was a farmer in western Massachusetts. Like many other farmers of the day, he was being driven into bankruptcy by the banks’ predatory lending practices. (Sound familiar?) Rallying other farmers to his side, Shays led his rebels in an attack on the courts and the local armory. The rebellion itself failed, but a message had been sent: The bankers (and the politicians who supported them) ultimately backed off. As Thomas Jefferson famously quipped in regard to the insurrection: “A little rebellion now and then is a good thing. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

Perhaps it’s time to consider that option once again.

I’m calling for a national strike, one designed to close the country down for a day. The intent? Real campaign-finance reform and strong restrictions on lobbying. Because nothing will change until we take corporate money out of politics. Nothing will improve until our politicians are once again answerable to their constituents, not the rich and powerful.

Let’s set a date. No one goes to work. No one buys anything. And if that isn’t effective — if the politicians ignore us — we do it again. And again. And again.

The real war is not between the left and the right. It is between the average American and the ruling class. If we come together on this single issue, everything else will resolve itself. It’s time we took back our government from those who would make us their slaves.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-flynt/common-sense-2009_b_264706.html

Rachel Maddow:More Propaganda Against The 2nd Amendment!!!

August 22, 2009

6a00d8341d896453ef01156f473555970c-800wi

“When are people gonna realize that they have different talking head shills for each party. She’s no better than Rush Pinball in my book. Just spreading more hate, disinformation(to a public who really has a tough time grasping anything), and government propaganda. She’s a laughable joke to me & a lot of other people in this country. The facade has fallen… sorry pentagon, parties over.”

-Fred Face 8/21/09

Video:

http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=6957

For Anyone Interested In REALITY on this issue:

http://www.gunfacts.info/

Olbermann Spins Viper Militia Story to Demonize Patriots and Open Carry

August 22, 2009

keith-olbermann-11-1

Kurt Nimmo

Infowars
August 20, 2009

Video Here

On August 19, MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann took the airwaves warning us of the danger posed to the nation by the Arizona man who brought an AR-15 to an Obamacare event. Olbermann attempted to link the man to the so-called militia movement by way of Ernest Hancock, the editor of the Freedom’s Phoenix website, a constitutional news portal established to provide information as an alternative “to the filters of a slavering collective mainstream media awaiting the approval of their government masters.”

Olbermann attempted to connect Hancock to the Arizona Viper Militia.

On July 1, 1996, the BATF arrested a dozen members of the so-called Viper Militia and accused the group of a nefarious plot. President Clinton congratulated the BATF and saluted “the enforcement officers who made the arrests in Arizona yesterday to avert a terrible terrorist attack. Their dedication and hard work over the last six months may have saved many lives.” AG Janet Reno chimed in with effusive praise and declared the agency had saved the nation from “a potentially dangerous situation.” Raymond Kelly of the Treasury Department said the government had put an end to an “armed and dangerous” militia group determined to stir up “civil unrest.”

The government said the Viper Militia had plotted to blow up federal buildings, including the Phoenix Police Department and the Arizona National Guard headquarters. In addition, they supposedly planned to attack a local television station. The BATF claimed to have confiscated 77 machine guns, hundreds of other firearms, tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition, booby traps, tons of ammonium nitrate — the fertilizer absurdly said to have been used in the Oklahoma City bombing — and explosives such as nitromethane and lead azide.

In December of 1996, Alan W. Bock, writing for Reason Magazine, did a reality check on the government story and subsequent corporate media propaganda. Since the arrests earlier in the year, “some details have come to light that suggest the Vipers were not quite as dangerous as the BATF would have us believe,” Bock wrote. In fact, there wasn’t a plot to blow up government buildings or attack television stations.

Furthermore, the “vast arsenal” kept shrinking. Seventy-seven machine guns dwindled to four, and the unstable lead azide was transformed into lead styphnate, then lead picrate, a less dangerous compound. The amount of ammonium nitrate was reduced to 500 pounds, plus 14 or 15 gallons of nitromethane, all of which is legal to possess. But we’ll have to take the BATF’s word for all of this, because agents rushed the seized explosives (alleged explosives?) to the desert and blew them up. Most of the guns turned out to be legal World War I and World War II surplus rifles–not surprising, since a couple of the men arrested were collectors and one had a federal firearms license.

In fact, the group in question didn’t consider itself a militia. It referred to itself as the Viper Team or Team Viper, not the Viper Militia. “This particular militia threat seems to have been conjured up mainly by the BATF,” notes Bock. It was a fabrication cooked up by a couple infiltrators inserted in the militia that was not a militia after a group of Boy Scouts encountered armed people in camouflage who were setting off explosions in the Tonto National Forest, about 60 miles northeast of Phoenix.

During court hearings in the trumped up case, BATF supervisor Steven Ott admitted under oath that one of these infiltrators had urged the other members to rob banks. According to Louis Sahagun of the Los Angeles Times, they all refused, Vin Suprynowicz wrote for the September, 1996, issue of Liberty Magazine.

The government is infamous for this particular sort of entrapment, as numerous news stories over the last couple years reveal. As Infowars reported earlier this week, radio talk show host and blogger Hal Turner was trained by the FBI to set-up and bust people in the patriot movement. COINTELPRO is alive and well in America.

Olbermann’s outlandish claim rests on the fact that five members of the Vipers eventually entered into a plea agreement on weapons charges. The supposed leader of the group, Gary Bauer, also pleaded guilty on weapons charges. “He just thought it would be in his best interests,” Bauer’s attorney told The Washington Post on December 20, 1996.

Six of the accused were released from jail “after promising to stay away from explosives and firearms and to not break any laws,” the Los Angeles Times reported on July 12, 1996. “Family members and friends promised they would act as responsible third parties to ensure that the released defendants remained at home wearing electronic monitoring devices and reported to the court daily.”

Olbermann didn’t bother to tell his audience the outcome of the Viper case. On March 20, 1997, the Los Angeles Times reported that members who were not members of the Viper Militia received “the most lenient prison terms possible under plea agreements with the government…. The sentences ranged from a year and a day in prison with a $1,500 fine to three concurrent 37-month terms and a $2,500 fine.”

The Times also reported that the convicted accused the government of exaggerating their “paramilitary activities” to look tough on domestic terrorism. Moreover, an agent with the BATF testified during the trial that no plot was imminent.

Olbermann and his guest Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center — a perennial “expert” on the corporate media propaganda circuit — only repeated the government’s absurd accusations and did not mention the fact that nobody in the case was convicted of terrorism or was there in fact a terrorist plot. It was a government fabrication.

But then the point is not accurate news reporting but rather the dissemination of lies and propaganda aimed at law-abiding Americans and at the very heart of the Constitution and the Second Amendment. Olbermann’s propaganda moment was intended to link “Chris” from Phoenix to Ernest Hancock and the mirage that is the Viper Militia.

It was also an effort to expand on the government narrative put forth in the Department of Homeland Security’s “rightwing extremism” report designed to demonize the growing patriot movement as homegrown terrorists and violent racists.

http://www.infowars.com/olbermann-spins-viper-militia-story-to-demonize-patriots-and-open-carry/


Corporate Media Demonizes Defenders of the Constitution

August 19, 2009

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars 
August 18, 2009

The corporate media is freaking out over Americans exercising their right under the Second Amendment and open carry laws in Arizona and New Hampshire. It just drives them nuts citizens would show up at Obama events with legal weapons.

As Chris Matthews insinuated in his confrontational interview with William Kostric after the New Hampshire patriot showed up with a sidearm at an Obama event, these people want to assassinate the president. “Why did you bring a god damn gun at a Presidential event. I think those things make people wonder what you’re about,” asked an irate Matthews.

The corporate media went into overdrive in an attempt to portray Kostric as a right-wing extremist and a potential threat to the president. Joan Walsh, writing for Salon, attempted to connect Kostric to the birther movement and noted his connection to the “far-right group” We the People, while The New Yorktimes portrayed Kostric as “your average hard-core Ron Paul voter — male, smug and obsessed with the money supply.”

It drives the corporate media limo libs crazy when they see rustics with guns. Five alarm fire bells go off when they see the words of Thomas Jefferson on placards held by armed citizens.

Last night MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow had a former Secret Service agent on her show. People exercising their rights under the Constitution and state laws are “creating an atmosphere that could be dangerous to the president,” said Joseph Petro. “I would argue that the vitriolic political rhetoric we’re hearing from seemingly responsible people is stimulating a lot of these foolish stunts,” he said.

On August 17, the Associated Press added to the supposed outrage. “About a dozen people carrying guns, including one with a military-style rifle, milled among protesters outside the convention center where President Barack Obama was giving a speech Monday.”

Fred Solop, a Northern Arizona University political scientist, told the AP the incidents in New Hampshire and Arizona could signal the beginning of a disturbing trend. “When you start to bring guns to political rallies, it does layer on another level of concern and significance,” Solop said. “It actually becomes quite scary for many people. It creates a chilling effect in the ability of our society to carry on honest communication.”

It becomes “quite scary for many people” because a majority of Americans no longer understand the Constitution or its core principles. The Second Amendment was not designed to create “a chilling effect in the ability of our society to carry on honest communication,” but rather ensure it from a tyrannical government.

Paul Helmke, president of the Washington, D.C.-based Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said Obama’s propaganda events should be Constitution free zones. “To me, this is craziness,” he declared. “When you bring a loaded gun, particularly a loaded assault rifle, to any political event, but particularly to one where the president is appearing, you’re just making the situation dangerous for everyone.”

In other words, Americans exercising their constitutional rights are a danger to the president and society as a whole.

The corporate media, at the behest of our rulers, is desperate to characterize law-abiding Americans — Arizona, after all, has an open carry law allowing citizens to legally carry their weapons in public — as rightwing extremist lunatics who are a threat to the New World Order’s latest front man.

“Welcome to the disturbing new face of the radical right in America,” Paul Harris wrote for the Guardian last week. “Across the country, extremism is surging, inflamed by conservative talkshow hosts, encouraged by Republican leaders and propagating a series of wild conspiracy theories. Many fear it might end in tragedy…. Many experts believe that spark is no longer missing. Critics say that Republican politicians have let loose a wave of anger tied to the healthcare debate.”

The “experts” are from the Southern Poverty Law Center, an organization that is “now become a threat to the freedoms and security of American citizens due to their repeated attacks on all First Amendment rights and their utter debasement of the political process,” writes William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration. “While in the past the SPLC has targeted “hate groups” or groups deemed racist and potentially violent, such as the KKK and Neo Nazi groups, the SPLC has recently used their reputation for righting these groups to go after moderate and mainstream Americans, journalists, and show hosts and anchors in an attempt to suppress free speech.”

The American people are waking up to the coercive and tyrannical power of government, Republican politicians notwithstanding. In order to portray millions of Americans as rightwing nut cases, the corporate media — taking its cues from the Department of Homeland Security and the SPLC — has kicked into overdrive to demonize patriotic Americans.

In the days ahead, we can expect more of this anti-Constitution extremist rhetoric from the lapdog corporate media.

http://www.infowars.com/corporate-media-demonizes-defenders-of-the-constitution/

Media Floats Talking Point That Gun Owners Are Domestic Terrorists

August 13, 2009

120809top

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Wednesday, August 12, 2009

The establishment media and the Southern Poverty Law Center are again floating the talking point that militia groups and worried gun owners are growing in the United States and that this could portend a violent act of domestic terror, despite the fact that every major domestic terror attack in the 1990’s was carried out by the federal government itself, from Ruby Ridge, to Waco, to the Oklahoma City bombing.

“Militia groups with gripes against the government are regrouping across the country and could grow rapidly, according to an organization that tracks such trends,” reports the Associated Press. “The stress of a poor economy and a liberal administration led by a black president are among the causes for the recent rise, the report from the Southern Poverty Law Center says. Conspiracy theories about a secret Mexican plan to reclaim the Southwest are also growing amid the public debate about illegal immigration.”

The article cites people who own guns and implies that they are domestic terrorists or cop killers in the vein of Richard Poplawski, the Pittsburgh man who gunned down three officers during a domestic dispute earlier this year.

The report cites a Homeland Security “threat projection” which states “White supremacists and militias are more violent and thus more likely to conduct mass-casualty attacks on the scale of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.”

Of course, the irony behind all this is the fact that all the major acts of violence in connection with the militia movement during the 1990’s were committed by the government and federal agents.

It was an FBI sniper that killed Randy Weaver’s son and also his wife as she was holding their 10-month-old baby while running for cover during the Ruby Ridge standoff in 1992.

It was the BATF that burned the Branch Davidian ranch to the ground, killing seventy-six people including more than 20 children and two pregnant women, during the Waco massacre in 1993.

And it was high level FBI officials that groomed Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh in the run up to the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah building in 1995.

McVeigh’s accomplice Terry Nichols’ revelation that McVeigh was being steered by a high-level FBI official are supported by a plethora of evidence that proves McVeigh did not act alone and that authorities had prior warnings and were complicit in the bombing.

The Deseret Morning News named the FBI agent at Larry Potts, but that information was later sealed by the court.

The affidavit was filed in a lawsuit brought by attorney Jesse Trentadue, whose brother Kenneth was tortured and beaten to death in an Oklahoma City federal prison in 1995. Authorities claimed Trentadue had committed suicide but he was being held in a suicide proof cell at the time and autopsy photos of his body showed he had been shocked with a stun gun, bruised, burned, sliced and then hung.

Jesse Trentadue has amassed evidence that his brother was mistaken for one of Timothy McVeigh’s alleged bombing accomplices and in attempting to get him to talk, federal agents went too far and then tried to instigate a cover-up of the murder.

During the process of his lawsuit,Trentadue was able to receive documentswith names blacked out that show the FBI’s OKC bombing informants were conducting armed robberies with Timothy McVeigh in order to fund the construction of the fertilizer bomb used in the attack on the federal building.

“One of the foreign informants was actually the explosives instructor who taught him how to make the bomb,” said Trentadue, confirming that Nichols told him the criminal activities were part of a process of creating a ledger or a storyboard to which the government’s version of events could later be pinned to.

The documents also show that McVeigh called Elohim City two days before the bombing asking for help. Four months before the bombing, an FBI informant told his superiors of the attack plan and said that the Alfred P. Murrah building had been scouted.

Just like 9/11, the official story of the Oklahoma City Bombing, that McVeigh alone carried out the attack using a fertilizer truck bomb, is contradicted by a plethora of eyewitness account as well as physical and circumstantial evidence.

– In early April 1995 a Ryder truck identical to the one used in the bombing was filmed by a pilot during an overflight of of an area near Camp Gruber-Braggs, Oklahoma. A June 17th, 1997 Washington Post article authenticates the photos as being exactly what they appear to be, photos of a Ryder truck in a clandestine base at Camp Gruber-Braggs. Why were the military in possession of a Ryder truck housed in a remote clandestine army base days before the Alfred P. Murrah bombing?

– In a 1993 letter to his sister, McVeigh claimed that he was approached by military intelligence and had joined an “elite squad of government paid assassins.” McVeigh often contradicted himself and changed his story on a whim to fit in with the latest government version of events. Is the Camp Grafton footage evidence of McVeigh’s enrollment in such a clandestine program?

– Multiple reports of Arabs at the scene assisting McVeigh were ignored and surveillance tapes were withheld under national security. The likely reason for this was the fact that Bush senior and Clinton were responsible for bringing in nearly 1,000 Iraqi soldiers captured by U.S. forces during the 1991 Persian Gulf War, some of whom were involved in the bombing.

– The FBI claimed McVeigh scouted the Alfred P. Murrah building weeks before the bombing and yet on the morning of the attack he stopped at a local gas station to ask directions, lending credibility to the new claims that he was being controlled by other conspirators and that the target of the bombing had been changed.

– Original reports of two explosions and several failed devices being defused by bomb squads were buried by the establishment as the official explanation that McVeigh acted alone was pushed. Scientific analysis conducted by General Benton K. Partin revealed core columns were blown out from within the building and the extensive damage to the Alfred P. Murrah building was completely inconsistent with the explanation of a single and relatively weak fertilizer truck bomb.

– Many eyewitnesses reported that bomb squads in full reaction gear were seen around the building immediately before the blast. Police officer Terence Yeakey, who helped save dozens of victims, was one such witness. Yeakey compiled extensive files on his observations but was later found with his throat and wrists slashed having also been shot in the head after he had told friends he was being followed by authorities.

– Several individuals received prior warning that the bombing was about to take place. Bruce Shaw, who rushed to the Murrah building to find his wife who was employed there with the Federal Credit Union, testified that an ATF agent told him that ATF staff had been warned on their pagers not to come to work that day.

– The aftermath of the bombing led to the passage of the Omnibus Crime Bill and the demonization of the ‘Patriot Movement’, which was spreading like wildfire as opposition to federal government abuse grew following the events at Ruby Ridge and Waco. The consequences of the Oklahoma City Bombing effectively dismantled the Patriot Movement before the turn of the century.

This is the true history of “domestic terrorism” and the militia movement. In every instance, the terrorism has been carried out by the government and the militia movement or the patriot movement have either been the victims or the patsies. This is key should the Obama administration attempt to stage another false flag and blame it on patriots in an attempt to neutralize the groundswell of grass roots outrage currently spreading like wildfire across the country in response to the march of big government and the loss of liberties.

http://www.infowars.com/media-floats-talking-point-that-gun-owners-are-domestic-terrorists/

Confirmed: No Supporting Evidence For DHS “Rightwing Extremism” Report

August 13, 2009

120809DHS

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Wednesday, August 12, 2009

A freedom of information act request has revealed that the Department of Homeland Security’s now infamous “rightwing extremism” report, released in April, was not based on any reliable supporting evidence whatsoever.

According to the DHS, the report was compiled based purely on around 50 internet articles, the credibility of which is severely questionable.

The revelation comes from the groupAmericans for Limited Government (ALG), which bills itself as an “independent, nonpartisan political movement that fights for hardworking taxpayers against the special interests that continually push for big government nationwide.”

The group filed it’s  FOIA request shortly after the release of the leaked security intelligence assessment which equated veterans and gun owners with violent terrorists.

The document, entitled Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment ( PDF link) characterized concerns about the economy, unemployment, the loss of U.S. sovereignty and the move towards global government as “rightwing extremist chatter on the Internet” which itself is defined as a potential tool for terrorists to network, build bombs, and send encrypted messages to each other.

It also listed those opposed to abortion or immigration as potential extremists, and cited groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority as potential sources of hate crime.

ALG asked for all data, studies, reports and documents that had led the DHS to these conclusions.

The shocking  response from the DHS indicates that it undertook no statistical analysis at all, failed to conduct any interviews with the groups it went on to demonize and complied the report based purely on a  scattering of web posts from some extremely dubious sources.

“We expected to receive back some hard-core analysis, some data analysis, looking at crime statistics and current trends that would back up conclusions in the report,” said Nathan Mehrens, a news contributor to Americans for Limited Government and a former Labor Department official.

“Instead what we got was a list of URLs to various Web sites, all kinds of news stories across the board,” Mehrens told FOX News.

Amongst the 50 or so links provided by the DHS are news articles from the New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times and USA Today, along with a smattering of other media sources. These represent subjects including rising gun sales, the activity of minority white supremacist groups and speculation that economic woes will fuel more hate groups.

More noteworthy is the fact that the DHS also cites substantial material from both the Anti Defamation League (ADL) and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

How disgusting it is then that when it was leaked, these two politicized and establishment funded groups that masquerade as “civil rights” organisations, immediately pounced on the DHS report and used it to justify their materials and agendas.

In the months that followed, they also returned to the report again and again to tie it in with incidents such as the tragic shooting at the Holocaust museum in Washington DC.

It is no coincidence that the SPLC was also cited as a research source in the equally inflammatoryMissouri Information Analysis Center report, which characterized Ron Paul supporters as extremists.

The news also comes in the wake of another sustained effort on behalf of the establishment media and the Southern Poverty Law Center to float the talking point that militia groups and worried gun owners are growing in the United States and that this could portend a violent act of domestic terror.

Perhaps the most damning aspect of the revealed sources for the DHS “rightwinger” report, however, comes in the shape of 11 links to a website called “WhatDoesItMean”, which is a well known source of disinformation among the blogging community.

The site acts as a dumping ground for legitimate news articles, but mixes them in with pure conjecture, unverified stories and plain lies on subjects as far reaching as extra-terrestrial aliens and imminent armageddon.

For the DHS to cite this website far more than any other in order to substantiate its accusations against veterans and other so called “rightwing extremists” is an absolute joke.

This pathetic list of links represents nothing more than a couple of hours of idle internet surfing and Google searches on behalf of the DHS. They have simply thrown together a series of barely related web posts in a ridiculous attempt to provide proof for their outrageous accusations where there is none.

A tenth grader could have complied a more compelling source list.

Here then we have proof definitive that this behemoth agency that was supposedly created to protect the United States from the ruthless terrorists hell bent on its destruction, spends its afternoons surfing the web, compiling useless lists of links in order to paint up everyday American citizens as extremist racist killers.

http://www.infowars.com/confirmed-no-supporting-evidence-for-dhs-rightwing-extremism-report/

Senate Confirms Radical Anti-gunner to the U.S. Supreme Court

August 7, 2009

*GOA

Senate Confirms Radical Anti-gunner to the U.S. Supreme Court
— But Obama nomination suffers a higher than normal number of opposition votes 

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
http://www.gunowners.org

Thursday, August 6, 2009

The Senate easily confirmed the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.  Only 31 Senators took seriously their oath to uphold the Constitution and voted against this radical anti-gun nominee, with 68 voting for confirmation.

All the Democrats in attendance voted for Sotomayor, while nine Republicans joined their ranks.

The Republican Senators who voted for Sotomayor were:  Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Christopher Bond of Missouri, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, Mel Martinez of Florida, George Voinovich of Ohio and Susan Collins and Olympia J. Snowe of Maine.

Many Democrat Senators campaigned on a pro-Second Amendment platform, yet voted to confirm a nominee who does not believe you have a fundamental right to self defense or an individual right to possess a firearm.

Placing the prerogatives of President Obama over their constitutional “Advice and Consent” duty, many so-called pro-gun Senators reneged on their promises to voters that they would support the individual right to keep and bear arms.

The common refrain heard in the Senate before the vote was:  “The President deserves his pick.”

Of course, Senator Barrack Obama did not hold that view in 2006, when he opposed President Bush’s pick of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.  Then-Senator Obama said:

There are some who believe that the President, having won the election, should have the complete authority to appoint his nominee, and the Senate should only examine whether or not the Justice is intellectually capable and an all-around nice guy. That once you get beyond intellect and personal character, there should be no further question whether the judge should be confirmed.


I disagree with this view. I believe firmly that the Constitution calls for the Senate to advise and consent. I believe that it calls for meaningful advice and consent that includes an examination of a judge’s philosophy, ideology, and record.


Thankfully, we are seeing more and more Senators stand up to Obama’s radical agenda.  You will remember that GOA encouraged you to lobby other gun groups so that gun owners across the country could speak with a unified voice in opposition to Judge Sotomayor.

We were hugely successful in this endeavor!  News reports credit the gun lobby’s strong and unified opposition to Sotomayor as resulting in at least three NO votes from Senators who were previously undecided or in favor of the nominee. Even that figure is probably low, considering that 31 NO votes is a lot better than three NO votes (in the case of Justice Ginsburg) and nine NO votes (in the case of Justice Breyer).

One of the fence-sitting Senators who voted right today was Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah.  For the first time in his 33 year Senate career, Hatch voted against a Supreme Court nomination.  You may remember that Hatch even supported Obama’s pick for Attorney General and voted to end the filibuster on Harold Koh, the radical choice for the State Department counsel. 

But faced with mounting pressure from grassroots in his state, Sen. Hatch broke with long-standing tradition regarding his support for Supreme Court nominations.  Today, he voted against Judge Sotomayor. 

“I feel very badly that I have to vote negatively — it’s not what I wanted to do when this process started — but I believe that I’m doing the honorable and right thing,” Sen. Hatch was quoted as saying in Newsday.

Thank you, everyone, for putting the heat on your Senators.  President Obama would do well to interpret 31 NO votes as a “shot across the bow.”  With his approval ratings plummeting, the president’s next Supreme Court pick may have to be far more in the mainstream.

http://gunowners.org/a080609.htm

Sotomayor Nomination Heads To Senate Floor

July 29, 2009

*GOA

 

Senate Judiciary Votes “Yes” on Sonia Sotomayor 
— Full Senate to vote on her nomination soon 

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
http://www.gunowners.org 

Tuesday, July 28, 2009 


It was nearly a party-line vote.  While every Democrat on the Senate 
Judiciary Committee voted in favor of Judge Sonia Sotomayor today, 
almost every Republican voted against her… all except for turncoat 
Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. 

Apparently, the flighty Republican did not care that Judge Sotomayor has 
demonstrated an extreme anti-gun bias in her private and public life. 
Not only that, she has expressed racist views in multiple speeches over 
the years, and she has proven — in her actions and words — that she is 
committed to IGNORING THE CONSTITUTION! 

The Sotomayor nomination now moves to the U.S. Senate floor, where gun 
owners definitely face an uphill battle. 

Press reports have indicated that Sotomayor is giving Senators private 
assurances that she will follow Supreme Court precedents on the Second 
Amendment.  This is ridiculous, of course, but it doesn’t help that a 
liberal front group claiming to support the Second Amendment — the 
American Hunters and Shooters Association — is supporting Sotomayor, 
giving cover to wavering Democrats. 

Politico.com reports that AHSA “will be highlighted as part of a 
rapid-fire response strategy Democrats plan to launch to respond to GOP 
attacks.” 

The fact that AHSA endorsed Obama during the campaign should demonstrate 
that this group is nothing more than a Trojan horse.  That’s why we need 
Senators to know that gun owners consider a vote for Sotomayor to be one 
of the most ANTI-GUN votes they could ever cast and that front groups 
like AHSA don’t speak for you! 

ACTION:  Please contact your two Senators and urge them to vote NO on 
Judge Sotomayor.  Tell them that the American Hunters and Shooters 
Association doesn’t speak for you.  Please use the Gun Owners 
Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to 
send your legislators the pre-written e-mail message below. 


—– Pre-written letter —– 

Dear Senator: 

The confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor would be a horrible choice for 
Americans — not to mention the gun owners of this country.  Throughout 
her career, Judge Sonia Sotomayor has shown that she opposes the right 
to keep and bear arms, denies there is a constitutional right to 
self-defense, and frequently ignores constitutional and statutory 
precedents. 

However, I understand that a front group called the American Hunters and 
Shooters Association is supporting Sotomayor, giving cover to wavering 
Senators. 

Please understand that AHSA is NOT a pro-gun organization.  This 
organization shares many of the same goals as the Brady Campaign, and it 
is nothing more than a Trojan horse in the gun rights community. 

After all, this is a group that according to records from 2005 had fewer 
than 150 dues paying individual members.  Its founding president, Ray 
Schoenke, donated money to the radical Handgun Control, Inc. — a group 
that argued in favor of the DC gun ban (which was struck down by the 
Supreme Court last year).  And another of its founding members, John 
Rosenthal, was also the founder of Stop Handgun Violence. 

I am a proud supporter of Gun Owners of America, and they do speak for 
me and the gun rights community when they say that Judge Sonia Sotomayor 
is bad for the Constitution… bad for the Second Amendment… and bad 
for America. 

Sincerely, 

(your name)

Obama Administration Begins Opposition To States Claiming Sovereignty And Gun Rights

July 25, 2009

sotomayor2

 

Tom Remington
Black Bear Blog
July 24, 2009

 

The several states are lining up to reclaim their sovereignty and telling the federal government to butt out. This is being done in myriad ways but all are related in that most claim that the Tenth Amendment protects the states from federal tyranny. States are passing resolutions, memorials and two states have passed laws and they intend to apply those laws for their citizens. The two states are Montana and Tennessee.

It was expected that at some point these laws would be challenged and it appears actions to do such has begun. The Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has published open letters to federal firearms license holders in  Montanaand  Tennessee explaining that

federal law trumps state law when it comes to gun laws.

 

“As you may know, federal law requires a license to engage in the business of manufacturing firearms or ammunition, or to deal in firearms, even if the firearms or ammunition remain with the same state. All firearms manufactured by a licensee must be properly marked. Additionally, each licensee must record the type, model, caliber or gauge, and serial number of each firearm manufactured or otherwise acquired, and the date such manufacture or other acquisition was made. Firearms transaction records and NICS background checks must be conducted prior to disposition of firearms to unlicensed persons. These, as well as other Federal requirements and prohibitions, apply whether or not the firearms or ammunition have crossed state lines.

In a report filed by CBS News, it seems to indicate that even though these states are claiming sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment, the Federal Government may have power over such gun laws as the Firearms Freedom Act, via the Commerce Clause.

Read literally, the Tenth Amendment seems to suggest that the federal government’s powers are limited only to what it has been “delegated,” and the U.S. Supreme Court in 1918 confirmed that the amendment “carefully reserved” some authority “to the states.” That view is echoed by statements made at the time the Constitution was adopted; New Hampshire explicitly said that states kept “all powers not expressly and particularly delegated” to the federal government.

More recently, federal courts have interpreted the Tenth Amendment narrowly, in a way that justifies almost any law on grounds that it intends to regulate interstate commerce.

World Net Daily points out in an article of their own that the Montana Firearms Freedom Act bill declares that Congress has not “expressly pre-empted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition”.

I have been saying for some time that all of this will eventually wend its way through the courts ultimately landing at the feet of the United States Supreme Court. This is one reason the approval of Sonia Sotomayor as a Supreme Court justice is vitally important, especially due to the fact that she is anti Second Amendment and has shown little regard for the original intent of the Constitution.

Also at issue in this debate are pending lawsuits challenging gun laws in other states. Chicago’s gun ban is being challenged after the District of Columbia vs. Heller decision reaffirming an individual right to keep and bear arms. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that federal gun laws do not pertain to the states, a position taken by Sotomayor.

This is an interesting ruling considering that prior to this the Ninth Circuit Court ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause incorporates the Second Amendment and therefore federal law, which now holds the ruling of theDistrict of Columbia vs. Heller decision, applies to the states rendering them unable to create gun laws that supersede federal laws. This will end up at the Supreme Court.

 

While we are discussing the Fourteenth Amendment, the Second Amendment and Ninth and Tenth, the BATFE is sending out public letters, assumed to be authorized by the Obama administration, to federal firearms dealers in Montana and Tennessee, stating that federal law supersedes state laws, at least as they pertain to firearms and ammunition.

Where will this all end up? I believe the Supreme Court but I know not how long this may take. In the meantime, the Obama administration, made up of mostly anti-gun people, are grasping to gain control over your right to keep and bear arms. From the day Obama was elected, the people rushed to stores buying up guns and ammunition at unprecedented rates. With the combination of a new president and staff known to want to ban gun and gun sales and the District of Columbia vs. Heller ruling, it has helped spur more laws to relax gun restrictions. This, I am positive, angers the Obama administration.

None of this comes as a surprise to Gary Marbut, President of the Montana Shooting Sports Association. Marbut was directly responsible for the Montana Firearms Freedom Act. In a letter sent to his members of MSSA, Marbut points out what he views as little concern over the letter and how it was expected.

1) The letters are addressed only to FFLs and purport to assert authority only over those licensees already under the federal thumb because of their licenses. We’ve always assumed that people with existing FFLs would not be players in the state-made guns exercise because they will not wish to risk thwarting the earned reputation the BATFE has for vindictiveness. The letters are not addressed to non-FFLs, those folks who are potential participants in the state-made guns business.

2) The BATFE letters may lack any official import because they are not signed by the official who appears in the signature block, but by some unknown other person. It’s difficult to place much credence in a missive upon which the purported issuing person is unwilling to put his signature, and for which the signer is unknown.

3) The essence of the letter is a declaration that the laws that the BATFE enforces supercede the U.S. Constitution and the Tenth

Amendment. I understand that the BATFE hopes that is so, but that’s far from proven yet. (We still recommend that nobody make these state-made guns until we can litigate and vet the principles involved.)

 

4) The letters, if they are official even though unsigned by the issuer, will help us establish standing to get this issue squarely before the federal courts. The feds have thrown down the gauntlet.

I like Montana’s approach to their action in the creation of their Firearms Freedom Act. They are proactively seeking to bring this issue to the courts for a ruling. They believe in their own state’s constitution and that they, according to their contract with the people and the United States Government, have the sovereignty and freedom under the U.S. Constitution, to make their own laws in matters such as this.

This will be a long and drawn out affair but one that is ripe for a good battle. Let’s hope this battle arrives before Obama can stack the Supreme Court with more anti-gun “empathetic” justices.

 

http://www.infowars.com/obama-administration-begins-opposition-to-states-claiming-sovereignty-and-gun-rights/

Feds Declare Tennessee Gun Law Invalid

July 19, 2009

firearms-letter

Infowars 
July 18, 2009

 

It is yet another example of the federal government running roughshod over the states.

Last month, the state of Tennessee’s General Assembly passed House Bill 1796, the “Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act,” which states that any firearms or ammunition manufactured within the state and legally owned and kept within the state by citizens are “not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration” due to provisions in the Second, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

But according to Assistant Director Carson W. Carroll of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, the U.S. Constitution is little more than a g.d. piece of paper, as George W. Bush so infamously deemed it during his reign as the decider-in-chief.

On July 16, Carroll dispatched his agency’s official response to the law passed in Tennessee — the BATFE asserts that “Federal law supersedes the Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply.”

It will be interesting to see how Tennessee reacts to this official proclamation.

 

http://www.infowars.com/feds-declare-tennessee-gun-law-invalid/

Sotomayor Takes Axe to Second Amendment

July 16, 2009

*GOA

 

Sotomayor Takes Axe to Second Amendment 
— Won’t answer whether she believes there’s a right to self-defense 

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
http://www.gunowners.org 

Wednesday, July 15, 2009 

The U.S. Senate must vote NO on Judge Sonia Sotomayor! 

In defending her decision that the states could enact any form of gun 
control they wished — with absolutely no regard to the Second 
Amendment — Judge Sonya Sotomayor has developed a new love for 
Nineteenth Century court opinions. 

Demonstrating that she was programmed in her responses, Sotomayor 
defended one of her earlier legal opinions by citing “footnote 
23″ of Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion in the DC v. Heller case 
last year. 

But, when pressed by questioner Orrin Hatch yesterday, Sotomayor could 
not recite the contents of that footnote or the holdings of the cases 
which it cited.  As it turns out, the footnote on which Sotomayor 
claims to rely, cited — without approval — two Nineteenth Century 
cases which rejected the notion that the Second Amendment was 
‘incorporated’ to apply to the states. 

But those were also the days when the Supreme Court held that the 
rights protected in the First Amendment did not apply to the states.   
Apparently, Sotomayor wants to base her anti-gun philosophy on 
antiquated decisions from an era when the U.S. Supreme Court was 
spitting out racist decisions. 

Her answers got even worse today when Republican Senator Tom Coburn of 
Oklahoma asked her, point blank, “Is there a constitutional right 
to self-defense?”  Sotomayor said that was an “abstract 
question” and that she couldn’t think of a Supreme Court case that 
addressed that issue. 

Coburn said he didn’t want a legal treatise on what Supreme Court 
holdings have said, rather, he wanted her own personal opinion.   
Sotomayor would not answer the question, although when pressed, she 
equated self-defense with vigilantism! 

Folks, do you see how important it is to stop this nomination?  GOA 
mailed its members postcards opposing Sotomayor not too long ago.   
Please make sure you have mailed those in.  We need a multi-pronged 
offensive right now where our Senators are receiving snail mail, email 
and phone calls. 

And, we need ALL PRO-GUN ORGANIZATIONS to take a stance AGAINST this nominee. 

Organizational spokesmen can talk a good game and say they have serious 
“concerns” about Sotomayor.  That’s all well and good.  But 
unless those organizations (big and small) rate each Senator’s vote on 
Sotomayor — when she’s clearly anti-gun — then those supposed 
“concerns” are just meaningless. 

Senators have to hear from ALL the pro-gun organizations — big and 
small — that they are going to rate this vote during the 2010 
election.  Otherwise, those organizations are just Paper Tigers. 

We can’t let this anti-gun judge infiltrate U.S. Supreme Court!  She is 
dangerous on so many levels — but, especially, on Second Amendment 
rights. 

GOA considers her nomination to be of the most important gun votes in 
the HISTORY of the US Senate.  We can’t think of any other nominee in 
recent history who has taken such a horrid stand on the basic right of 
self-defense. 

She says that she will follow the precedent in the DC v. Heller (2008) 
case.  But even if she does, that only means that she will vote to 
apply the Second Amendment in Washington, DC.  She has already ruled 
this year in Maloney v. Cuomo that the amendment doesn’t apply to where 
you live. 

— Tim Macy, Vice-Chairman of Gun Owners of America 

ACTION:  We need to “pull out the stops” to defeat this 
nominee.  Please contact your two U.S. Senators today and urge them to 
VOTE NO on Judge Sonia Sotomayor. 

Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at 
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the 
pre-written e-mail message below. 

—– Pre-written letter —– 

Dear Senator: 

Even though President Obama is extremely anti-gun, I still started with 
an open mind regarding his nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor.  But 
after her testimony these past two days, there is no way that she 
should be confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court. 

When asked by Senator Tom Coburn if there was a right to self-defense, 
Sotomayor said that was an “abstract question.”  Sotomayor 
would not answer directly, although when pressed, she equated 
self-defense with vigilantism! 

How can the Senate confirm a judge to the U.S. Supreme Court who does 
not believe in the rights that are EXPLICITLY stated in the Bill of 
Rights? 

I also want you to know that Gun Owners of America will heavily score 
any vote related to the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor — whether 
it’s a vote on cloture or final passage — for its rating in 2010. 

Moreover, GOA is going to publish its rating so that millions of 
Americans can see how their Senators voted on this most important vote. 

GOA has told me that it considers the Sotomayor nomination to be one of 
the most significant gun votes in the HISTORY of the US Senate, as 
there has been no other nominee in recent history who has taken such a 
horrid stand on the basic right of self-defense. 

Sincerely,

Don’t Tread on Me

July 14, 2009

July 13, 2009

Dear Friend of Liberty: 

When you’re backed into a corner, all you can do is FIGHT your way out. 

Today, that’s exactly where Patriots like you and me find ourselves

It doesn’t matter that the big government politicians from BOTH parties have nearly wrecked and bankrupted our country. 

The out of control Fed…Trillion dollar stimulus bills…Record deficits under both Presidents Bush and Obama… 

Bailouts…Government takeover of the Auto industry…Taxpayer-funded handouts for bankers and Wall Street… 

I’m sick and tired of it.  And I’m sure you are too.

You and I can’t count on politicians in either party to do the right thing, not without being pushed. 

The good news is Ron Paul and Campaign for Liberty are fighting back.  And you and I are starting to see results

Not only that, but there’s a groundswell of folks all over the country who are also FED UP and are supporting our cause of Liberty. 

With our battles heating up, I’m asking you to dig deep today to support Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty

These battles simply can’t be won without your help. 

Your support for ALL of Campaign for Liberty’s critical efforts is absolutely vital, including: 

*** AUDIT THE FED, so the American people can finally see the corruption and economic devastation caused by the central planning of a handful of bankster bureaucrats;

*** STOPPING the radical environmentalists’ Cap-and-Tax schemethat would drive already sky-high energy costs through the roof, massively hike taxes on hardworking Americans and grind our economy to an immediate halt;

*** DEFEATING Big Government Medicinethat would not only lead to astronomical tax hikes, but would give big government bureaucrats decision-making power over our healthcare system and virtually EVERY medical decision.

That’s why Campaign for Liberty is fighting – and why I’m asking you to act TODAY to push our battles forward! 

You see, Campaign for Liberty supporters are making a REAL impact in Washington

So many patriotic Americans are FED UP, and it’s thanks to your efforts on H.R. 1207, AUDIT THE FED. 

Already, Dr. Paul’s bill has gained the support of over half of the House of Representatives!  That would have been unthinkable just a year ago. 

But today is a new day for our movement.

You know, it’s funny.  If you read a newspaper, you won’t see a call for a full-fledged audit of the Federal Reserve.

Turn on the television and you won’t hear the talking heads calling for AUDIT THE FED. 

So what’s happening?  Where is the pressure coming from? 

It’s simple. It’s YOU! 

It’s called a grassroots R3VOLUTION. 

And if you and I can succeed, Washington DC and your state government will never be the same. 

But the truth of the matter is there’s still much, MUCH work to be done if we’re going to hold on to the precious freedoms we still enjoy and restore the freedoms that have been whittled away

This is not a battle that will be won in weeks, or even months.  You and I must prepare for long-term revolution to take back our country and our liberty. 

In the past, the Socialists and Statists have used crises like our current economic disaster to grab more and more power. 

They’re trotting out the same tired playbook now, trying to take more of our money and liberty each passing day

The only difference is that — in the past — there’s been no cohesive, organized opposition ready and able to fight back. 

But today, we have Ron Paul. 

Today, there is Campaign for Liberty.

And you. 

There are literally hundreds of thousands of folks all over the country just like YOU

And together, we must fight back, and not back down from this challenge. 

Of course, just knowing how the regime works and what it’s up to isn’t going to be enough

As I said before, we have to start “throwing punches.” 

It’s sad but true — too many politicians don’t care about right or wrong or what’s good or bad for America.

If they did, they wouldn’t be so intent on stripping us of our God-given rights, plunging us into unconstitutional, undeclared wars and spending us to the verge of bankruptcy!

At the end of the day, too many politicians care ONLY about getting and keeping POWER.

That’s why if our movement is to succeed, you and I must FIGHT back and DEFEAT the big government politicians’ pet legislation.

And then hold the politicians accountable as well.

But to do this, the R3VOLUTION must continue to grow.

Already, we’ve recruited over 180,000 supporters for Campaign for Liberty.  But that’s nowhere near the number we’ll need to really bring pressure to our elected officials.  And my research indicates there may be as many as 700,000 more ready to join us – if we can reach them. 

As I’m sure you know, reaching like-minded Americans through direct mail, phone banking and the internet to recruit them to our cause all takes a good deal of money.

Media campaigns like the one we’re about to embark on to help push Audit the Fed are even more expensive.

And unlike the government, we can’t just print money to cover our operations.

That’s why I’m counting on you.

I’m counting on you to make a generous contributionTODAY to help Campaign for Liberty fight back against the politicians’ big government schemes and recruit hundreds of thousands of new supporters.

When Dr. Paul announced he was running for President in 2007, few people could have imagined the movement he — and you — would create.

You see, you are an important part of this movement.

And today, despite all the naysayers, YOU have a very real opportunity to help turn our movement into a major political force in Washington through Campaign for Liberty.

And what you and I are able to accomplish over the next several months will help determine whether Dr. Paul’s Presidential run was truly the “start of something” or just “a flash in the pan.” 

I think I know the answer.  But I’m counting on every single one of Dr. Paul’s supporters to heed his call to arms today.

So please make a generous contributionof $250, $100, or $50 TODAY.

Nothing worth achieving is ever easy.  Nor is it free.  And I’m sure you agree, restoring real liberty in our time is truly a goal worth achieving

Sincerely, 

John F. Tate
President

Time to put the heat on your Senators as Sotomayor hearings begin.

July 14, 2009

*GOA

 

Should We be Surprised by Sotomayor’s Radical Views? 
— Time to put the heat on your Senators as hearings begin 

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
http://www.gunowners.org 

“I will be talking [to Judge Sotomayor] about the question of 
foreign law and the question of [her] commitment to the Second 
Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms….  President Obama, who 
nominated Judge Sotomayor, has a rather limited view of what the Second 
Amendment guarantees.” — Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), June 2009 

Monday, July 13, 2009 

Today, the U.S. Senate commences hearings on Justice Sonia Sotomayor, 
who was nominated by President Obama to replace the retiring Judge 
David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court. 

In many ways, Sotomayor’s views are out-of-step with our American 
heritage and with the views of Americans in general.  For example, 
Sotomayor believes that our fundamental law is constantly evolving and 
that rights are constantly changing with the times. 

But should we be surprised?  The President who nominated her holds some 
of the most radical views ever held by a resident of the White House.   
His take on the Constitution — and the Second Amendment in particular 
— has stationed him to the far left on the political spectrum. 

Consider just a small snapshot of his record over the years: 

* As President, Obama has nationalized much of the car and banking 
industry and is now looking to do the same with health care.  Even the 
Marxist President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, joked on live television 
last month that he and Fidel Castro need to be careful or else “we 
are going to end up to [Obama’s] right.” 

* As a U.S. Senator, Obama was ranked by the National Journal in 2007 
as the most liberal legislator in that chamber.  Realize that such a 
ranking put Obama to the left of 99 other Senators — including an 
open, self-avowed socialist, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT). 

* Like many socialists, Obama has supported some of the most extreme 
positions on gun control:  supporting a ban on handguns, opposing the 
repeal of the draconian DC gun ban, opposing the right of self-defense 
for residents in the Chicago suburbs, and much more. 

Obama’s brand of far-left politics sees the Constitution as moldable as 
a ball of wax.  In a 2001 interview, he criticized earlier Supreme 
Courts for “never ventur[ing] into the issues of redistribution of 
wealth….  It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that 
were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution.” 

Sotomayor appears to have the same view of our highest document, as she 
stated in 1996 that law is not “static and predictable,” but 
“constantly overhaul[ed] and adapt[ed] [by lawyers and courts] to 
the realities of ever-changing social, industrial and political 
conditions.” 

ACTION:  Please urge your two Senators to vote AGAINST the Sotomayor 
nomination.  Tell them to cast a pro-gun vote on EVERY vote related to 
Judge Sonia Sotomayor (whether it’s a vote on sustaining a filibuster 
or a vote on final passage). 

Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at 
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your legislators the 
pre-written e-mail message below. 

—– Pre-written letter —– 

Dear Senator: 

Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s views are out-of-step with our American 
heritage and with the views of Americans in general.  Not surprisingly, 
the Rasmussen polling firm reported on July 1 that more Americans 
oppose her nomination than support her. 

Sotomayor believes that our fundamental law is constantly evolving and 
that rights are constantly changing with the times.  But a majority of 
Americans disagree.  Multiple polls have found that almost 
three-fourths of all Americans believe that the Second Amendment of the 
U.S. Constitution protects the rights of “individuals” to own 
guns.  Not so for Judge Sotomayor: 

* She ruled in United States v. Sanchez-Villar (2004) that “the 
right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.” 

* And earlier this year, Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel 
which ruled in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not 
apply to the states.  This makes her more liberal than the Ninth 
Circuit, which stated in the Nordyke case in April that the Second 
Amendment does apply to the states. 

Please cast a pro-gun vote on EVERY vote related to Judge Sonia 
Sotomayor (whether it’s a vote on sustaining a filibuster or a vote on 
final passage). 

I would like to hear back from you on this.  Although rest assured, Gun 
Owners of America will keep me up to date on any further developments. 

Sincerely, 

(your name)

Guns Even the Score Against ‘Evil’

July 13, 2009

By Wayne LaPierre

Recently, demanding a harsh new federal ban on semi-automatic firearms, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell evoked the defining argument of the gun-ban movement—their twisted confusion between good and evil.

“It’s nuts for ordinary citizens to go out and buy assault weapons. Assault weapons are difficult to operate, they jam easily. If you want a gun to protect your home, it’s the last thing you should have. . . . If you have an assault weapon to protect your house, you’re crazy . . . they’re not very effective.”

So much for possession of a firearm on the side of good. What about evil?

In the hands of criminals, Rendell said, “Assault weapons only have one purpose. . . . They fire at short range; they put out a ton of fire at one time; and they are very powerful. . . .There’s no purpose for these guns but to kill or maim.”

Rendell’s convoluted notion of good and evil is the very core of why the gun ban movement defies common sense. It rejects the most important instinct of humanity—self-preservation against evil.

Human beings have a hard-wired program for self-protection; for fighting back; for safeguarding their homes, families and communities. As Americans, that’s why we preserve armed self-defense as part of our Second Amendment protections.

Rendell’s rant was amplified by ABC’s 20/20 special, “If Only I Had a Gun”—a shameless hit-job, totally embracing the gun-ban belief system that armed self-defense in the face of evil—a mass murderer in a public
setting—is futile.

That same embrace of evil over good was pressed home by an aggressively pacifist media on an international scale with coverage of Somali piracy and terrorism on the high seas.

In the past year alone, Somali pirates, heavily armed with full-automatic firearms and rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), have attacked over 100 commercial vessels and extracted tribute of over $100 million. In an April 10 puff-piece, The New York Times called the pirates “professional,” quoting an “expert” saying the pirates have “a business model that has proven very effective for them.”

There is a single reason the “business model” works. It is the same reason “gun control” provides an overwhelming advantage to armed criminals. Their unarmed victims can’t fight back.

As most Americans proudly know, the pirate “business model” was wrecked when the high-seas thugs attempted to capture an American-flagged ship, the Maersk Alabama—the first U.S. vessel seized in an act
of piracy since 1801.

The American crew valiantly fought back and maintained control of their ship. U.S. Navy SEAL snipers aboard the destroyer USS Brainbridge killed three Somali pirates as one was about to murder the ship’s captain who had bravely traded his freedom for the safety of his crew.

Even using deadly force to save Capt. Richard Phillips was attacked as a provocation. The Christian Science Monitor quoted a maritime expert: “We fear that this escalation spiral, which we’ve seen in the past few months, will push pirates into a readiness to shoot.”

Most importantly, the Maersk Alabama incident sparked a controversy over something that should be a no-brainer—arming crews.

On the side of reason at a recent Senate hearing was Capt. Phillips, who advocated handing out arms to specially trained officers in times of pirate assault.

Also coming out four-square on the side of using armed guards was Gen. David Petraeus, who now heads the U.S. Central Command, that included military operations in Africa. . . .

The gun-ban crowd would impose a tyrannical doctrine that goes against every human instinct for survival. That policy guarantees not free individuals choosing self-defense against evil, but the triumph of evil over disarmed victims.

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/guns_even_the_score_183.html

Obama For Dummies

July 12, 2009

Robert M. Bowman On Alex Jones

July 9, 2009

“This is a good overview for people who have no idea what is really happening in this country. A “Dot Dot Dot For Dummies” kind of overview of American politics and World politics. This is what is happening. Stop living in denial and stop supporting an administration that used your liberal goodwill by baiting you with the promise of change by ushering in a fake, (corporate shill puppet), black President.

I hate to say it but… wake up people. Your civil liberties will be on the chopping block for good soon, if all you good people do not speak up. Get your confidence back and start standing up for yourselves.”

-Fred Face 7/8/09

 

 

Robert M. Bowman, former Director of Advanced Space Programs Development for the U.S. Air Force in the Ford and Carter administrations, a former United States Air Force Lieutenant Colonel with 101 combat missions, and presidential candidate for the Reform Party in 2000.

 

NRA Past President Strikes Again on Sotomayor Nomination

July 9, 2009

*GOA

 

NRA’s Past President Strikes Again! 
— Urges Senators “not to confirm Judge Sotomayor” 

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
http://www.gunowners.org 

Wednesday, July 8, 2009 

Last week we told you how NRA’s Past President Sandy Froman was 
calling on all NRA members to vigorously oppose the nomination of 
Judge Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. She did this in response to 
the “wait and see” approach that the NRA’s upper management 
has taken 
in regard to the Sotomayor nomination — an approach that may well 
allow her to wiggle through and be confirmed. 

Yesterday, Sandy Froman struck again. But this time she was joined 
with another past president of the NRA and several current Board 
members, as well. 

“Judge Sotomayor’s record on the Second Amendment causes us grave 
concern over her treatment of this enumerated right [to keep and 
bear arms],” the coalition stated. 

“As Second Amendment leaders deeply concerned about preserving all 
fundamental rights for current and future generations of Americans, 
we strongly oppose this nominee, and urge the Senate not to confirm 
Judge Sotomayor.” 

In related news, the NRA sent a letter yesterday to the Senate 
Judiciary committee expressing “very serious concerns” over the 
Sotomayor nomination, but said that the leadership “has not 
announced an official position” out of respect for the confirmation 
process. The letter indicated the NRA’s management would be 
watching the upcoming hearings very carefully. 

One of the concerns about the hearing process, however, is that 
Sotomayor will act exactly the same way Obama has. You will remember 
that Obama tried to play himself off as a supporter of gun rights 
during the presidential campaign, but then once he took office, began 
showing his true colors. 

Obama has nominated far-left gun banners to key positions of power — 
including Attorney General Eric Holder, State Department counsel 
Harold Koh and Judge Sonia Sotomayor. 

It’s not uncommon to see politicians tout the Bill of Rights when 
trying to get elected or confirmed, but then act like a modern day 
Benedict Arnold once they are safely entrenched. 

If Judge Sotomayor is anything like the man who nominated her, she 
will tell Senators what they want to hear during the Senate 
proceedings, but then stab us in the back once she has secured a 
lifetime appointment to the bench. 

Folks, this is a huge battle. And that’s why it’s important to 
have every single gun organization firing all of its political 
ammunition. This is a battle that we can win. So even though we 
already asked you to contact the NRA’s management last week, it is 
imperative that they hear from you again. 

ACTION: Please urge the NRA’s upper management to tell Senators 
that a vote to confirm Judge Sotomayor is an anti-gun vote. You 
can use the text message below — addressed to NRA Executive Vice 
President Wayne LaPierre and NRA Executive Director Chris Cox — 
to help direct your comments to the NRA. 

CONTACT INFO for the NRA: 

Phone) (800) 392-8683 
Webform) https://secure.nraila.org/Contact.aspx 

—– Pre-written comments —– 

Dear Mr. LaPierre and Mr. Cox: 

I was so excited to see that past NRA President Sandy Froman — in 
coalition with several other past and present NRA leaders — came 
out in opposition the nomination of Judge Sotomayor. 

In a letter dated July 7, the coalition stated that “we strongly 
oppose this nominee, and urge the Senate not to confirm Judge 
Sotomayor.” 

This is Froman’s second communication in this regard, as she stepped 
up to the plate on June 24 with a call to arms for all NRA members 
to vigorously oppose the Sotomayor nomination. 

“Gun owners, and especially the members of the National Rifle 
Association,” Froman said, “must aggressively oppose Judge 
Sotomayor’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.” 

I couldn’t agree more with Mrs. Froman. 

I hope that the NRA will officially tell Senators now — and not wait 
until after the hearings — that a vote to confirm Judge Sotomayor 
is an anti-gun vote. Please let me know what you intend to do. 

Thank you. 

Sincerely, 

(your name)

AK-47: An Assault Rifle for Everyman

July 7, 2009

FIND THE  TRUTH AT:

www.thetruthorthefight.com

www.thetruthorthefight.com

www.thetruthorthefight.com

ak47_1a

  • By Tony Long Email Author
  • July 6, 2009
    Wired.com
It’s probably not a stretch to describe Mikhail Kalashnikov’s AK-47 assault rifle as the most important small-arms weapon of the 20th century.

Born out of Kalashnikov’s obsession to create a weapon capable of driving the invading Germans from his motherland, the Soviet weapons designer produced an assault rifle renowned as much for its simplicity as for its effectiveness.

Although it never saw service during World War II, the AK-47 became the standard infantry weapon for the Red Army, as well as most of the other Warsaw Pact armies. National liberation movements supported by the Soviet Union also found themselves generously equipped. More famously, it continues finding its way into the arsenals of rebels, drug traffickers, street gangs and terrorists the world over.

Now approaching 90, Kalashnikov remains bullish on his greatest creation. Despite the ever-mounting death toll caused by the AK-47, Kalashnikov has no trouble sleeping. “I was doing it for my country,” he says.

The AK-47 has evolved over the years, which keeps it relevant to this day. This gallery charts the history of this terrible, remarkable weapon.

Above: Early in the Iran-Iraq War, an AK-47-toting Iranian soldier watches smoke rising from burning oil refineries near the Iranian city of Abadan. The Iraqis under Saddam Hussein, armed and supported by the United States, used mostly M16s.

ak47_2a

In this 1979 photo, a young Khmer Rouge soldier holds a North Korean-made AK-47 rifle after fleeing to Thailand ahead of advancing Vietnamese troops. The Soviet Union licensed manufacturers in a number of countries to produce versions of the AK-47.

ak47_3a

Mikhail Kalashnikov, the AK-47’s inventor, shows off his handiwork in 1997 ahead of festivities to mark the weapon’s 50th anniversary.

ak47_4a

A Taliban militiaman checks his AK-47 while cleaning it between skirmishes in the mountains of Afghanistan. The ammunition clip has been removed, which, considering the way he’s holding it, shows good sense.

ak47_5a

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California) holds an AK-47 with a modified shoulder stock and ammunition drum during a 1999 news conference in Washington D.C. Feinstein was seeking a federal ban on high-capacity ammunition clips. She didn’t get it.

ak47_6a

Esmad Ullah, a teenage soldier in Afghanistan’s national army, could be the poster child for the ubiquity of the AK-47 assault rifle. The picture was taken in 2003, near Ullah’s observation post outside of Kabul.

ak47_7a

Squeeze, don’t pull. A Palestinian girl receives a lesson in the art of firing an AK-47 from a police officer. She was among some 30,000 Palestinian youngsters who attended special summer camps across Gaza in 2000, where they were taught to handle weapons and schooled in guerrilla warfare tactics.

http://www.wired.com/rawfile/2009/07/ak-47

FIND THE  TRUTH AT:

www.thetruthorthefight.com

www.thetruthorthefight.com

www.thetruthorthefight.com

Bill Gives Attorney General Power To Designate Gun Owners, Tax Protesters As Terrorists

July 7, 2009

Nuts                                  Nuts

Detroit FBI Arrests

Federal Agents Conducting House by House Gun Checks

July 2, 2009

agent1

 

 

HOUSTON, TEXAS – The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATF) agents are in the midst of  fanning out across Texas in order to conduct house by house investigations into what the agency deems numerous  “suspicious” firearms transactions and as a means to combat “narco-terrorism” along the U.S. /Mexican border.

In fact, the “suspicious” transaction searches are so loosely defined, that BATF agents ended up questioning a Houston area pastor who previously purchased two handguns for target practice, which is then flippantly chalked up as “hard to believe”. Additionally, interagency cooperation between the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and the BATF have led to  warrantless airplane surveillance of vehicles along the border.

After speaking to five offices within the agencies and being told by several agents they felt “uncomfortable” with my line of questioning, Special Agent, Public Information Officer Perot of the BATF, indicated that aerial surveillance does not require a warrant due to it taking place with the “public sphere” thereby meaning individuals should have no expectation of privacy.

Perhaps even more alarming to Constitutionalists and civil libertarians than an “eye in the sky” with carte blanche authority to surveil, is the fact that the door to door firearms checks come at the behest of a foreign government. In 2008 alone, the Mexican government requested the BATF track down the original owner of 7,500 firearms used in drug crimes at American taxpayer expense.

“Ever turning up the heat on cartels, our law enforcement and military partners in the government of Mexico have been working more closely with the ATF by sharing information and intelligence,”

Kenneth Melson
Acting Director
BATF

Moreover, federal agents lament the tedious difficulty in conducting door to door firearm checks due to a current federal law prohibiting the use of a centralized database for gun owners. Alternatively, Mr. Eric Pratt of “Gun Owners of America” believes that a centralized database would only end up further infringing upon the inherent rights of law abiding gun owners. He goes on to state that criminals will still develop and expand avenues in order to arm themselves regardless of a behemoth centralized registry, just as they have after each previous “needed” addition to the nation’s gun laws. Further, by his analysis this is merely another attempt by federal authorities to scapegoat lawful gun owners when the crux of the issue is really one of border control, or lack thereof.

 

http://www.blacklistednews.com/news-4707-0-8-8–.html

“Young Americans for Liberty,” Launches Brand New Website

July 2, 2009
FROM THE DESK OF JOHN F. TATE
PRESIDENT, CAMPAIGN FOR LIBERTY

Dear Patriot:

Today, Young Americans for Liberty is launching their brand new website and kicking off a major campaign to distribute 25,000 pocket Constitutions to young people across the country.

I think you will be excited to learn that YAL is in a unique position to spread the Constitutional message you and I heard during the Ron Paul for President Campaign to the next generation!

YAL Executive Director, Jeff Frazee, has the announcement, links, and details below.

In Liberty,
John F. Tate




Dear Friend of Liberty,

Today I am proud to announce the new Young Americans for Liberty website!



Please take a few minutes to visit our new websiteand join our cause.  If you like what you see, you can show your support with a generous $25, $50, or $100 contribution.

This is only the first step in revolutionizing the youth movement for liberty.

Over the next few months, drastic improvements will be made to this site as we provide advanced online tools to our members and chapters.

To commemorate this launch, I am also overjoyed to publically announce “The Constitution Project” – a nationwide effort to place 25,000 U.S. Constitutions into the hands of young people.

Every $2 donation puts a YAL Pocket Constitution into the hands of an eager new student next fall.

My goal is to find a few hundred fellow patriots to support this effort, so we can print and distribute all 25,000 Constitutions by the end of this school year.

Will you help me reach this goal?

To show you the high-level of professionalism and mass-appeal of this project, here is a sneak peek of the remarkable cover art for the custom YAL Constitutions.



As you can see, this pocket-sized booklet includes more than the U.S. Constitution.  It also exposes young minds to The Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation.

Believe it or not, many students have never read these documents!  What a shame!

“Founding Partners” of The Constitution Project have the option of printing their name or business inside the back cover of every pocket Constitution as a tribute to their dedication to liberty.

For $500, I can add your name or business as a Founding Partner of this project.  Corporate contributions are accepted as well.

Can I count on you to help us place the Constitution in the hands of students this fall?

Please visit the new YAL website and donate $50, $100, or $500 securely at this link:http://www.yaliberty.org/contribute/constitution.

Or you can mail Young Americans for Liberty a check to P.O. Box 2751, Arlington, VA 22202.

You see, if YAL can raise $10,000 by July 4th, Independence Day, I can place the first order and the first shipment of Constitutions will arrive just in time for our chapters to start the new school year. Constitution Day is just around the corner too!

Young Americans for Liberty continues to build on your support, and I cannot thank you enough.  We are well on our way towards reaching thousands of young people this upcoming school year.

For liberty,

Jeff Frazee
Executive Director, YAL

P.S. The nation has strayed too far from the Constitution, but YAL has a plan!  You can help us execute “The Constitution Project” by contributing here:http://www.yaliberty.org/contribute/constitution.

RED ALERT: The Total Takeover Of America Enters Its Final Phase

June 30, 2009

290609top2

 

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, June 29, 2009

 

The wholesale looting of America and the transfer of wealth and power over to a private banking elite who are setting up a world government, along with the complete obliteration of any remaining freedom to protest, resist, or even speak out against this agenda, is now entering its final phase as numerous different pieces of the jigsaw puzzle fall into place and portray a clear picture of tyranny.

We are about to sound the death knell for the United States if every one of the following attacks on our liberty, free speech, sovereignty, and right to not be ruled over by an unelected banking dictatorship is not fiercely opposed and crushed.

RED ALERT 1

The passage of the “Climate Bill” by the House and its likely approval by the Senate represents the entrée for the complete and total subjugation of any freedoms we had left and the beginning ofnightmare regulation and suffocating control over every aspect of our personal lives by millions of green stasi tasked with enforcing impossible to attain goals of 80% carbon dioxide reduction – all based on the manufactured threat of global warming.

This bill will also sink the economy and create a new great depression, effectively obliterating America’s first world status. It represents a transfer of power and wealth from both the U.S. government and the American taxpayer over to the system of world government and global regulation now being erected by means of the climate change hoax.

This is far worse than just a “new tax” as Republicans are complaining – this is the total takeover of the American economy by private banking interests through the carbon trading system.

As we have attempted to warn, the major beneficiaries of the climate bill will be the elitists who own the carbon trading systems that will be used to handle the ‘cap and trade’ program, namely Al Gore and Maurice Strong, two figures intimately involved with a long standing movement to use the theory of man made global warming as a mechanism for profit and social engineering.

We must rally now to lobby members of Congress who voted for the legislation and demand they change their vote before July 2nd. Failing that, we must demand that the Senate does not rubber stamp this nightmare legislation. Failing that, we must support and organize to craft more legislation based on the example of Arizona, who recently passed state Senate legislation refusing to comply with insane climate laws coming from the federal level.

RED ALERT 2

The seemingly endless economic “bailouts” represent the wholesale looting of the American taxpayer and the grand theft of trillions of dollars by private banking interests who refuse to even disclose where the money went.

Not satisfied with stealing tens of trillions, under the Obama administration’s new regulatory reform plan, the Federal Reserve is now trying to enrich itself with dictator powers that will give it complete control over the U.S. economy, handing them the authority to “regulate” and shut down any company whose activity it believes could threaten the economy and the markets.

We must rally now and lobby more members of Congress to support Ron Paul’s H.R. 1207 bill to audit the Federal Reserve and highlight the fact that Bernanke is spewing financial terrorism when he threatens an economic collapse should the Fed be opened up to scrutiny.

RED ALERT 3

Federal hate crimes legislation, which in reality would criminalize “thought crimes,” has cleared the House and now faces the Senate as S.909, the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act (officially, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act).

S.909 is a direct violation of the First Amendment. It allows the federal government to prosecute people involved in “hate speech” transmitted over television, radio, and the internet. The House version of the bill states:

“Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce [radio, TV, internet] any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both. (HR 1966, SEC 3, Sec. 881a)”

In other words, if a talk show host engages in “hostile” speech against a person or persons of the above mentioned federally protected group that talk show host will face federal prosecution and the prospect of a two year prison term.

The Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act would similarly criminalize free speech on the Internet if it can be deemed in any way to have been “harmful” to an individual. This represents the end of political blogging and free speech on the world wide web.

If both bills are not opposed and thrown out then the First Amendment will become nothing more than a relic of a bygone age.

RED ALERT 4

The Senate bill S.787, otherwise known as the Clean Water Restoration Act (CWRA), would replace language in the regulatory act currently using “navigable waters” with “waters of the United States.”

What this means is that “the government would essentially be able to regulate everything from standing water in floodplains to creeks that run behind business and residences,” according to anEnvironmental Leader report.

This represents a complete takeover of private land and waterways by the federal government, a total assault on private property rights and a complete federalization of America’s land and water.

“In a letter to Senate Environment and Public Works Chair Barbara Boxer and ranking member James Inhofe, the American Farm Bureau Federation said that the proposed law would “extend to all water — anywhere from farm ponds, to storm water retention basins, to roadside ditches, to desert washes, to streets and gutters, even to a puddle of rainwater,” stated the letter. “For the first time in the 36-year history of the act, activities that have no impact on actual rivers and lakes would be subject to full federal regulation.”

If this bill becomes law, it will empower the federal government to seize private property on a whim, using similar powers that Communist China employed during Chairman Mao’s “great leap forward,” where landowners had their property violently confiscated and stolen by the government.

If this bill passes the Senate, private property rights in the United States are effectively null and void and the federal government would legally have the power to bulldoze families from their homes as routinely happens in Communist China.

RED ALERT 5

Amongst the myriad of assaults on the Second Amendment rights of American citizens undertaken by the Obama administration during the course of its first year in office, the one that stands out as the most alarming is the attempt to ban people who appear on the terrorist watch list from buying guns.

But isn’t stopping terrorists from buying guns surely a sensible measure to take? The problem is that the terrorist watch list, sometimes called the no fly list, is not a list of likely terrorists, it is a sprawling database of of innocent people that contains the names of over one million Americans. This is a rise of 32% since 2007 alone.

Members of Congress, nuns, war heroes, reverends, the former assistant attorney general, toddlers and children, the ACLU administrator, people with difficult names and all American names like Robert Johnson and Gary Smith, have become caught in the vast tentacle of this list, documents the ACLU.

Moreover, once a person is included on the terrorist watch list it is virtually impossible to get off it.

The terrorist watch list is an ever-expanding tool with which to deny Americans basic rights as well as to strip them completely of the Fourth Amendment.

Now it is being used to prevent law-abiding citizens from purchasing firearms. Legislation sponsored by the The Government Accountability Office seeks to “close the gap” and prevent victims of the terrorist watch list from being able to purchase firearms.

This represents a new end run around the Second Amendment and a concerted effort on behalf of the federal government to classify millions of innocent Americans as potential terrorists, thus stripping them of their Constitutional right to own firearms.

RED ALERT 6

Our right to protest against any of the egregious assaults on the Constitution that are listed above is itself being removed by new law enforcement and Pentagon training manuals and guidelines that define protesting as domestic terrorism.

Current Department of Defense anti-terrorism training course material states that the exercise of First Amendment rights in the U.S. constitutes terrorist activity.

Over the last few years we have documented countless examples of security assessment reports from the likes of the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, as well as police training manuals, which state that anti-war protesters, gun owners, veterans, Ron Paul supporters and those who merely cite the Constitution should be equated with extremists and domestic terrorists.

The fact that the government is now treating people who merely criticize its conduct as domestic terrorists is the clearest signal possible that the United States has entered a period in history similar to Germany in the early 1930’s and that it can only be a matter of time before the right “emergency” provides the justification for dissidents to be targeted for round-ups and mass imprisonment.

No one can claim now that this is merely a paranoid delusion – the government itself is training its law enforcement and military arms that protesters and people who use their First Amendment rights are domestic terrorists. The last time this happened was under King George shortly before the American Revolution.

ONE MINUTE TO MIDNIGHT

If we don’t stand up in unison and exercise our right to protest and free speech now more than ever before, while pointing out that the real terrorists are those who would seek to destroy the freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights, then we may find ourselves doing our protesting behind the barbed wires and the concrete blocks of an internment camp.

The hour is late, the clock stands at one minute to midnight, and the federal government, through all the examples documented above, is on the verge of implementing nothing less than a total environmental, financial and societal dictatorship and killing what once was the United States of America.

Almost identical programs of total enslavement are also being pushed through in almost every other major western country at the same time.

If we don’t stop obsessing about the minutia of life and actually concentrate on the imminent destruction of the very principles of our livelihoods, the bedrock freedoms that allow us to operate in relative comfort on a daily basis and be reasonably secure in our own homes, being able to pay our bills, put food on the table, earn money, and air our grievances when government threatens to impinge on those basic freedoms, then there will be nothing left but a rotten hollow carcass and a memory of what America once strived to be – land of the free, home of the brave – not land of the thief, home of the slave.

 

http://www.infowars.com/red-alert-the-total-takeover-of-america-enters-its-final-phase/

Harrisburg chapter of NAACP urges martial law

June 28, 2009

obama puppet1

 

“Holy Suspicious Story Batman!

“Hey, lets create a violent atmosphere in the ghetto’s of America by giving them inadequate living conditions, poorly run and underfunded schools, funnel in drugs and weapons, and when the time is right we’ll place an inadequate black president in office that we can play like a puppet and prop him up as the  superman who stops the inner-city violence by banning all guns from the criminals, (who exist  because of this system), and while were at it we’ll just ban weapons from all the law abiding gun owners in America. It might be the only way we can get away with disarming the U.S. public. And if were feeling really good we’ll go with the Marshall Law.” -Some conversation somewhere in Satan’s asshole, (the pentagon), in the 1940’s, 50’s, whatever.

“You need to fight the system that creates this violent mentality in our inner-cities.  Not the punks who got plaid by it. It’s just another form of slavery straight from the minds of the racist elite who run this country. Be very suspicious of groups like NAACP. They don’t make a peep about the real reasons why some black folks are still living in bondage. Front organization etc…etc…etc.”

-Fred Face 6/27/09


 

by STEVEN FARLEY Of The Patriot-News

Thursday June 25, 2009, 9:24 PM

 

The Harrisburg Chapter of the NAACP is calling on Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell to suspend some civil liberties and impose martial law in the city to halt the wave of recent lawlessness.

Chapter President Stanley Lawson also called on Rendell to bring in the state National Guard for at least 30 days and to impose a curfew. In June, there have been at least 12 shootings, many of them in the daytime, including a man killed Wednesday at a busy city intersection during the lunch hour.

“The Guard is for floods and natural disasters. I don’t know any more of a natural disaster than of our young people being killed,” he said at a general membership meeting of about 25 people at Capitol Presbyterian Church, 14th and Cumberland streets.

“It’s time for some real action,” he said. “Right now the important thing is to stop this madness.”

“We’re beyond what the Harrisburg police department can do. We need help,” Lawson said.

Martial law is a system of rules that takes effect when the military takes control of the normal administration of justice, normally in times of emergency.

At about the same time Lawson was speaking, Rendell was at another community meeting in Harrisburg where he promised to have state police patrol city streets to increase the presence of law enforcement.

Lawson noted that there was historical precedent for the Guard to step in, recalling the race riots in 1968 following the assassination of the Rev. Martin Luther King in Memphis, Tenn.

Lawson said that many reasons have been given for the wave of shootings, such as drugs, robberies and neighborhood turf wars. Fear is the bigger reason, he suggested.

“The young men, it’s fear, it’s just fear. They think: ‘I’m going to get them before they get me,'” he said.

When one man noted the presence of the Guardian Angels from York coming to Harrisburg, Lawson responded: “I appreciate the Guardian Angels, but I see what’s going on in York, Lancaster and Philadelphia. It’s everywhere. I’m concerned about what is going on in Harrisburg.”

Member and attorney Stanley Mitchell noted the civil rights organization is asking for a short suspension of some civil rights, but added: “We have the civil rights not to be shot.”

 

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2009/06/harrisburg_chapter_of_naacp_ur.html

Gun Banner Confirmed — And The Truth About Legislation

June 27, 2009

gun_owners_of_america3

 

Eight Republicans Help Confirm a Hard-Core Gun Banner 
— And how to keep Senators from “spinning” their support for gun 
control 

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
http://www.gunowners.org 


“Too much work [was] left undone. After a few sleepless nights, I wrote 
for myself a list of issues on which I needed to do more in the years 
ahead. One of those issues was global regulation of small arms.” — 
Harold Hongju Koh (2001) 


Friday, June 26, 2009 

Imagine that.  The Senate confirmed this week, by a vote of 62-35, a gun 
banner who stays up at night thinking of ways to impose more gun control 
upon American citizens. 

Harold Koh is that gun grabber, and he was confirmed yesterday to be the 
Legal Adviser at the State Department. 

On Wednesday, Senate Republicans attempted to kill the Koh nomination 
with a filibuster — until eight of them crossed the aisle to help 
Democrats confirm Koh. 

The back-stabbing Senators are:  Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Susan Collins 
(R-ME), Judd Gregg (R-NH), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Richard Lugar (R-IN), Mel 
Martinez (R-FL), Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and George Voinovich (R-OH). 

Once the filibuster was thwarted, Koh’s nomination passed easily.  The 
vote on final passage can be viewed at: http://tinyurl.com/m4m2f5 

Koh is eager to assume his post at the State Department, having lamented 
that there is only so much that can be done from the outside to push gun 
control treaties, and that ultimately we need people like him in 
positions of power.  The chief lawyer for the State Department is just 
the position someone like him needs to push more gun control through 
international treaties. 

GOA will continue watching for any attempt by the Obama administration 
to foist an international gun control treaty upon the citizens of the 
U.S. 

Please stay tuned. 


Don’t Let Your Senators Escape the Heat of the Spotlight! 

If you have been watching the news, you have no doubt seen stories on 
the health care debate.  This is the topic de jour on Capitol Hill, and 
Congress is ramping up to vote on a bill in a few weeks. 

Last week, GOA alerted you to the fact that the whole health care issue 
has become a Trojan Horse for gun control, among other things. 

However, there are detractors who claim that the current health care 
debate will have nothing to do with guns.  For example, GOA has been 
“informed” that a search of the TeddyCare bill does not turn 
up the word 
“guns,” and that the word “database” is seen only a 
few times. 

Hmm, if your Senator’s office gives you that as a response, then tell 
them not to be so lazy and naive. 

One needs to do more than type in a word search in order to analyze 
legislation. The database was set up under section 3001(c)(3)(i) of the 
stimulus bill.  But the Kennedy bill allows for sweeping new 
regulations, which make it potentially impossible for any doctor to 
refuse to enter your records under the current section 13112 exemption. 

Many things you tell your doctor in the privacy of his office could 
affect your right to own a firearm. And just because anti-gun zealot Ted 
Kennedy doesn’t notify us up front of his anti-gun intentions doesn’t 
mean they don’t exist. 

Frankly, we got this same garbage in connection with the Veterans 
Disarmament Act (officially known as the NICS Improvement Act), where 
the anti-gunners took away the guns of 150,000 veterans through language 
which was not explicit.  Before the bill was signed into law last year, 
some detractors even claimed that because the NICS bill did not mention 
the word “veterans,” we must have been wrong to suggest that 
the bill 
would disarm vets! 

Well, guess what?  The disarmament which was already occurring before 
President Bush signed the legislation into law last year is now 
occurring with a vengeance under the Obama administration.  (In fact, 
GOA members should be looking for an upcoming mailing which will give 
you postcards to send in support of an important bill — introduced by 
Sen. Burr of North Carolina — which will protect veterans from the 
fangs of the Veterans Disarmament Act.) 

The point is, no Senate staffer should ever give you an opinion on a 
bill unless he has read the entire code that the bill will be amending. 
Nor should they ignore the potential for an Obama administration to 
abuse any particular piece of legislation. 

Remember how the RICO Act, originally enacted to help combat the Mafia, 
was later used to crack down on legitimate banks and peaceful pro-life 
protesters?  The original RICO Act never used the word 
“abortion,” but 
that didn’t stop overzealous prosecutors from going after the 
non-violent protestors. 

And who would have thought, when the original Brady law was passed in 
1993, that it would be used to keep people with outstanding traffic 
tickets… or couples with marriage problems… or military vets with 
nightmares from buying guns?  After all, the Brady law never mentioned 
those people groups, and yet the law has been used over the past 15-plus 
years to deny gun rights to those very people. 

Reading legislation is not a job for the timid or the lazy.  If staffers 
in your Senate offices aren’t willing to read current bills IN THE LIGHT 
OF EXISTING LAWS — and to do the research necessary to compile this 
information — then politely encourage them to get another line of work.

State Department Nominee Is An Anti-gun Radical

June 24, 2009

gun_owners_of_america1

 

 

Vote Coming to Confirm Anti-gun Radical 
— “Guns Kill Civil Society,” says State Department Nominee 

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
http://www.gunowners.org 

Tuesday, June 23, 2009 


Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has scheduled a Wednesday vote on a 
State Department nominee who supports gun control on a global scale. 

While advocates of the Second Amendment have come to expect that 
appointees of President Barack Obama would be hostile to the rights of 
gun owners, the president’s nominee for legal advisor to the State 
Department reaches a whole new level of anti-gun extremism. 

Harold Hongju Koh, who served at the State Department under the Clinton 
administration, is a self-described “trans-nationalist” who 
believes 
that our laws — and our Constitution — should be brought into 
conformity with international agreements. 

“If you want to be in the global environment, you have to play by the 
global rules,” Koh told a Cleveland audience. 

Koh’s positions treat our constitutional law as if it were a mere local 
ordinance on the greater world stage. This is of particular concern to 
gun owners at a time when the U.S. Congress is under pressure from 
President Obama to ratify an international gun control treaty with 
countries in the western hemisphere.  That treaty, known by its Spanish 
acronym CIFTA, would likely serve as a forerunner to a more extensive 
United Nations initiative, the “Program of Action to Prevent, Combat and 
Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in all its 
Aspects.” 

The Bush administration, under the leadership of UN Ambassador John 
Bolton, rejected the small arms treaty.  Bolton plainly told the world 
that the United States will not accept a gun control document that 
violates our Constitutional right to bear arms.  Harold Koh commented 
that Bolton was being “needlessly provocative.” 

In a paper entitled “A world drowning in guns,” Koh maintains 
that a 
civil society cannot exist with broad gun ownership: “Guns kill civil 
society,” he said. 

Koh is eager to assume his post at the State Department, having lamented 
that there is only so much that can be done from the outside to push gun 
control treaties, and that ultimately we need people like him in 
positions of power.  The chief lawyer for the State Department is just 
the position someone like him needs to put his agenda into play. 

While Koh’s nomination has been delayed largely because of Second 
Amendment concerns, Sen. Reid plans to force a vote this week. 

It is imperative that gun owners contact their Senators and insist that 
they vote AGAINST this anti-gun extremist. 

ACTION:  Please contact your Senators immediately and urge them to 
oppose Harold Hongju Koh’s nomination to the State Department.  You can 
use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at 
http://gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the pre-written 
message below. 


—– Pre-written letter —– 

Dear Senator: 

The Senate is expected to soon vote on a State Department nominee who 
supports gun control on a global scale. 

Harold Hongju Koh, who served at the State Department under the Clinton 
administration, is a self-described “trans-nationalist” who 
believes 
that our laws — and our Constitution — should be brought into 
conformity with international agreements. 

According to Koh, “If you want to be in the global environment, you have 
to play by the global rules.”  Well, I don’t support global rules that 
contradict our own Constitution. 

Koh supports international gun control treaties such as the United 
Nations initiative entitles the “Program of Action to Prevent, Combat 
and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in all 
its Aspects.” 

When former UN Ambassador John Bolton told the world that the United 
States will not accept a gun control document that violates our 
Constitutional right to bear arms, Harold Koh commented that Bolton was 
being “needlessly provocative.” 

And in a 2003 Fordham Law Review article entitled “A world drowning in 
guns,” Koh maintains that a civil society cannot exist with broad gun 
ownership: “Guns kill civil society,” he wrote. 

I urge you to reject this trans-nationalist, anti-gun extremist who 
would place foreign laws and international agreements on equal footing 
(at minimum) with the U.S. Constitution. 

Sincerely,

(your name)

Proposed Law Allows AG Holder to Block Gun Sales to Over a Million Americans

June 22, 2009

rahm2

 

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
June 20, 2009

 

New Jersey Democrat senator Frank R. Lautenberg plans to introduce legislation designed to cancel the Second Amend rights of well over a million U.S. citizens this coming week, according to the New York Times. “Mr. Lautenberg plans to introduce legislation on Monday that would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales to people on terror watch lists,” the newspaper reports.

Lautenberg is a notorious gun-grabber. He introduced a similar measure in 2007.

Lautenberg’s action comes in the wake of statistics compiled by the Government Accountability Office drawing attention to an “odd divergence” in federal law that allows erroneously designated terrorists to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms but prevents them from getting on a plane or getting a visa.

The Inspector General of the Justice Department reported that the Terrorist Screening Center — the FBI-administered organization that consolidates terrorist watch list information in the United States — had over 700,000 names in its database as of April 2007 and that the list was growing by an average of over 20,000 records per month, according to the ACLU. In March of this year the list hit the one million mark, a 32% increase from 2007.

The actual number may far exceed one million entries. The FBI says the number of names on its terrorist watch list is classified. In addition to the National Counterterrorism Center watch list, the FBI keeps a list of persons said to be domestic terrorists, according to ABC News.

Lautenberg said he was frustrated by an FBI refusal to disclose to investigators details and specific cases of gun purchases beyond the aggregate data included in the GAO report, the Times notes.

Earlier this year, a Department of Homeland Security report on “rightwing extremism” designated advocates of the Second Amendment, pro-life and anti-illegal immigration activists, and returning veterans as “terrorists.” It is not known if members of these groups are on the so-called terrorist watch list, although it is a fair assumption to conclude they are.

On May 15, 2007, then Illinois representative Rahm Emanuel, speaking at the annual Stand Up For a Safe America event sponsored by the gun-grabbing Brady Center, said that if your name appears on the bloated and error-ridden terror watch list your Second Amendment right should be denied (Emanuel’s comments are included in the Alex Jones clip below).

Obama chief of staff Emanuel’s promise may soon carry the force of law if Lautenberg’s proposed law makes it through Congress. According to the New York Times, however, the Justice Department is “noncommittal” about whether it would develop guidelines if Congress moved to give the attorney general discretion to block gun sales.

Lautenberg’s proposed bill is one of several now working their way through the labyrinth of Congress. On April 29, with little fanfare or corporate media coverage, H.R. 2159 was introduced and referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. The bill would “increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosives licenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist.” Another bill, H.R. 1022, sponsored by New York Democrat Carolyn McCarthy and 67 co-sponsors, would provide AG Holder with the ability to ban guns at will.

Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, told WorldNetDaily that H.R. 2159 will be used in conjunction with the DHS “Rightwing Extremism” report. “By those standards, I’m one of [DHS Secretary] Janet Napolitano’s terrorists,” Pratt said. “This bill would enable the attorney general to put all of the people who voted against Obama on no-gun lists, because according to the DHS, they’re all potential terrorists.”

Lautenberg’s proposed bill would go one step further and allow Holder to deny the Second Amendment to officially designated enemies of the state.

Alex Jones explains the real purpose behind Emanuel’s desire to deny American’s their Second Amendment right to bear arms.

 

http://www.infowars.com/proposed-law-allows-ag-holder-to-block-gun-sales-to-over-a-million-americans/

 

 

The Truth About Guns In America

http://www.gunfacts.info/

Ted Kennedy’s New Bill Makes Health Care A Gun Rights Issue

June 17, 2009

images

 

Ted Kennedy Bill Could Send Your Gun Info Into A Massive Federal 

Database 
— And you could be forced to spend $13,000 of your own money toward 
this effort! 

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
http://www.gunowners.org 


Tuesday, June 16, 2009 

At long last, Teddy Kennedy has partially revealed the health care 
system he wants to foist on the whole country — and it isn’t pretty. 

It won’t be pretty for your pocket book… OR FOR YOUR GUN RIGHTS! 

But first, let us explain what TeddyCare is all about. 

At the center of the plan is what’s called a “universal 
mandate.” What 
this means is that you — and virtually everyone in the country — will 
have to buy as much health insurance as the government demands, and that 
insurance plan will actually have to be approved by the government. 

If you work for a small business, the business will buy the insurance on 
your behalf. But you may be saddled with an enormous part of the cost. 
And, if the employer’s contribution is too large, you will be fired. 

If you fail to buy TeddyCare, as the government orders you to do, the 
IRS will fine you, garnish your wages, put a lien on your house, and, 
ultimately, put you in prison. 

How much will you have to spend on your TeddyCare insurance? Teddy’s not 
saying. 

The portion of your paycheck that will have to be forked over to Teddy’s 
latest social experiment will be revealed ONLY AFTER THE MASSIVE HEALTH 
CARE BILL IS SIGNED INTO LAW. 

This should set off alarm bells in your brain, because, for instance, 
the average family policy is currently $12,700.  “So,” 
proclaims Teddy, 
“everyone’s going to get a subsidy to pay for this.”  There’s 
going to 
be a “chicken in every pot,” and no one’s going to have to 
pay for it. 

Yeah, right. If you’re a welfare mother, the government will pay for 
your TeddyCare, and it would pay for it — the first time — by taxing 
employer-provided health benefits of working Americans. But if you a 
“working Joe” your Kennedy-subsidy will be a microscopic 
fraction of the 
cost of your mandated TeddyCare insurance policy. 

Okay, all of this sounds ominous… but why is this a gun issue? 

The answer is that TeddyCare will allow radical left Health and Human 
Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to determine all of the fine print 
in every TeddyCare policy — which you will be required to buy under 
penalty of imprisonment. 

Currently, as a result of the stimulus bill and a whole lot of other 
factors, the government is rapidly moving in the direction of 
computerizing all of your most confidential medical records and putting 
them into a federal database. 

So remember when your son was asked by his pediatrician about your gun 
collection? That would be in the federal database. 

Or remember when your wife told her gynecologist that she had regularly 
smoked marijuana ten years ago — thereby potentially barring both her 
and you from ever owning a gun again? That would be in the database. 

Or if a military veteran complains to his psychiatrist that he’s had 
emotional stress since coming back to the States, that would be in the 
database. 

Or remember when gramps was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s, thereby making 
him a “mental defective” who would have to relinquish his 
life-long gun 
collection? That’s in there too. 

And, while we are dangerously close to allowing BATFE to troll all of 
that information, TeddyCare would allow Sebelius to put EVERYONE’S 
private data in a database with a stroke of a pen. 

When we say “everyone,” we don’t mean quite everyone. 

Teddy has conveniently excluded Washington bureaucrats from his 
TeddyCare mandate. 

Also, Teddy and his friends in the media don’t want you to hear about 
the details until after the bill is passed. That’s why they’re trying to 
slam it through within the next month and a half before anyone’s had a 
chance to read or debate it. 

In fact, the TeddyCare proposal is currently circulating around Capitol 
Hill without even a bill number. 

ACTION:  Urge your two U.S. Senators to oppose Sen. Ted Kennedy’s 
mandate that will result in the registration of all your gun 
information. 

Please forward this email to your friends and family and urge them to 
contact their Senators as well. 

You can go to the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at 
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the 
pre-written e-mail message below. 


—– Pre-written letter —– 

Dear Senator: 

At long last, Teddy Kennedy has partially revealed the health care 
system he wants to foist on the whole country — and it isn’t pretty. 

At the center of the TeddyCare plan is what’s called a “universal 
mandate.” What this means is that I — and virtually everyone in the 
country — will have to buy as much health insurance as the government 
demands, and that insurance plan will actually have to be approved by 
the government. 

But this is not only an issue of individual freedom; it is a gun issue. 

This is because Teddycare will allow radical left Health and Human 
Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to determine all of the fine print 
in every Teddycare policy — which Americans will be required to buy 
under penalty of imprisonment. 

Currently, as a result of the stimulus bill and a whole lot of other 
factors, the government is rapidly moving in the direction of 
computerizing all of our most confidential medical records and putting 
them into a federal database. 

So if a kid is asked by his pediatrician about his dad’s gun collection, 
that would be in the federal database. 

Or if a wife told her gynecologist that she had regularly smoked 
marijuana ten years ago — thereby potentially barring both her and her 
husband from ever owning a gun again, that would be in the database. 

Or if a military veteran complains to his psychiatrist that he’s had 
emotional stress since coming back from Iraq or Afghanistan, that would 
be in the database. 

Or when gramps was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s, thereby making him a 
“mental defective” who would have to relinquish his life-long gun 
collection, that would be in there too. 

And, while we are dangerously close to allowing BATFE to troll all of 
that information, TeddyCare would allow Sebelius to put EVERYONE’S 
private data in a database with a stroke of a pen. 

You cannot imagine how angry I, my family, and my neighbors are about 
this most recent fraud scheme to cheat me out of perhaps over $10,000 
for TeddyCare — and to violate my privacy in the process. 

I insist that you oppose TeddyCare — immediately and loudly. Please do 
not try to shower me with propaganda about how a mandate on how I spend 
my own money is somehow good for me. 

Sincerely, 

(Your Name)

Dana Gould on Gun Control

June 16, 2009

Government Demands Inventory of All VFW Weapons

June 10, 2009

all seeing eye

 

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
June 9, 2009

 

An Infowars reader has passed along an email sent to VFW commanders by the Assistant Adjutant of the Department of Texas Veterans of Foreign Wars indicating the U.S. Army TACOM (Tactical Army Command) is demanding an inventory of all weapons held by VFW posts.

“While you may have had possession of this equipment for 20, 40, 60 or 100 years,” the email states, “it still belongs to the U.S. Military.”

The email arrived with an inventory attachment where all weapons are to be listed and the document sent to the Department of Texas Veterans of Foreign Wars. “This form will then be bounced off of the central database of all Texas VFW Posts at U.S. Army TACOM to verify serial numbers of each item that has been issued. This is a very extensive list and goes back to before the VFW was founded. So if you have a cannon from the Spanish-American War — it’s on the list.”

Many VFW halls around the country have decommissioned military weapons on their properties along with uniforms, statues and flags from every era. It is a common practice for VFW honor guard units to use M-1 rifles made into blank firing devices for salutes at parades and funerals. Weapons held by VFW posts are generally kept under lock and key in storage rooms.

TACOM is not simply interested in blank firing devices and antique rifles and pistols, however. “Weapons and Equipment consist of but is not limited to, Rifles, Pistols, Mortars, Artillery, Tanks, Vehicles, Aircraft, Missiles, Aircraft Carriers (sic), etc, from any period.”

According to the email, any attempt “hide” the items will be dealt with severely. “Please do not try and hide this as all weapons and equipment not accounted for will be reported to the FBI and BATF as stolen military equipment,” writes Dan West, retired Sgt. USMC. “I am hopeful that I need not remind anyone of the severity of punishment that can be administered or the legal bills resulting from individuals or elected officers of the Post having possession of stolen military weapons.”

 

The inventory of weapons at VFW posts is further evidence the government does not trust veterans, even with antiquated and non-functioning military equipment used primarily for display and historical purposes.

Last month the government took the unprecedented step of requiring soldiers at Fort Campbell in Kentucky to disclose all of their privately owned weapons and gun licenses.

“Military officials insist the policy is not connected to a recent controversial Department of Homeland Security report that warned disgruntled veterans could pose a national security threat. Rather, the inventory of private guns is aimed at stemming what the Army claims is an increasing number of accidental discharges by gun-toting soldiers,” NewsMax reported on May 5.

On June 5, WorldNetDaily reported that Fort Bliss in Texas had informed soldiers who live off the premises to provide descriptions, serial numbers, calibers, makes and models of any of the guns they own privately.

 

http://www.infowars.com/government-demands-inventory-of-all-vfw-weapons/

“Obama Is God”

June 9, 2009

“If you think this is just some cute “slip of the tongue remark”… think a couple more times.  It’s well crafted. We’ve had scum-bags for many decades running America’s reputation in the ground with the rest of the world because of our very questionable foreign policies. And now you’re suppose to feel bad and guilty about yourself and your country for the atrocities committed over the years by a group of people that 99% of all Americans have nothing humanly in common with. The American people have nothing to do with the ultra elite racist, war criminal, and  murdering thieves who actually control the media, elections, and policy in this country. The only connection we have is our failure to seek out these people by name and have them all executed for high treason. 

At this point after the blatantly outlawed behavior of the Bush administration, (and thats the way they wanted to sell it to you), anything a new well spoken and articulate President shoves in your face will look much better and easier to digest to the majority of the American public: iE::no clue of the actual world outside of television, spiritually dead, and  kinda sorta’ brainwashed.

So when our newer smarter, hipper, and friendlier liberal government tries to pull things like mass thievery of the American public, (( iE:(bailout), continuing NAFTA, completely destroy our economy (by design), try to create the illusionistic need for a singular currency for North America, continued escalation of oppressive occupations overseas, continued  mass murdering of innocent Iraqi civilians, continued spying on the American people, etc, etc, fuckin’ Et cetera…)),  people will just sit there like cute little pinheads and say silly things like, “Well… at least it’s not Bush,” or  “Obama can’t control every little thing that the U.S. Government does.” Whereas people used to blame Bush if their cat got sick.  

They got you right where they want you… Afraid of offending. Afraid of your shadow. Or just plain old distracted.

 

 

Obama is just continuing Bushes policies 10 Folds. Snap out of it. 

 

Some solutions??,” you ask. Well this link may not be the answer for a utopia but it’s a start:

 http://www.campaignforliberty.com/

 

 

-Fred Face 6/8/09

 

 

Sotomayor Member of Female Version of Bohemian Grove

June 7, 2009

“I don’t know much about Sotomayor but I’m sure like the new trend in Washington…( just because someone is a minority doesn’t mean that they are going to shake things up in DC… as we see 10-folds with Obama… it’s Washington’s new trick to keep the middle-class & poor masses at bay while they rape & pillage us).

Believe me I would be the first guy tossing out all the old stuffy white fat-fucks in DC but it takes more than a little slight of hand trick to trick this crazy motherfucker. I don’t care where Sotomayor came from, what her ethnicity is or how hard she struggled because if they are going to let her this high up in the ranks… she has either already sold her soul or will be willing to do so… (i.e. she will be involved with gun control… i can already see it now).

I think it’s refreshing to have Puerto Rican woman this high up in the system but I’m suspect of the motives of the white men who are placing her there. I hope she proves me wrong.”

 

-Fred Face  6/6/09

 

 

Obama Supreme Court

 

From Politico:

Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor last year accepted an invitation to join the Belizean Grove, an elite but little-known women’s-only group.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Founded nearly 10 years ago as the female answer to the Bohemian Grove — a secretive all-male club whose members have included former U.S. presidents and top business leaders — the Belizean Grove has about 125 members, including Army generals, Wall Street executives and former ambassadors.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sotomayor’s membership in the New York-based group became public Thursday afternoon in a questionnaire submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

From the Belizean Grove website:

 

Having observed the power of the Bohemian Grove, a 130-year-old, elite old boys’ network of former Presidents, businessmen, military, musicians, academics, and non-profit leaders, and realizing that women didn’t have a similar organization, Susan Stautberg and 26 other founding members created the Belizean Grove, a constellation of influential women who are key decision makers in the profit, non-profit and social sectors; who build long term mutually beneficial relationships in order to both take charge of their own destinies and help others to do the same.

Susan Stautberg (a former Washington bureau chief for Westinghouse Broadcasting) said she’d like to keep the Belizean Grove under the media radar. In other words, you’re not supposed to know anything about an exclusive, invitation-only club organized by the ruling elite and their minions.

The elite want to conduct their plotting and conspiracies in the dark. Remember how angry CFR member David Gergen got when Alex Jones confronted him on his participation at Bohemian Grove.

The discovery of Sotomayor’s inclusion in the secretive Belizean Grove club is merely another indication that she is a minion of the global elite and her appointment to the Supreme Court will mean the globalist agenda will go forward — and that agenda includes the ultimate subversion of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the sovereignty of the United States.

No word yet if members of the Belizean Grove engage in pagan rituals, dress up in red-hooded robes, cremate a coffin effigy of “Dull Care” at the base of a 40 foot owl altar, and romp with homosexuals like their male counterparts do at Bohemian Grove.

 

http://www.infowars.com/sotomayor-member-of-female-version-of-bohemian-grove/


Infowars
June 6, 2009

No Guns for Negroes

June 5, 2009

Obama’s Great Illusion

June 4, 2009

10bush-obama_lg

 

Yvonne Ridley
Information Clearing House
June 3, 2009

 

I wonder how many of you have woken up to the fact that America’s latest leader is really a political Houdini … an illusionist on a presidential scale.

In front of our very eyes he has morphed from a gentle intellectual, and strong defender of human rights into a war-mongering bully who sponsors targetted assassinations and orders pre-emptive strikes with casual ease.

It took George W. Bush years before he dared to unveil his true intentions and invade Iraq, displacing three million people in a war which cost the lives of thousands of US soldiers and the slaughter of countless civilians.

Whereas the smooth-talking Obama has achieved the same in just a few months since he arrived in The White House by launching an illegal war on Pakistan … but he’s using someone else’s army instead of his own.

He is twice as clever as the previous White House incumbent and far, far more deadly. Obama is quite possibly one of the world’s most skillful manipulators and his greatest illusion so far is fooling the public as well as the media.

While blatantly using Pakistan’s army as a cheap source of military labour he holds the country’s leader Asif Ali Zadari in suspended animation, trapped helplessly in an almost hypnotic state, induced by the promise of millions of dollars and the support of the world’s biggest military machine.

Of course we must lay some blame at Zadari’s feet for allowing himself to be used like a magician’s assistant instead of acting with the dignity and honour his office, country and people demand.

Obama is far more lethal than his predecessor – and yet his transformation from Mr Nice Guy to something more sinister seems to have gone largely unnoticed by the world’s watching media which appears to be intoxicated by the powerful charisma emanating from his rich, but smooth seductive tones.

He has already reneged on promises over closing down Guantanamo, ending military tribunals and releasing to the public the entire archive of shame which captured the torture and abuse of the previous administration’s War on Terror in video and film from 2001 onwards.

 

Moazzam Begg, an ex-Guantanamo detainee remarked recently over one of his u-turns: “President Obama has recently granted immunity to CIA agents … if the desire to get at what went wrong is so blatantly covered up under cover of “national security concerns”, there will be no end to this. And once again, the warmongers will get away with another odious and criminal cover-up”.

He has the power to make Guantanamo’s vile prison disappear and for a few glorious weeks human rights activists across the world waited with baited breath for the cages of Cuba, Bagram and elsewhere to fly open.

Just how difficult is it for the media to dip into their own archives and remind Obama about the pledges he made on the campaign trail and hold him to account? His first promise on the White House website was that his administration would be the most transparent in US history. Sadly these grand statements have not been followed through.

But this journalistic amnesia is all too convenient – what happened to his determination to bring home all combat troops from Iraq within 18 months?

Is there no journalist from the White House lobby prepared to remind him of how he said during televised presidential debates that getting Usama bin Ladin was “our biggest national security priority”? Perhaps the hypnotic Obama Affect has wiped their computer hard-drives and their memories but if you listen to his very first TV interview as the Commander-in-Chief of America he said Usama was more than a symbol.

His actual words were: “He’s also the operational leader of an organization that is planning attacks against U.S. targets,” adding that “capturing or killing bin Ladin is a critical aspect of stamping out al-Qaida.”

Having secured the votes from red neck territory by saying Obama will get Usama, he now says that killing or capturing the al-Qaida chief is no longer necessary to “meet our goal of protecting America.”

However, American Armenians are not so gullible and quite a few were shocked out of their trance following the US President’s recent visit to Turkey when he executed with the greatest of ease yet another presidential flip flop.

“As President, I will recognise the Armenian genocide,” he declared loud and proud during his campaign, but when he arrived in Turkey he sort of muttered, when asked about the hugely sensitive subject: “My views are on the record, and everyone knows my views.” And then he refused to elaborate and state them!

“Sunlight is the best disinfectant” said Obama before he took the keys to the White House – may be that’s why, when I watch the US President perform under the glare of the spotlights on the world stage, I can see something of the night lurking around his presidential shadows.

There are a few of us who are immune to the charms of the new president. Like me, they believe that the sheep’s clothing has vanished and what we now have is a dangerous wolf stalking the corridors of power on Capitol Hill.

Yes, there’s a new act in the White House these days but while Harry Houdini built his reputation performing death-defying escapes and magic tricks his political Doppelganger is certainly the master of dark arts and mass illusion.

This president has gone from charming to harming and few have noticed.

 

http://www.infowars.com/obamas-great-illusion/

China Censors: The Tiananmen Square Anniversary Will Not Be Tweeted

June 3, 2009
    tiananmen-241x300
    • By Kim Zetter Email Author 
    • June 2, 2009
      Wired.com  

    Chinese authorities have instituted censoring measures to block access to several internet sites and services in anticipation of Thursday’s 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square protest and massacre.

    The censoring began at 5 p.m. local time on Tuesday as access to sites was blocked, though users could still reportedly reach some of them through proxies, VPNs and third-party desktop clients.

    The blocked sites include Twitter, Flickr and Microsoft’s Hotmail, according to the Telegraph. FoxNews added The Huffington Post, Life Journal and the MSN Spaces blogging tool to the list. BBC viewers in China also saw their screens black out when the news service broadcast stories about the anniversary, and foreign news crews have been barred from filming in the square. Readers of the Financial Times and Economist magazine found stories about Tiananmen ripped from their pages. Authorities also plan to begin cracking down on unapproved internet cafes, according to reports from state media.

    The blocked sites are just a few among thousands that China’s censors have targeted since the beginning of last year as a string of anniversaries is marked, including the 50th anniversary of the Tibet uprising. In April, access to YouTube was blocked after someone posted images of China’s military police beating Tibetan monks.

    Twitter became popular in China after last year’s earthquake in Sichuan when people used it to get out reports of the devastation and signal news of their safety to friends and family members. The Times of London recently noted that Chinese users of Twitter can write terms that are normally blocked if they type them on other websites, such as “6/4″ for the date of the Tiananmen massacre or “Charter 08,” referring to a document published online last year by a group of intellectuals that calls for greater freedom and democracy.

    As a result, the Times says, bloggers have been anticipating the blocking of Twitter.

    “Twitter is a new thing in China. The censors need time to figure out what it is,” blogger Michael Anti told the China-based blog Danwei.org. “So enjoy the last happy days of twittering before the fate of YouTube descends on it one day.”

    He noted that given the nature of the Chinese language, a Chinese tweet could crowd in much more meaning in the 140 characters allowed by Twitter per message, than can English users. “140 Chinese characters can make up all the full elements of a news piece with the ‘5 Ws’ (Who, What, Where, When and HoW),” he said. “But the joy of the Chinese Twitterland is more fragile, and I hope that it will live longer in this country.”

    Photo: A Chinese policeman grabs a protester in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square on the 15th anniversary of a bloody military crackdown on democracy protesters, Friday, June 4, 2004. (AP Photo/Greg Baker)

     

    http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/06/china-censors-internet-before-tiananmen-square-anniversary/

    Lessons from Tiananmen Square

    June 3, 2009
    tiananmen_square1

     

    MONDAY, 01 JUNE 2009 17:59

     And why judges like Sonia Sotomayor should study their history

    by Erich Pratt

    Sometimes a pithy bumper sticker can say it all.

    Twenty years ago, many gun owners silently protested the horrific events of June 4, 1989 with this simple adage: “China has gun control.”

    To be more specific: China’s gun control applied to anyone outside of the military and the police — a truth that was pounded into the skulls of thousands of university students during what became known as the Tiananmen Square Massacre. The military government responded to student protesters in 1989 with gunfire and tanks, killing thousands of defenseless people.

    The brutality of that day caused one Chinese professor to begin questioning his hope in “science and democracy.” That professor, Hong Yujian, is now a Christian pastor in Vancouver, Canada.

    Before his conversion, however, Yujian wanted to understand what it was that had made the American dream work. So he studied America’s founding documents and was struck by phrases like “all men are created equal … they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.”

    Hong was blown away. “There is nothing like this in Chinese thinking,” Hong told World magazine. “But if you cut out the Creator, you cut out the root of democracy.”

    Wow, what a revelation! Our rights come from God. Isn’t it amazing that former communists understand this, but our intellectual elites are trying hard to forget it?

    Take Sonia Sotomayor, the justice who has been nominated by President Obama to take the place of retiring Justice David Souter on the U.S. Supreme Court. Judge Sotomayor has rejected the notion that our rights come from God. In United States v. Sanchez-Villar (2004), she stated that “the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.”

    That’s not what our Founding Fathers believed. They understood that our rights come from God, and as such, are unalienable. In other words, no government official — or judge — can take them away or restrict them in any way. The Second Amendment even captures this sentiment by stating the right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed.”

    Elbridge Gerry, who was a delegate to the Constitutional Convention and one of the first U.S. Congressmen, agreed that our rights were non-negotiable. He said that “Self defense is a primary law of nature, which no subsequent law of society can abolish;  the immediate gift of the Creator,  obliges everyone … to resist the first approaches of tyranny.”

    Gerry rightly believed that no law could justifiably abolish our rights. But when judges like Sotomayor start deciding which rights we have or don’t have, then all of our rights are in jeopardy.

    This was certainly the case in China where for decades — even centuries — they have not respected the people’s right to keep and bear arms … or their other rights for that matter. If you are a student today in China, you will not read about the Tiananmen Square Massacre in your textbooks or hear about it from your teachers or find articles about it on the Internet. It’s all been blocked and expunged by the government filters.

    It’s interesting that tyrants don’t like the freedoms that we protect in the First and Second Amendments of the Bill of Rights. In our U.S. Congress, the very politicians who hate the Second Amendment are the ones who have tended to support laws like the McCain-Feingold law (which punishes people, under certain circumstances, for merely criticizing elected officials) and a reincarnation of the UnFairness Doctrine (which would punish broadcast stations for having “too much” conservative talk radio).

    We either work to protect our right to defend ourselves or, eventually, we will even lose our right to protest the infringements that are taking place.

    Thankfully, the resistance has already started. At least 35 states have introduced Tenth Amendment resolutions in recent months, putting the federal government on notice that it has far exceeded its constitutional powers.

    This is not just a Republican revolution … it is a bipartisan movement of legislators (and citizens) across the country who are fed up with a government that keeps taking away more and more of our freedoms.

    And while these Tenth Amendment resolutions are a welcome first step, some states are now looking to veto (or get around) unconstitutional federal laws. More than a dozen states have rejected the federal REAL ID Act — which establishes the equivalent of a National ID card.

    And Montana has just enacted a law that could invalidate most federal gun control laws inside the state. According to the statute, any gun made in the state is exempt from federal regulations.

    On June 4, you can expect to see rallies in our nation’s capital to protest the Tiananmen Square Massacre on its 20-year anniversary. And that’s a good thing.

    But if Washington doesn’t change course and stop infringing upon American rights, such protests will be less than mouse squeaks compared to the firestorm that will erupt across this great land.

    *********************************************************************
    Erich Pratt is the Director of Communications for Gun Owners of America

     

     

    Obama Picks Anti-gun Judge for the Supreme Court

    May 31, 2009

    obama080630_1_560-1

     

    — Time to start contacting your Senators right away

    Unless you’ve taken a very long Memorial Day vacation, you’ve no doubt heard the big news.

    President Obama has picked an anti-gun radical to replace Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court.

    Obama’s pick is Judge Sonia Sotomayor, who is currently on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second District.  There she has racked up an anti-Second Amendment record and has displayed contempt for the rule of law under the Constitution.

    The Heller decision put the Supreme Court in support of the Constitutional protection of the individual right to keep and bear arms.  Sotomayor, a politically correct lover of centralized government power (as long as she is part of the power elite), immediately went into counter-attack mode against the Heller decision.

    Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which ruled in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states.  As she and her cohorts claimed, the Supreme Court has not yet incorporated the states under the Second Amendment.  Until then, she believes, the Second only applies to the District of Columbia.

    This is pure judicial arrogance — something Sotomayor relishes (as long as she is one of the ruling judges).  In fact, protection of the right to keep and bear arms was a major objective for enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment, as recently freed slaves were being disarmed and terrorized in their neighborhoods.  

    But Sotomayor disdains this important right of individuals, as indicated by an earlier opinion from 2004.  In United States v. Sanchez-Villar, she stated that “the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.” 

    Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s.  Fox Cable News reported yesterday that in her senior thesis at Princeton University, she wrote that America has a “deadly obsession” with guns and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to firearms ownership.

    Sotomayor’s Second Amendment views go hand in hand with her politically correct views on the law and the role of judges.

    In a speech given at Duke University in 2005, she made it abundantly clear that judges are involved in making policy.  Realizing that this did not sound very judicial (even though most judges act on this basis), Sotomayor tried to laugh off her brazen admission: “I know this is on tape and I should never say that, [audience laughing], because we don’t make law — I know.  Um, okay. I know, I’m not promoting it, I’m not advocating it.”  The audience continued to laugh.  They got the joke.

    But Sotomayor’s joke will be on us and our liberties if she gets confirmed to the Supreme Court.  And that is why we need to start contacting our Senators early and often, urging them to vote against this dangerous nomination.

    ACTION:  Please contact your two Senators and urge them to oppose the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.  You can use the  Legislative Action Center to send your Senators a pre-written e-mail message. 

     

    http://gunowners.org/a052909.htm

    Rabidly Anti-gun Sotomayor is Unacceptable

    May 30, 2009

    gun_owners_of_america

     

    Obama Picks Anti-gun Judge for the Supreme Court 
    — Time to start contacting your Senators right away 

    Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
    8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
    Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
    http://www.gunowners.org 


    Friday, May 29, 2009 


    Unless you’ve taken a very long Memorial Day vacation, you’ve no doubt 
    heard the big news. 

    President Obama has picked an anti-gun radical to replace Justice David 
    Souter on the Supreme Court. 

    Obama’s pick is Judge Sonia Sotomayor, who is currently on the U.S. 
    Court of Appeals for the Second District.  There she has racked up an 
    anti-Second Amendment record and has displayed contempt for the rule of 
    law under the Constitution. 

    The Heller decision put the Supreme Court in support of the 
    Constitutional protection of the individual right to keep and bear arms. 
    Sotomayor, a politically correct lover of centralized government power 
    (as long as she is part of the power elite), immediately went into 
    counter-attack mode against the Heller decision. 

    Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which ruled 
    in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to the 
    states.  As she and her cohorts claimed, the Supreme Court has not yet 
    incorporated the states under the Second Amendment.  Until then, she 
    believes, the Second only applies to the District of Columbia. 

    This is pure judicial arrogance — something Sotomayor relishes (as long 
    as she is one of the ruling judges).  In fact, protection of the right 
    to keep and bear arms was a major objective for enactment of the 
    Fourteenth Amendment, as recently freed slaves were being disarmed and 
    terrorized in their neighborhoods. 

    But Sotomayor disdains this important right of individuals, as indicated 
    by an earlier opinion from 2004.  In United States v. Sanchez-Villar, 
    she stated that “the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental 
    right.” 

    Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s. 
    Fox Cable News reported yesterday that in her senior thesis at Princeton 
    University, she wrote that America has a “deadly obsession” 
    with guns 
    and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to 
    firearms ownership. 

    Sotomayor’s Second Amendment views go hand in hand with her politically 
    correct views on the law and the role of judges. 

    In a speech given at Duke University in 2005, she made it abundantly 
    clear that judges are involved in making policy.  Realizing that this 
    did not sound very judicial (even though most judges act on this basis), 
    Sotomayor tried to laugh off her brazen admission: “I know this is on 
    tape and I should never say that, [audience laughing], because we don’t 
    make law — I know.  Um, okay. I know, I’m not promoting it, I’m not 
    advocating it.”  The audience continued to laugh.  They got the joke. 

    But Sotomayor’s joke will be on us and our liberties if she gets 
    confirmed to the Supreme Court.  And that is why we need to start 
    contacting our Senators early and often, urging them to vote against 
    this dangerous nomination. 

    ACTION:  Please contact your two Senators and urge them to oppose the 
    nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.  You can 
    go to the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at 
    http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the 
    pre-written e-mail message below. 


    —– Pre-written letter —– 

    Dear Senator: 

    If you cherish the Second Amendment and agree that it protects an 
    individual right to keep and bear arms — as stated by the recent Heller 
    decision — then you must vote against Judge Sonia Sotomayor. 

    This choice for the Supreme Court is totally unacceptable!  Consider a 
    partial rendering of her anti-gun record: 

    * Sotomayor ruled in United States v. Sanchez-Villar (2004) that “the 
    right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.” 

    * Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which 
    ruled in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to 
    the states.  This makes her more liberal than the Ninth Circuit, which 
    stated in April that the Second Amendment does apply to the states. 

    * Sotomayor has held very anti-gun views, even as far back as the 1970s. 
    Fox Cable News reported on May 28 that in her senior thesis at Princeton 
    University, she wrote that America has a “deadly obsession” 
    with guns 
    and that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to 
    firearms ownership. 

    I will consider a vote in favor of Sotomayor as the most anti-gun vote a 
    Senator could cast.  To send an anti-gun liberal judge to the Supreme 
    Court for the rest of her life is to establish “legislation without 
    representation.”  After all, she says that the courts are where policy 
    is made, and once she’s there, we’ll never be able to vote her out. 

    Again, please vote against this dangerous nomination. 

    Sincerely, 

    (your name)

    Glenn Beck is a freak (Larry Pratt is not)

    May 26, 2009

    I put this up here because of the interesting information on Bobby Rush. Coming from “Pratt,” I believe it. Not Beck. Glenn Beck is a government special op of the highest magnitude. And just a weird fuck.

    Larry Pratt:  http://gunowners.org/

    Revolution in the air

    May 24, 2009

    small_guillotine

    By Dan Jones
    Author, Summer of Blood

    The anger in the air is palpable. The ordinary people hold the political class in contempt.

    The government is failing, as war and economic catastrophe are dealt with in increasingly unconvincing fashion by second-rate public servants. There is, for the first time in a generation, a sense of revolution brewing.

    This is not today’s Britain. It is England in 1381, the year that witnessed one of the greatest popular risings in our history: the Peasants’ Revolt.

    Between May and November that year, England was seized by spasms of popular rebellion, provoked by poll taxes and a disastrous war, and underpinned by the common belief that the government was a pack of scoundrels.

    Towns and villages from Somerset to Scarborough rose against their rulers, beating and sometimes killing MPs, lawyers, landowners and politicians, tearing down their homes and vandalising their land.

    Bloody revenge

    At the heart of the rising was a march on London on Corpus Christi weekend (Thursday 13 to Saturday 15 June).

    Traditionally this was a time of mystery plays and festive processions. In 1381, the main procession consisted of villagers from the Thames estuary marching along the pilgrim road between Canterbury and London, burning houses and taking political prisoners as they protested against their venal, incompetent masters.

    Wat Tyler's mob burning St John's Monastery near Smithfield, London

    The peasant’s revolt ransacked London before it was put down

    When the protestors, led by their general Wat Tyler and the maverick preacher John Ball, reached London, they found they had significant common cause with the townsmen.

    The London populace bore long-held grudges towards their own ruling elites – which included the oligarchic, super-rich merchant traders in the City as well as the hapless courtiers who governed in the name of 14-year old King Richard.

    Common fury with the state of lordship bound rural and urban rebels in a compact to clean up government.

    So the town mice opened their gates to the country mice, and together they all set about the cats.

    At first there were organised protests, attacks on specific, symbolic landmarks: the Savoy Palace, home of the powerful and unpopular duke of Lancaster, was burned to the ground; the Temple, home of the legal profession, was sacked. Prisons were broken open and the Tower of London, where the government had holed up, was besieged.

    Demonstrations became riots. A chopping block was set up at Cheapside, where the street ran sticky with the blood of the condemned.

    Portrait of Richard II

    Kind Richard II was only 14 years old when faced with the rebellion

    The Archbishop of Canterbury had his head hacked off on Tower Hill. The Treasurer was murdered, as – in Suffolk – was a Chief Justice.

    Some 140 Flemish merchants and their families were butchered on the banks of the Thames, in a shocking xenophobic massacre.

    But for the luck of the young king, Richard II, and the fortitude of a few good men around him led by Mayor of London, William Walworth, the City would have been burned to the ground.

    Tyler and his mob were eventually defeated at Smithfield, but it took nearly six months to calm the rest of the country.

    Political revolt

    The summer of discontent left a profound mark on the English political consciousness.

    A few lines written, prior to the rebellion, by the Kentish poet John Gower, were suddenly recognised as an important tenet of government.

    “There are three things of such a sort that they produce merciless destruction when they get the upper hand,” he wrote.

    “One is a flood of water, another is a raging fire and the third is the lesser people, the common multitude; for they will not be stopped by either reason or by discipline.”

    I have thought many times during the past months that our politicians would benefit from revisiting the events of the Peasants’ Revolt.

    In many ways it is a tale of mutual misunderstanding: the ordinary folk thought the worst of their politicians, and politicians saw their people as an economic resource, to be taxed and tormented as the necessities of government demanded.

    Skeleton from the Great Plague discovered in Spitalfields Market

    The Black Death was a major factor in fermenting anti-government feeling

    This government, like the government in 1381, has been caught out by a global crisis of unprecedented severity.

    In the fourteenth century it was the Black Death, which killed 40% of Europe’s population.

    The government’s reaction – to impose labour laws that stifled economic recovery but preserved the social hierarchy, was vastly unpopular, for it prevented ordinary people from improving their lives.

    Now, it is the collapse in global credit which has brought a different sort of misery to millions.

    No doubt there are many differences between 1381 and 2009. They were medieval, we are modern. And history never repeats itself as exactly as historians sometimes wish.

    But if I were an MP today, I would make it my business to learn the course and the lessons of 1381 by heart. Then I would give thanks that there are no longer any chopping blocks at Cheapside.

    Dan Jones is the author of Summer of Blood.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8061000/8061725.stm

    America’s Nightmare: The Obama Dystopia

    May 24, 2009

    Obama 2008

    by Andrew Hughes

     

    After 8 years of the Bush-Cheney nightmare during which we saw the wanton destruction of Afghanistan and Iraq, the cynical  negation of centuries of Law designed to protect the most basic human rights and a foreign policy worthy of Genghis Khan, there came along the “Great Black Hope” in the persona of Barack Obama. The collective world consciousness turned uncritically to what was presented as a new era for peace, change and trust in Government. 

    Never before had one witnessed such an accomplished use of manipulation, propaganda, imagery and public relations wizardry to sell the public a man who was to take the baton from Bush and run with it in the race to destroy the economy, the rights of the people and help birth a nation totally controlled by those who have always lurked in the shadows of power. “Change” was promised and was delivered in the form of a deepening of the already Dystopic  nightmare. 

    Promises were broken with no apology, the same creative legalese that infested the Bush administration, in the form of John Yoo and Alberto Gonzalez, was again used to deny justice to the inmates of Guantanamo, It was used to justify more torture, more destruction of the Constitution and more illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens. 

    The President that extended the hand of peace to the Muslim world has murdered hundreds of Pakistani men, women and children. The President who promised accountability in Government has filled his staff with lobbyists, banksters and warmongers. His Attorney General refuses to prosecute some of the worst war crimes committed in modern history and continues to give legal cover to criminals who tortured with impunity.

    The country has been further bankrupted by the continuing theft of taxpayer money as the Wall St. campaign donors receive their quid pro quo. Obama has stood by idly as Bernancke states that the private Federal Reserve is not answerable to either Congress of the American public. The U.S. taxpayer is now on the hook for $14.3 Trillion and rising. Foreclosures and unemployment are rising with no meaningful efforts by the administration to alleviate the symptoms, never mind the cause. The new image of America is one of tent cities, lengthening soup kitchen lines, sherrifs evicting countless thousands of young and old from their homes, once prosperous towns descending in to an eerie stillness and an increasingly disillusioned populace.

    The “War on terrorism” has mutated in to a control grid for an increasingly aware population. The foundation for this had already been put in place by Bush with the Patriot Act, Patriot Act 2, Military commissions act and numerous executive orders that strangled what was left of Posse Comitatus and the Constitution. 

    Homeland Security now defines “Terrorists” as those who believe in the Constitution, the first, second and fourth amendments. Returning veterans are being targeted for a denial of their second amendment rights. A  “Terrorist Watchlist” of more than a million and rapidly growing, is being used as the basis for denying citizens the rights to travel and to work. 

    Obama is now mulling over the idea of indefinite detention without trial for U.S. citizens. This, from a teacher of the Constitution ! Bills are in congress to criminalize free speech on the Internet via the Cyberbullying Act which will make hurting somebody’s feelings a felony. Just like the Patriot Act this will morph in to a criminalization of political free speech and any criticism of the Government.

    “Cyberterrorism” is being used as a pretext to bring government regulation to the the last stronghold of unbiased information. Washington has realized that it’s getting harder to get away with their Fascist agenda and are moving to control the field. The populace have become more aware of just what kind of “Change” Obama intended to deliver. 

    There has been a growing resistance on a state level with several invoking their 9th and 10th Amendment rights in a valiant attempt to stop the Federal Vampire from draining the last drops of blood, the last vestiges of Freedom and Hope. 

    This is the Dystopic Nightmare that America finds itself in today and each day brings new assaults on Freedom and Sanity. The framework for total control of the citizenry, the economy and the media is being built upon in a relentless aggrandization of Govermental power. Obama sits atop his new Empire still smiling that sickeningly disingenuous smile surrounded by his seasoned courtiers who have worked for decades to bring America in to this new era of the New World Order.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13716

    Montana Governor Signs Revolutionary New Gun Law

    May 24, 2009

    dont_tread_on_me

     

    Article written by Joe Heibel

    Executive Summary – The USA state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law. I mean REVOLUTIONARY.

    The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana. The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal – confiscation of privately owned firearms.

    Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obamas face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face. Gotta love it.

    Important Points – If guns and ammunition are manufactured inside the State of Montana for sale and use inside that state then the federal firearms laws have no applicability since the federal government only has the power to control commerce across state lines. Montana has the law on their side. Since when did the USA start following their own laws especially the constitution of the USA, the very document that empowers the USA.

    Silencers made in Montana and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered. As a note silencers were first used before the 007 movies as a device to enable one to hunt without disturbing neighbors and scaring game. They were also useful as devices to control noise when practicing so as to not disturb the neighbors.

    Silencers work best with a bolt-action rifle. There is a long barrel and the chamber is closed tight so as to direct all the gases though the silencer at the tip of the barrel. Semi-auto pistols and revolvers do not really muffle the sound very well except on the silver screen. The revolvers bleed gas out with the sound all over the place. The semi-auto pistols bleed the gases out when the slide recoils back.

    Silencers are maybe nice for snipers picking off enemy soldiers even though they reduce velocity but not very practical for hit men shooting pistols in crowded places. Silencers were useful tools for gun enthusiasts and hunters.

    There would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required. So in a short period of time there would be millions and millions of unregistered untraceable guns in Montana. Way to go Montana.

    Discussion – Let us see what Obama does. If he hits Montana hard they will probably vote to secede from the USA. The governor of Texas has already been refusing Federal money because he does not want to agree to the conditions that go with it and he has been saying secession is a right they have as sort of a threat. Things are no longer the same with the USA. Do not be deceived by Obama acting as if all is the same, it is not.

    Text of the New Law:
    HOUSE BILL NO. 246

    INTRODUCED BY J. BONIEK, BENNETT, BUTCHER, CURTISS, RANDALL, WARBURTON

    AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM FEDERAL REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA; AND PROVIDING AN APPLICABILITY DATE.

    BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:

    Section 1. Short title. [Sections 1 through 6] may be cited as the “Montana Firearms Freedom Act”.

    Section 2. Legislative declarations of authority. The legislature declares that the authority for [sections 1 through 6] is the following:

    (1) The 10th amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

    (2) The ninth amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of Montana certain rights, as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those rights is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

    (3) The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the 9th and 10th amendments to the United States constitution, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.

    (4) The second amendment to the United States constitution reserves to the people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

    (5) Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution clearly secures to Montana citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of individual Montana citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional protection is unchanged from the 1889 Montana constitution, which was approved by congress and the people of Montana, and the right exists, as it was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

    Section 3. Definitions. As used in [sections 1 through 6], the following definitions apply:

    (1) “Borders of Montana” means the boundaries of Montana described in Article I, section 1, of the 1889 Montana constitution.

    (2) “Firearms accessories” means items that are used in conjunction with or mounted upon a firearm but are not essential to the basic function of a firearm, including but not limited to telescopic or laser sights, magazines, flash or sound suppressors, folding or aftermarket stocks and grips, speedloaders, ammunition carriers, and lights for target illumination.

    (3) “Generic and insignificant parts” includes but is not limited to springs, screws, nuts, and pins.

    (4) “Manufactured” means that a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition has been created from basic materials for functional usefulness, including but not limited to forging, casting, machining, or other processes for working materials.

    Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.

    Section 5. Exceptions. [Section 4] does not apply to:
    (1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one person;

    (2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than 1 1/2 inches and that uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;

    (3) ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or

    (4) a firearm that discharges two or more projectiles with one activation of the trigger or other firing device.

    Section 6. Marketing of firearms. A firearm manufactured or sold in Montana under [sections 1 through 6] must have the words “Made in Montana” clearly stamped on a central metallic part, such as the receiver or frame.

    Section 7. Codification instruction. [Sections 1 through 6] are intended to be codified as an integral part of Title 30, and the provisions of Title 30 apply to [sections 1 through 6].

    Section 8. Applicability. [This act] applies to firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition that are manufactured, as defined in [section 3], and retained in Montana after October 1, 2009.

    Article written by Joe Heibe

    Executive Summary – The USA state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law. I mean REVOLUTIONARY.

    The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana. The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal – confiscation of privately owned firearms.

    Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obamas face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face. Gotta love it.

    Important Points – If guns and ammunition are manufactured inside the State of Montana for sale and use inside that state then the federal firearms laws have no applicability since the federal government only has the power to control commerce across state lines. Montana has the law on their side. Since when did the USA start following their own laws especially the constitution of the USA, the very document that empowers the USA.

    Silencers made in Montana and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered. As a note silencers were first used before the 007 movies as a device to enable one to hunt without disturbing neighbors and scaring game. They were also useful as devices to control noise when practicing so as to not disturb the neighbors.

    Silencers work best with a bolt-action rifle. There is a long barrel and the chamber is closed tight so as to direct all the gases though the silencer at the tip of the barrel. Semi-auto pistols and revolvers do not really muffle the sound very well except on the silver screen. The revolvers bleed gas out with the sound all over the place. The semi-auto pistols bleed the gases out when the slide recoils back.

    Silencers are maybe nice for snipers picking off enemy soldiers even though they reduce velocity but not very practical for hit men shooting pistols in crowded places. Silencers were useful tools for gun enthusiasts and hunters.

    There would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required. So in a short period of time there would be millions and millions of unregistered untraceable guns in Montana. Way to go Montana.

    Discussion – Let us see what Obama does. If he hits Montana hard they will probably vote to secede from the USA. The governor of Texas has already been refusing Federal money because he does not want to agree to the conditions that go with it and he has been saying secession is a right they have as sort of a threat. Things are no longer the same with the USA. Do not be deceived by Obama acting as if all is the same, it is not.

    Text of the New Law:
    HOUSE BILL NO. 246

    INTRODUCED BY J. BONIEK, BENNETT, BUTCHER, CURTISS, RANDALL, WARBURTON

    AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM FEDERAL REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA; AND PROVIDING AN APPLICABILITY DATE.

    BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:

    Section 1. Short title. [Sections 1 through 6] may be cited as the “Montana Firearms Freedom Act”.

    Section 2. Legislative declarations of authority. The legislature declares that the authority for [sections 1 through 6] is the following:

    (1) The 10th amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

    (2) The ninth amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of Montana certain rights, as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those rights is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

    (3) The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the 9th and 10th amendments to the United States constitution, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.

    (4) The second amendment to the United States constitution reserves to the people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

    (5) Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution clearly secures to Montana citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of individual Montana citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional protection is unchanged from the 1889 Montana constitution, which was approved by congress and the people of Montana, and the right exists, as it was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.

    Section 3. Definitions. As used in [sections 1 through 6], the following definitions apply:

    (1) “Borders of Montana” means the boundaries of Montana described in Article I, section 1, of the 1889 Montana constitution.

    (2) “Firearms accessories” means items that are used in conjunction with or mounted upon a firearm but are not essential to the basic function of a firearm, including but not limited to telescopic or laser sights, magazines, flash or sound suppressors, folding or aftermarket stocks and grips, speedloaders, ammunition carriers, and lights for target illumination.

    (3) “Generic and insignificant parts” includes but is not limited to springs, screws, nuts, and pins.

    (4) “Manufactured” means that a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition has been created from basic materials for functional usefulness, including but not limited to forging, casting, machining, or other processes for working materials.

    Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in conjunction with a firearm in Montana.

    Section 5. Exceptions. [Section 4] does not apply to:
    (1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one person;

    (2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than 1 1/2 inches and that uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;

    (3) ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or

    (4) a firearm that discharges two or more projectiles with one activation of the trigger or other firing device.

    Section 6. Marketing of firearms. A firearm manufactured or sold in Montana under [sections 1 through 6] must have the words “Made in Montana” clearly stamped on a central metallic part, such as the receiver or frame.

    Section 7. Codification instruction. [Sections 1 through 6] are intended to be codified as an integral part of Title 30, and the provisions of Title 30 apply to [sections 1 through 6].

    Section 8. Applicability. [This act] applies to firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition that are manufactured, as defined in [section 3], and retained in Montana after October 1, 2009.

    http://www.republicmagazine.com/montana-governor-signs-revolutionary-new-gun-law/

     

    In just 3 months Americans bought enough guns to outfit the entire Chinese and Indian armies combined

    May 24, 2009

    Money Talks
    May 23, 2009

    “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.” – Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto WWII

    You also bought 1,529,635,000 rounds of ammunition in just the month of December 2008. Yeah that is right, that is Billion with a “B”. This number takes no accounting of reloading or reloaded ammunition.

    …..read more at AmmoLand.com if you dare.

    And how is Smith &Wesson doing? Pretty good I’d say. It looks like SWHC outperformed the general market’s 30% gain since the lows. Spaceshot!!!

    SW4291

    SW429

    Military Personnel Ordered To Comply With Illegal Private Firearms Registration

    May 23, 2009

    190509top3

    Paul Joseph Watson
    Prison Planet.com
    Tuesday, May 19, 200

    An alarming document sent to us by an Infantryman based out of Fort Campbell Kentucky shows that active duty military personnel are being secretly ordered to submit information to their Chain of Command on how many firearms they own privately, their location, as well of details of any Concealed Carry permits.

    Though the order was apparently rescinded, the fact that active duty soldiers are being asked to submit every detail of their private firearm collection is a telltale sign that the second amendment is in dire straights. Furthermore, Alex Jones has personally confirmed that such directives are being issued all over the country.

    The directive orders active duty personnel to report details of all privately-owned firearms to their Chain of Command, as well as future firearms purchases.

    The memorandum was sent to us by a concerned 11B Infantryman based at Fort Campbell. In his e mail, the man expresses his shock at being ordered to comply with what amounts to a registration of privately-owned firearms.

    “I live off post, with my firearms (which I don’t bring on post for any reason). A very frightening thing happened at work yesterday,” he writes. “I was ordered to fill out a list containing my firearm information. This included make, model, caliber, and serial number of all firearms I currently posses. In addition, I was also required to list registration information, location of all weapons individually, and information regarding any CCW permits I posses.”

    The man tried to ascertain why such information was being demanded by speaking to his First Sergeant but was told, “Just put your info on the form.”

    “I don’t know how high this goes, but I am hearing that this is going on in other units at Fort Campbell as well,” writes the Infantryman. “It just seems a little coincidental to me that within 90 days: the most anti-firearm President in history is inaugurated, some of the nastiest anti-firearm laws are put on the table in Washington, and then the Army comes around wanting what amounts to a registration on all firearms, even if they are off post, and doesn’t provide any reason or purpose as to why.”

    The man said he had been at Fort Campbell for almost 8 years and had never encountered anything like this directive before.

    “I fear something really nasty is blowing in the wind here,” he warns.

    According to a World Net Daily article, the order was stopped when it was discovered the commander was not “acting within his authority.”

    However, Alex Jones has personally confirmed that bases all over the nation, including in Texas, are directing active duty personnel to provide the same information about their private gun collections.

    The story emphasizes how gargantuan threats to the second amendment are not being reported by the mainstream media nor by big gun groups like the NRA.

    A similarly grave threat to the second amendment is the so-called ‘No Fly, No Buy Act’, (H.R. 2401), a bill that will merge the TSA’s no-fly list with the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), a point-of-sale system for determining eligibility to purchase a firearm in the United States, Guam, and Puerto Rico.

    Since the Department of Homeland Security now considers veterans, advocates of the Second Amendment, and states’ rights activists as terrorists, the ‘No Fly, No Buy’ act would effectively disarm the majority of the entire country.

    The language of H.R. 2401 reads as follows: “To increase public safety and reduce the threat to domestic security by including persons who may be prevented from boarding an aircraft in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, and for other purposes,” according to the Open Congresswebsite. Govtrack.us reports that the bill was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

    http://www.infowars.com/military-personnel-ordered-to-comply-with-illegal-private-firearms-registration/

    Victory in Congress: Gun Ban Repealed!

    May 21, 2009

    gun_owners_of_america

     

    Victory at Last 
    — National Park Service Gun Ban Repealed! 

    Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
    8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
    Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
    http://www.gunowners.org 


    “Gun Owners of America was the most consistent and loudest voice on 
    Capitol Hill in support of the effort to repeal the National Park 
    Service gun ban.” — Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) 


    Wednesday, May 20, 2009 

    Good news! 

    The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill today that included an 
    amendment to repeal the gun ban on National Park Service (NPS) land and 
    wildlife refuges. 

    The amendment, sponsored by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) and attached to a 
    credit card industry reform bill, passed the House overwhelmingly by a 
    vote of 279-147. 

    For decades, law-abiding citizens have been prohibited from exercising 
    their Second Amendment rights on NPS land and wildlife refuges, even if 
    the state in which the land is located allows carrying firearms. 

    With some limited exceptions for hunting, the only way to legally 
    possess a firearm anywhere in a national park is by having it unloaded 
    and inaccessible, such as locked up in an automobile trunk.  A Bush 
    administration regulation partially reversed the ban, but that action 
    was singlehandedly negated recently by an activist judge in Washington, 
    D.C.  The Department of Interior decided not to appeal that ruling. 

    Senator Coburn believes, like you do, that Americans should not be 
    forced to sacrifice their Second Amendment rights when entering NPS land 
    and wildlife refuges. 

    GOA worked with Coburn on an amendment that simply allows for state and 
    local laws — instead of unelected bureaucrats and anti gun activist 
    judges — to govern firearm possession on these lands. 

    The anti-gun leadership in both the House and Senate went berserk and 
    fought to keep the Coburn amendment from being attached to the 
    underlying bill.  Sparks were flying on the floor of the House of 
    Representatives today. 

    Anti-gun Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) whined that a “very 
    good” credit 
    card bill had been “hijacked” by the Coburn amendment.  To 
    this, Rep. 
    Rob Bishop (R-UT) pointed out that gun control is the policy of tyrants, 
    as evidenced by the British attempt to confiscate firearms at Lexington 
    and Concord in 1775. 

    Congressional leaders and entrenched bureaucrats have fought GOA over 
    the NPS gun ban for the past eight years. 

    But your activism has finally broken through.  The late Senator Everett 
    Dirksen said, “When I feel the heat, I see the light!”  Well, 
    you have 
    applied a lot of heat.  Members of Congress know that they oppose your 
    Second Amendment rights at their own peril. 

    As it stands today, both houses of Congress have now passed the Coburn 
    amendment — and President Obama is expected to sign the provision into 
    law (only because it is part of a larger credit card bill that he really 
    wants). 

    So, congratulate yourself for winning this long, hard battle.  GOA was 
    the leading, and often only, national gun group involved in this fight. 
    You involvement was absolutely vital to achieving this win. 

    Of course, many more battles lie ahead.  President Obama continues to 
    push for the Senate to ratify massive international gun control 
    treaties.  There is a battle over a Supreme Court nominee coming up. 
    Anti-gun zealots in Congress are aggressively pushing to renew the 
    Clinton gun ban and close down gun shows. 

    And as the health care debate picks up steam in the coming weeks and 
    months, GOA is battling efforts to create a computerized national 
    healthcare database.  Such a database can be used to deny people their 
    Second Amendment rights in the same way that so many veterans have lost 
    their gun rights based only on the diagnoses of a doctor for things like 
    combat-related stress. 

    GOA will be calling for action on these and other Second Amendment 
    issues as they move through Congress. 

    In the meantime, have a safe Memorial Day as we remember those who gave 
    the ultimate sacrifice so that America would remain “Land of the 
    Free.”

    The Worlds Biggest Cock Suckers

    May 17, 2009

    President Obama Continues Assault on the Second Amendment

    May 17, 2009
    THURSDAY, 16 APRIL 2009 18:48

    By John Velleco
    Director of Federal Affairs

    President Obama is determined to eradicate the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens.

    In recent meetings with Mexican President Felipe Calderón, the American President promised to urge the U.S. Senate to pass an international arms control treaty. 

    The treaty, cumbersomely titled the “Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials” (known by the acronym CIFTA), was signed by President Bill Clinton, but never ratified by the Senate. 

    President Obama is hoping to capitalize on an increased Democrat majority and push its quick ratification.  The U.S. is one of four nations that have not ratified the treaty.

    If ratified and the U.S. is found not to be in compliance with any provisions of the treaty — such as a provision that would outlaw reloading ammunition without a government license — President Obama would be empowered to implement regulations without Congressional approval. 

    Supporters of CIFTA claim the treaty is not a threat to the Second Amendment, but only a “symbolic” gesture.  But symbolic of what?  That America really is to blame for problems of violence and drug gangs in a foreign country?  That the American government can be pressed by a foreign country to alter the Second Amendment?

    If the kind of “change” that Obama wants is for the United States to take its marching orders from third world countries regarding our gun rights, we’re in big trouble!

    The fact is, this treaty will do NOTHING to combat the violence in Mexico, but it will go a LONG WAY toward eroding our ability to protect the right to keep and bear arms through our elected officials.

    Even if America BANNED ALL GUNS, the violence in Mexico would not go away.  After all, the cartels are funded — to the tune of billions of dollars — by products (illegal drugs) that are already completely banned.  How much more evidence is needed that a “prohibition” will not work?

    Actually, gun control proposals such as reinstating the ban on semi-automatic firearms will make Americans less safe, especially if violence spills over to this side of the border. 

    As Wyoming Senator John Barasso pointed out in a recent trip to El Paso, Texas: “Why would you disarm someone when they potentially could get caught in the crossfire?… The United States will not surrender our second-amendment rights for Mexico’s border problem.”

    President Obama disagrees and he continues to spread the myth about how many guns recovered in Mexico come from the U.S.  “More than 90% of the guns found in Mexico are not bought [in Mexico], but in the United States,” he said. 

    William La Jeunesse and Maxim Lott set the record straight and debunked “the 90% number” in a FOXNews.com report: “It’s just not true,” they said.  According to their report, the real number is closer to 17%.

    In other words, the Obama administration is pushing to disarm law-abiding Americans based on a massive misinformation campaign.

    So how are the cartels armed if firearms are not pouring across the U.S. border?  Keeping in mind that the cartels control BILLIONS of dollars, La Jeunesse and Lott shed some light on how they obtain the overwhelming majority of their guns:

    — The Black Market. Mexico is a virtual arms bazaar, with fragmentation grenades from South Korea, AK-47s from China, and shoulder-fired rocket launchers from Spain, Israel and former Soviet bloc manufacturers.

    — Russian crime organizations. Interpol says Russian Mafia groups such as Poldolskaya and Moscow-based Solntsevskaya are actively trafficking drugs and arms in Mexico.

    — South America. During the late 1990s, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) established a clandestine arms smuggling and drug trafficking partnership with the Tijuana cartel, according to the Federal Research Division report from the Library of Congress.

    — Asia. According to a 2006 Amnesty International Report, China has provided arms to countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Chinese assault weapons and Korean explosives have been recovered in Mexico.

    — The Mexican Army. More than 150,000 soldiers deserted in the last six years, according to Mexican Congressman Robert Badillo. Many took their weapons with them, including the standard issue M-16 assault rifle made in Belgium.

    — Guatemala. U.S. intelligence agencies say traffickers move immigrants, stolen cars, guns and drugs, including most of America’s cocaine, along the porous Mexican-Guatemalan border. On March 27, La Hora, a Guatemalan newspaper, reported that police seized 500 grenades and a load of AK-47s on the border. Police say the cache was transported by a Mexican drug cartel operating out of Ixcan, a border town.

    In addition, despite efforts to clean up the system, corruption in the Mexican government is rampant.  An article in the New York Times late last year noted that, “One of Mexico’s most notorious drug cartels made huge cash payments to officials in the Mexican attorney general’s office in exchange for confidential information on anti-drug operations… the cartel might have had an informant inside the American embassy.”

    The bribes ranged from $150,000 to $450,000 each.  Clearly, these gangs have the resources not only to buy firearms by the planeload, but they can buy the planes, too!  Politicians on both sides of the border seem to ignore that they’re dealing with multi-billion dollar criminal organizations that will always be able to get firearms.

    One would think that Mexico President Felipe Calderón and Attorney General Eduardo Medina Mora would have their hands full cleaning up a huge mess in their own country, but they’re not too busy to meddle in U.S. affairs. 

    As the Times noted in an article that coincided with Obama’s Mexico trip, “Mexican officials have repeatedly called on the United States to clamp down on the flow of weapons and are likely to bring it up again with President Obama on Thursday.”

    Mr. Mora even lectured that “The Second Amendment was never meant to arm foreign criminal groups.”  

    American office holders should be more concerned about upholding their oath to support and defend the U.S. Constitution than kowtowing to “blame America first” foreign politicians. 

    http://gunowners.org/obamaacalderon.htm

    Yet Another Anti-gun Radical up for a State Department Post

    May 17, 2009
    THURSDAY, 07 MAY 2009 22:07

         We realize it sounds like old news.

         The Obama administration — the one that, during the campaign, “was not going to go after our guns” — 
    has nominated yet another anti-gun crazy for a high federal post. 

         This one is Harold Hongju Koh, a Yale Law Professor nominated to be chief legal guru for Hillary Clinton’s State Department. 

         And, even by the standards of liberal craziness (and tax evasion) that we have come to expect from Obama administration officials, this guy is off the charts.

     

     He wants to apply Sharia law here, proposes to send U.S. citizens for trial by international tribunals, and blasts American conduct in international forums. 

         Koh has also gone out of his way to be at the front of the cheerleading squad to get the UN into the business of regulating Second Amendment-protected conduct in the United States.

         Specifically, in a lecture reprinted in the Fordham Law Review, he excoriates former UN Ambassador John Bolton for insisting that any UN regulation of guns not contain “measures abrogating the Constitutional right to bear arms.”  This assertion that our international agreements should actually protect the Second Amendment was, in Koh’s words, “most amazing to a student of American constitutional law.”

         Koh went on to argue that it was ridiculous to insist that UN agreements protect the Second Amendment because “the Second Amendment had never been used to overturn any American federal gun law.”  Besides, protested Koh, the conference documents of the anti-gun conference had made it “amply clear” that they would not impede legal gun ownership. 

         Well, it’s time we make it “amply clear” that anti-gun crazies should not be in positions where they can negotiate away Second Amendment rights in international conventions.

    Gun Owners of America urges the Senate to reject this radical, anti-gun nominee.

    http://gunowners.org/koh.htm

    Tucker from Greece: Bilderbergers own President Obama

    May 17, 2009

     James P. Tucker 
    The American Free Press
    May 15, 2009

    newfacesametyrannyobama

     

    Bilderberg luminaries all appeared grim-faced as they stepped from their limos on to the grounds of the Nafsika Astir Palace Hotel in Vouliagmeni, Greece. They arrived from the airport in nearby Athens, escorted by police with sirens blaring. The world economy is at the top of the Bilderberg agenda. Bilderberg will debate how to exploit the global recession and fabrications about “swine flu” to advance its world government goals. Bilderberg’s agenda has expanded, even as public awareness has grown.

    Sources within Bilderberg said President Obama will be instructed to make another effort to get the United States to sign on to the International Criminal Court. The ICC treaty, if ratified by the Senate, would be superior to the Constitution, able to overrule Congress and the Supreme Court and impose “world law” on America.

    Bilderberg leaders said they understood the effort would have to be handled with “subtle delicacy” because of the Senate’s traditional hostility to joining the ICC.

    Former President Bill Clinton, who attended Bilderberg as the obscure governor of Arkansas in 1991 and was elected president in 1992, OK’d the ICC treaty, even though a test vote showed more than 90 senators objecting to the treaty, including world government advocates who were scared off by patriotic voters made aware of the perils by The Spotlight, the inspiration for AMERICAN FREE PRESS. So Clinton dared not submit the ICC treaty for ratification, and was forced to wait for a wind change in politics.

    BILDERBERG OWNS OBAMA

    But Bilderberg owns President Obama, who sees himself as a “citizen of the world.” He will be sweet-talking Senate supporters who are afraid to back the treaty. He will be hoping for an even more left-wing Senate after the 2010 election, His goal, as dictated by Bilderberg, is to persuade the new Senate (to be seated in January 2010), to ratify the ICC treaty late on a Saturday night, too late for the Sunday papers or to make changes in the Sunday TV talkies.

    You will not read of this in the Bilderberg-controlled Washington Post, New York Times, Los Angeles Times or hear about it on network news broadcasts.

    http://www.infowars.com/tucker-from-greece-bilderbergers-own-president-obama/

    Archie Bunker on Gun Control

    May 17, 2009

    It’s Getting Very Serious Now

    May 13, 2009

    Chuck Baldwin
    NewsWithViews
    May 12, 2009

                             “I’m a somewhat living tree stump.”

    kissinger-wrinklesIf one doubts the intention of the elitists in government today to deny the American people their right to keep and bear arms, consider what former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger is purported to have said just a couple of weeks ago.

     

     

     

     

     

    First, it was a Missouri Analysis and Information Center (MIAC) report; then it was a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) report; now it is a New York congressman’s bill. Each of these items, taken on their own, is problematic enough; taken together they portend “a clear and present danger” to the liberties of the American people. It is getting very serious now.

    As readers may recall, the MIAC report profiled certain people as being potential violence-prone “militia members”: including people who supported Presidential candidates Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and myself. In addition, anyone who opposed one or more of the following were also included in the list: the New World Order, the U.N., gun control, the violation of Posse Comitatus, the Federal Reserve, the Income Tax, the Ammunition Accountability Act, a possible Constitutional Convention, the North American Union, the Universal Service Program, Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), abortion on demand, or illegal immigration.

    The MIAC report prompted a firestorm of protest, and was eventually rescinded, with the man responsible for its distribution being dismissed from his position. The DHS report profiled many of the same people included in the MIAC report, and added returning Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans as potentially dangerous “extremists.”

    As I have said before, it is very likely that when all of the opinions and views of the above lists are counted, 75% or more of the American people would be included. Yet, these government reports would have law enforcement personnel to believe we are all dangerous extremists that need to be watched and guarded against. If this was not bad enough, a New York congressman has introduced a bill in the House of Representatives to deny Second Amendment rights to everyone listed above.

    According to World Net Daily, May 9, 2009, “A new gun law being considered in Congress, if aligned with Department of Homeland Security memos labeling everyday Americans a potential ‘threats,’ could potentially deny firearms to pro-lifers, gun-rights advocates, tax protesters, animal rights activists, and a host of others–any already on the expansive DHS watch list for potential ‘extremism.’

    “Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., has sponsored H.R. 2159, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009, which permits the attorney general to deny transfer of a firearm to any ‘known or suspected dangerous terrorist.’ The bill requires only that the potential firearm transferee is ‘appropriately suspected’ of preparing for a terrorist act and that the attorney general ‘has a reasonable belief’ that the gun might be used in connection with terrorism.

    “Gun rights advocates, however, object to the bill’s language, arguing that it enables the federal government to suspend a person’s Second Amendment rights without any trial or legal proof and only upon suspicion of being ‘dangerous.’”

    WND quotes Gun Owners of America Executive Director Larry Pratt as saying, “By [DHS] standards, I’m one of [DHS Secretary] Janet Napolitano’s terrorists. This bill would enable the attorney general to put all of the people who voted against Obama on no-gun lists, because according to the DHS, they’re all potential terrorists. Actually, we could rename this bill the Janet Napolitano Frenzied Fantasy Implementation Act of 2009.”

    Pratt was also quoted as saying, “Unbeknownst to us, some bureaucrat in the bowels of democracy can put your name on a list, and your Second Amendment rights are toast.” He went on to say, “This such an anti-American bill, this is something King George III would have done.”

    Now that DHS has established both a list and a lexicon for “extremists,” it looks to Congress to confer upon it police-state-style powers through which these individuals may be disarmed and eventually done away with. Rep. Peter King is accommodating this goal with H.R. 2159.

    Let me ask a reasonable question: how long does anyone think it would be, after being profiled by DHS and denied the lawful purchase of firearms, that those same people would be subjected to gun confiscation? And how long do you think it would be before DHS began profiling more and more groups of people, thus subjecting them to gun confiscation?

     

    This was exactly the strategy employed by Adolf Hitler. The Jews were the first people denied their civil rights–especially the right to own and possess firearms. Of course, after disarming Jews, the rest of the German citizenry was likewise disarmed. And we all know where that led.

    I’m not sure how many of the American people realize that it was the attempted confiscation of the colonialists’ cache of arms in Concord, Massachusetts, that started America’s War for Independence. Yes, my friends, it was attempted gun confiscation that triggered (pun intended) the “shot heard ’round the world.” And now it would appear that, once again, a central government is on the verge of trying to deny the American people their right to keep and bear arms.

    I am told that as of 2004, 50% of the adults in the United States own one or more firearms, totaling some 270 million privately owned firearms nationwide. I would venture to say that the vast majority of these gun owners would find themselves matching the DHS profile of a potential “extremist.” I wonder how many gun owners realize the way they are now being targeted by their government, and just how serious–and how close–the threat of gun confiscation has become?

    If one doubts the intention of the elitists in government today to deny the American people their right to keep and bear arms, consider what former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger is purported to have said just a couple of weeks ago. Kissinger attended a high-level meeting with Russian President Medvedev that also included former Secretaries of State James Baker and George Shultz; former Secretary of Defense William Perry; and former Senator Sam Nunn. Included in the discussions was Kissinger’s assertion that the American people were now ready to accept a “New Global Order.” He is also reported to have told Medvedev, “By September we’ll have confiscated all privately owned guns so it really doesn’t matter what we do, we’ll still be in charge.” (Even though the national news media has not reported this statement, the Internet is abuzz with Kissinger having said it. Whether Kissinger actually made that statement or not, he, and rest of his ilk, have repeatedly called for a New World Order, in which there will be no constitutional protection for the right to keep and bear arms.)

    This leads to a very serious question: how many of America’s gun owners would allow their government to deny them gun ownership? Further, how many would passively sit back and allow their guns to be confiscated?

    As humbly and meekly as I know how to say it: as for me and my house, gun confiscation is the one act of tyranny that crosses the line; debate, discourse, discussion, and peaceful dissent cease and desist at that point. I say again, it is getting very serious now.

    http://www.infowars.com/its-getting-very-serious-now/

    HR 2159 Seeks To Disarm Individuals The Government Suspects Of Being Terrorists

    May 12, 2009

    abc_assault_holder_090225_mn

     

    By – Lee Rogers

    The terrorists in the federal government are continuing their push to infringe on everyone’s natural right to defend themselves. More specifically, a new bill has been introduced that would allow the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of a firearm to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist.   The bill is HR 2159 or the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009. This legislation is incredibly disturbing because since the 9/11 false flag terror attacks, the government has been utilizing the bogus war on terror as a pretext to label a myriad of people as domestic terrorists. In this Orwellian world that we live in, supporters of the Constitution, liberty oriented individuals and even anti-war protesters are now being considered domestic terrorists. With this in mind, this legislation will allow the government to deny an individual the right to bear arms by simply stating that they are a suspected terrorist. In this world we are moving into, everyone will be a suspected terrorist, so it is convenient that something like this would be proposed.

    The purpose of the bill is described below. The language clearly states that its purpose is to authorize the government to deny firearms to anyone who they consider to be a known or suspected terrorist. 

    Continue Article

      

     

    The Myth of 90 Percent: Only a Small Fraction of Guns in Mexico Come From U.S.

    May 12, 2009

    By William La Jeunesse and Maxim Lott

    You’ve heard this shocking “fact” before — on TV and radio, in newspapers, on the Internet and from the highest politicians in the land: 90 percent of the weapons used to commit crimes in Mexico come from the United States.

    — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said it to reporters on a flight to Mexico City.

    — CBS newsman Bob Schieffer referred to it while interviewing President Obama.

    — California Sen. Dianne Feinstein said at a Senate hearing: “It is unacceptable to have 90 percent of the guns that are picked up in Mexico and used to shoot judges, police officers and mayors … come from the United States.”

    — William Hoover, assistant director for field operations at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, testified in the House of Representatives that “there is more than enough evidence to indicate that over 90 percent of the firearms that have either been recovered in, or interdicted in transport to Mexico, originated from various sources within the United States.”

    There’s just one problem with the 90 percent “statistic” and it’s a big one:

    It’s just not true.

    In fact, it’s not even close. The fact is, only 17 percent of guns found at Mexican crime scenes have been traced to the U.S.

    What’s true, an ATF spokeswoman told FOXNews.com, in a clarification of the statistic used by her own agency’s assistant director, “is that over 90 percent of the tracedfirearms originate from the U.S.”

    But a large percentage of the guns recovered in Mexico do not get sent back to the U.S. for tracing, because it is obvious from their markings that they do not come from the U.S.

    “Not every weapon seized in Mexico has a serial number on it that would make it traceable, and the U.S. effort to trace weapons really only extends to weapons that have been in the U.S. market,” Matt Allen, special agent of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), told FOX News.

     

    Continue Article

    House Bill Aims to Strip “Rightwing Extremists” of Second Amendment Right

    May 11, 2009

    Guantanamo Holder

    Kurt Nimmo
    Infowars
    May 9, 2009
    A sinister bill working its way through the House may eventually serve as a companion piece to the Department of Homeland Security’s “Rightwing Extremist” report that labels veterans and advocates of the Second Amendment as dangerous terrorists — H.R. 2159, The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009, sponsored by Rep. Peter King of New York.

    On April 29, with little fanfare or corporate media coverage, H.R. 2159 was introduced and referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. The bill would “increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosives licenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist.” The entire bill can be read on the Govtrack website.

    A similar bill was introduced in the Senate in 2007 but did not make it out of committee.

    As noted above, the DHS has compiled a long list of folks the government considers terrorists. The bill, if enacted, would allow the attorney general, a documented gun-grabber, to deny millions of Americans due process. “[Rep. King] would deny citizens their civil liberties based on no due process,” Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, tells WorldNetDaily.

    Pratt worries that the new bill will be used in conjunction with the DHS “Rightwing Extremism” report. “By those standards, I’m one of [DHS Secretary] Janet Napolitano’s terrorists,” Pratt continues. “This bill would enable the attorney general to put all of the people who voted against Obama on no-gun lists, because according to the DHS, they’re all potential terrorists. Actually, we could rename this bill the Janet Napolitano Frenzied Fantasy Implementation Act of 2009.”

    On May 1, 2009, Infowars reported on the existence of another DHS document, the “Domestic Extremism Lexicon.” It adds more suspected terrorists to the government’s list, including people working in the alternative media, anarchists, pro-life activists, skinheads, lone terrorists, members of the militia movement, “decentralized” terrorists, and others.

    The DHS reports were distributed to “federal, state, local, and tribal counterterrorism and law enforcement officials so they may effectively deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks against the United States.”

    Earlier this week, a man was stopped in Louisiana and detained by police for the crime of displaying a “Don’t tread one me” bumper sticker on his car. A background check was conducted to determine whether he was a member of an “extremist” group, according to The American Vision website. “Don’t tread on me” was originally displayed on a flag designed by general and statesman Christopher Gadsden during the Revolutionary War. It is depicted as a terrorist symbol in the DHS “Rightwing Extremist” report.

    During Holder’s shoo-in confirmation hearings earlier this year, Stephen Halbrook, Second Amendment attorney, detailed Holder’s vehement opposition to the right to bear arms. Holder’s role in the Waco massacre and Ruby Ridge were expected to be brought up during the hearings but were not.

    Shortly after 9/11, Holder penned a Washington Post op-ed entitled “Keeping Guns Away From Terrorists.” In the article, the future Attorney General argues that a new law should give “the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms a record of every firearm sale.” He also states that prospective gun buyers should be checked against the secret “watch lists” compiled by various government entities. In order to make his point, Holder makes the ludicrous hypothesis that Osama bin Laden would be able to purchase an unregistered firearm at a gun show in America.

    The government now possesses the appropriate “watch lists” and has designated specific categories of Americans as domestic terrorists. If H.R. 2159 becomes law the Obama administration and the Justice Department will go after opponents to their far-reaching plan to disarm the nation and deliver it defenseless into the clutches of bankers and corporatists determined to reduce a once proud constitutional republic to the status of a fuedalist backwater.
    http://www.infowars.com/house-bill-aims-to-strip-rightwing-extremists-of-second-amendment-right/

    Holder says he approved Clinton-era renditions

    May 8, 2009

    Double the freak-show!

    holder

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    “Hey Democrats! Your guys are just as fucked-up! Get it through those loving & caring, (but a bit gullible and too trusting), brains of yours. Eric Holder is Obama’s A.G. for those of you who love Obama but know nothing of the menace of an administration that is behind him. Ya, Holder is the one trying to take law abiding American citizens gun rights away. He’s totally awesome.

    -F.F. 5/7/09

     

     

    BY STEPHEN C. WEBSTER 

    Under fire from Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday, Attorney General Eric Holder revealed that he had approved of rendition — essentially, legalized kidnapping — apparently more than once during his tenure as President Bill Clinton’s deputy attorney general.

    Cautioning Holder that any potential investigation into the Bush administration’s torture program could result in Democrats being roped in, “Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Richard Shelby of Alabama pressed Holder on the CIA’s ‘rendition’ program that moved terrorism suspects from one country to another,”reported Domenico Montanaro with MSNBC.

    “Didn’t that happen during the Clinton administration?

    “Yes, Holder said.

    “‘How many did you approve?’ they asked.

    “Holder said he’d check the record.”

    Despite frequent condemnation of the practice around the world, rendition — the secret capture, transportation and detention of suspected terrorists to foreign prisons in countries that cooperate with the U.S. — remains in the CIA’s playbook, thanks to a Jan. 22 executive order issued by President Obama.

    Under President George W. Bush, renditions became “extraordinary renditions,” in which suspects were handed over to nations where torture was not illegal. Rendition under Presidents Clinton and Obama has not been linked to torture.

    Holder has been, at least in public, an opponent of the torture program.

    “Waterboarding is torture. My justice department will not justify it, will not rationalize it and will not condone it,” Holder said in a speech to the Jewish Council of Public Affairs in March.

    “The use and sanction of torture is at odds with the history of American jurisprudence and American values. It undermines our ability to pursue justice fairly, and it puts our own brave soldiers in peril should they ever be captured on a foreign battlefield.”

    Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi was briefed in 2002 on the torture tactics the Bush administration wanted to use against terror war prisoners. At the time, she did not object. In April of 2009, she denied knowing the techniques would ever be applied to prisoners.

    “[They] did not tell us they were using that,” she said. “Flat out. And any — any contention to the contrary is simply not true.”

    RAW STORY was the first news outlet to identify the exact location of one of the sites in the CIA’s secret prison network, used in conjunction with Bush-era extraordinary renditions. RAW STORY identified a prison in northeastern Poland, Stare Kiejkuty, that was used as a transit point for terror suspects.

    According to filings, the CIA has over 7,000 documents related to Bush-era renditions.

    Attorney General Eric Holder has said that “no one is above the law” and that his office would “follow the evidence.” He has not appointed a special prosecutor.

    President Obama said Holder will be the person who ultimately decides whether to prosecute Bush administration lawyers who wrote opinions providing a legal basis for interrogation techniques widely denounced as torture.

    President Obama also said CIA agents who tortured prisoners will not be prosecuted.

    http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/05/07/holder-says-he-approved-clinton-era-renditions/#tab=home&url=home.php

    Republican “Leaders” Looking to Replace Specter with Noted Gun Banner

    May 8, 2009

    gun_owners_of_america1

     

    Republican “Leaders” Looking to Replace Specter with Noted 
    Gun Banner 

    Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
    8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
    Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
    http://www.gunowners.org 

    Thursday, May 7, 2009 


    Some Republicans still don’t understand why mainstream America is so 
    upset with their Party. 

    Now that Sen. Arlen Specter has defected to the Democrat Party, many 
    prominent Republicans are openly recruiting liberal Republicans to run 
    against Specter. 

    And at the top of their list is Tom Ridge. 

    Ridge is the turncoat Republican whose vote was crucial in passing the 
    semi-auto ban in 1994. 

    After having opposed a similar ban in 1991, then-Rep. Tom Ridge 
    flip-flopped and teamed up with Charles Schumer (D-NY) to pass the 
    semi-auto gun and magazine ban.  The gun ban passed narrowly, 216 to 
    214, thanks to Tom Ridge. 

    Later, as Governor of Pennsylvania, Ridge signed one of the most 
    restrictive gun control laws in the State’s history — the infamous Act 
    17 which registered and taxed long gun buyers and placed other 
    restrictions on Keystone State gun owners. 

    As the head of the Department of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge opposed 
    arming pilots.  He asked, sarcastically, if pilots carry guns, then 
    should we also arm railroad engineers and bus drivers? As DHS Director, 
    Ridge should have led the charge to arm pilots and people in other 
    positions that fell under the agency’s purview. 

    Instead, he just repeated the same tired old anti-gun line that we hear 
    every time a state passes a concealed carry handgun law. 

    Guess who else opposed the armed pilots program?  Pennsylvania’s 
    “Benedict” Arlen Specter, who was one of only two Republican 
    Senators to 
    vote against the bill. 

    The last thing we need is another elitist in Congress who does not trust 
    law-abiding citizens with firearms.  And yet, wishy-washy Republican 
    Senators like Utah’s Orrin Hatch and South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham are 
    touting Ridge over Specter.  In other words, let’s replace one turncoat 
    with another. 

    There is a better option.  His name is Pat Toomey, a Gun Owners of 
    America “A” rated pro-gunner who served in the U.S. House of 
    Representatives for three terms, before honoring a self-imposed term 
    limit and retiring in 2004. 

    Those who are pushing anti-gunner Tom Ridge claim that Pat Toomey is 
    unelectable because he’s “too conservative” for Pennsylvania. 

    But that’s what self-appointed experts said before Toomey got elected 
    term after term in a largely Democrat district in the eastern part of 
    Pennsylvania.  And that’s what they said before he accrued a gigantic 
    lead in the polls over a sitting Senator this year, forcing Specter to 
    jump parties. 

    It was Pat Toomey who forced Specter to jump to the Democrat Party. 
    Toomey — who was backed by Gun Owners of America Political Victory Fund 
    — was leading Specter in polls by an overwhelming margin. 

    That’s also what they said about Ronald Reagan — who was supposedly too 
    conservative to win a national election.  (By the way, Reagan also won 
    Pennsylvania.) 

    Bottom line:  We need to put these squishy politicians on alert.  Their 
    internal party politics is their business.  But when party leaders start 
    pushing noted gun banners — using the money contributed by millions of 
    gun owners around the country — we’re not going to remain silent. 

    Texas Senator John Cornyn is the head of the National Republican 
    Senatorial Committee.  Michael Steele heads the Republican National 
    Committee.  The decision to support an anti-gunner over a defender of 
    the Second Amendment rests largely in their hands. 

    ACTION:  Please urge Senator John Cornyn and Chairman Michael Steele not 
    to interfere in Pennsylvania’s primary.  There is already a pro-gun, 
    electable conservative running in the primary who deserves their 
    support. 

    You can contact NRSC’s Sen. Cornyn at info@nrsc.org or by phone at (202) 
    675-6000. 

    You can contact RNC Chairman Michael Steele at chairman@gop.com or by 
    phone at (202) 863-8700. 


    —– Pre-written letter —– 

    Dear Senator Cornyn / Chairman Steele: 

    Please don’t cave in to pressure to support anti-gun candidate Tom Ridge 
    over pro-gunner Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania’s Republican primary. 

    When in Congress, Ridge provided crucial support to pass the Clinton 
    semi-auto gun ban.  As Governor of Pennsylvania, Ridge signed one of the 
    most restrictive gun laws in the State’s history.  And as head of the 
    Department of Homeland Security, Ridge opposed the successful 
    congressional effort to arm commercial airline pilots. 

    The last thing we need is another Senator who does not trust “We the 
    People” with firearms. 

    Pat Toomey served three terms in the House before honoring a 
    self-imposed term limit and retiring.  Rep. Toomey was “A” 
    rated by Gun 
    Owners of America, and stood firm on conservative principles even though 
    he was supposedly “too conservative” for his district. 

    I urge you not to interfere in this race on behalf of an anti-gun 
    candidate.

    Obama Supports Treaty Outlawing Gun Possession

    May 5, 2009

    gun_control_works2

     

     

    Infowars
    May 3, 200

    As Lou Dobbs notes here, Obama is in favor of the ratifying CIFTA, the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms. On its face, the treaty sounds reasonable because it would “prevent, combat, and eradicate the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials” (emphasis added). However, upon reading the bill we discover the following:

    Stressing the need, in peace processes and post-conflict situations, to achieve effective control of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials in order to prevent their entry into the illicit market.Obama has promised Mexican President Felipe Calderon that he would urge the Senate to take up CIFTA. He is doing this under the cover of the drug cartel violence in Mexico. Obama and Calderon quoted a statistic echoed by the corporate media that 90% of the weapons seized in Mexican raids were purchased from U.S. gun shops and a reason why the U.S. needs to ratify this treaty. In fact, this is a lie — only a mere 17% of guns found at Mexico crime scenes have been traced to the U.S.

    CIFTA would bury the Second Amendment under “pertinent resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly.” It would criminalize ammunition reloading (defined as explosives manufacture) and gun assembly (including firearm kits and presumably breaking down weapons for cleaning or transport).

    Language contained in the CIFTA treaty insists it respects “the principles of sovereignty, nonintervention, and the juridical equality of states.” Not mentioned is the fact the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties has a superior rank to national laws. If the CIFTA treaty is ratified without exception, it would kill U.S. sovereignty and lead the way to destroying the Second Amendment.

    It should be noted that only the Senate needs to ratify the treaty. Article II, section 2, of the Constitution states that the president “shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur.”

    The United States was one of the first signatories to CIFTA in November, 1997. The Convention was transmitted to the Senate in June 1998 and to this day awaits the Senate’s advice and consent. 29 of the 34 OAS member states have ratified CIFTA. Only the US, Canada, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica and St. Vincent & Grenadines have yet to do so.

    http://www.infowars.com/obama-supports-treaty-outlawing-gun-possession/

    GOA-PVF: Specter Must Go

    April 30, 2009

    gun_owners_of_america2

     

    Time For Arlen Specter To Go 
    — GOA Supports Pro-gunner Pat Toomey 

    Gun Owners of America Political Victory Fund E-Mail Alert 
    8001 Forbes Pl Suite 102 
    Springfield VA 22151 
    (703) 321-8585 
    http://www.goapvf.org 

    Wednesday, April 29, 2009 

    First, Senator Arlen Specter provided the instrumental Republican 
    support to get anti-gun Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed by the 
    Senate. 

    Then, he singlehandedly pushed through the massive economic bailout, the 
    so-called stimulus bill, which contained several provisions of concern 
    to gun owners. 

    So it comes as no surprise that liberal anti-gun Specter, who has no 
    loyalty to the Constitution, also has no loyalty to the political party 
    that elected him.  Specter announced this week that he will leave the 
    Republican Party and run as a Democrat in 2010. 

    Specter’s announcement comes only after poll after poll showed him 
    trailing pro-gun conservative Pat Toomey in a Republican primary. 

    Specter thinks that changing parties will improve his chances of winning 
    next year. 

    What he’s going to learn is that the voters of Pennsylvania are much 
    more concerned about their Constitutional rights than they are with what 
    political party a candidate belongs to. 

    Every time Attorney General Eric Holder opens his mouth and talks about 
    reinstating the Clinton gun ban, gun owners know they have Arlen Specter 
    to thank. 

    Back in early January, Sen. Specter said he had “grave 
    concerns” about 
    Eric Holder.  He made it sound like he was going to join other pro-gun 
    Senators and oppose the Holder nomination. 

    Specter was only putting on a show. 

    After pretending to oppose Eric Holder, Sen. Specter provided the key 
    support that brought the nomination to the floor of the Senate. 

    Why the big switch? 

    Simple.  When it looked like Specter was going to face a primary 
    challenge from a real conservative, he talked tough and made it look 
    like he was opposed to Holder.  Then for a while, it appeared that 
    Specter would not have a serious challenge, so Specter flip-flopped and 
    decided not to oppose Holder. 

    With people like Specter in office, it’s no wonder our gun rights are in 
    such jeopardy. 

    At least gun owners have a clear choice in the next election.  Former 
    Congressman Pat Toomey has again taken up the conservative, pro-gun 
    mantle and will challenge the liberal incumbent. 

    Visit http://www.toomeyforsenate.com/contribute to support Pat Toomey 
    for Senate. 

    Together, we can defeat the Senate’s most dangerous turncoat and replace 
    him with a real Second Amendment defender. 

    Specter was one of three Republicans whose vote was needed to pass the 
    bailout.  When one of the other two Senators expressed reservations, 
    good old Arlen Specter stepped in and brought that Senator “back in 
    line.” 

    Without Specter, there would be no $1 TRILLION bailout. 

    Really, by the time debt services and other frills of the “socialism 
    bill” are accounted for, the cost will be over $3 TRILLION! 

    The debt foisted upon us by Arlen Specter will be passed on to 
    succeeding generations, AND the bailout is being used as a tool of the 
    anti-gun left. 

    You see, the bailout bill contains provisions that can fund anti-gun 
    activist organizations like ACORN and Moveon.org to the tune of hundreds 
    of millions — even billions — of your taxpayer dollars. 

    The bailout also contains provisions to require your doctor to 
    retroactively put your confidential medical records in a government 
    database.  Medical records have already been used to deny about 200,000 
    military veterans their Second Amendment rights, and that situation will 
    be made worse for all citizens thanks to the Specter bailout bill. 

    Perhaps no single Senator is negatively affecting the future of this 
    country more than Pennsylvania’s Arlen Specter. 

    Please help Gun Owners of America make this Specter’s last term in 
    office by supporting Pat Toomey for Senate at: 
    http://www.toomeyforsenate.com/contribute 

    Rep. Toomey challenged Specter in a primary in 2004 with the support of 
    Gun Owners of America, and came just 1.7% short of winning. 

    Specter’s bacon was pulled out of the fire only after the incumbent 
    Senator, President Bush and even, unfortunately, some in the gun rights 
    community campaigned on his behalf at the last minute. 

    Well, Senator Specter has sold out the people of Pennsylvania and 
    conservatives across the nation for the last time. 

    At the same time we get rid of an enemy of gun rights, we can also help 
    to elect an ardent supporter of the Second Amendment. 

    Pat Toomey served in the U.S. House of Representatives for three terms, 
    before honoring a self-imposed term limit and retiring in 2004. 

    Rep. Toomey was “A” rated by Gun Owners of America during his 
    time in 
    Congress.  Even though he was supposedly “too conservative” for the 
    eastern Pennsylvania district he represented, Toomey stood firm on his 
    pro-Second Amendment principles. 

    Unlike Arlen Specter, there was no waffling on the issues concerning 
    your gun rights. 

    Gun Owners of America knows from experience that when we’re in the 
    trenches battling the anti-gunners over reinstating the semi-auto gun 
    ban, closing down gun shows and funding liberal leftist organizations, 
    Pat Toomey will be with us shoulder to shoulder. 

    But first he has to defeat Specter, an anti-gun 
    Republican-turned-Democrat with millions of dollars in the bank and lots 
    of new liberal friends ready to give him more. 

    Gun Owners of America calls on sportsmen and gun owners in Pennsylvania 
    and across the country to stand with us to defeat Arlen Specter and to 
    elect Pat Toomey to the U.S. Senate. 

    Please make the most generous contribution possible to Pat Toomey for 
    Senate at http://www.toomeyforsenate.com/contribute on the web. 

    If you prefer to contribute by check, make your check payable to “Toomey 
    for Senate” and mail to: PO Box 220, Orefield, PA 18069. 

    Or, you can call the campaign at 484-809-7994 to contribute by phone. 

    Pat Toomey stands 100% in favor of your gun rights.  Together, let’s 
    stand with Pat Toomey in this crucial election. 

    Sincerely, 

    Tim Macy 
    Vice Chairman

    Obama Positioning For Backdoor Gun Control

    April 29, 2009

    By Chuck Baldwin
    Published 04/29/09 

     

    On his recent trip to Central America, President Barack Obama did more than cozy up to Marxist dictators; he also signed onto an international treaty that could, in effect, be used as backdoor gun control. It appears that Obama wants to use international treaties to do what congressional legislation is not able to do: further restrict the right of the American people to keep and bear arms. 

    Obama is using the oft-disproved contention that “90% of the guns recovered in Mexico come from the United States” as the stated basis of his support for the international treaty he is promoting. The treaty is formally known as the Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives and Other Related Materials (CIFTA) treaty. The Bill Clinton administration signed the treaty back in 1997, but the U.S. Senate has never ratified the treaty. Obama intends to change that. 

    To date, 33 nations in the western hemisphere have signed the treaty. The U.S. is one of four nations that have yet to ratify it. According to one senior Obama administration official, passing the treaty is a “high priority” for the President. 

    If ratified, the treaty would require the United States to adopt “strict licensing requirements, mark firearms when they are made and imported to make them easier to trace, and establish a process for sharing information between national law enforcement agencies investigating [gun] smuggling.” 

    Senator John Kerry, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee promises to “work for its [the CIFTA treaty’s] approval by the Senate.” 

    Should the Senate ratify CIFTA, Americans who reload ammunition would be required to get a license from the government, and factory guns and ammunition would be priced almost out of existence due to governmental requirements to “mark” each one manufactured. Even the simple act of adding an after-market piece of equipment to a firearm, such as a scope or bipod, or reassembling a gun after cleaning it could fall into the category of “illicit manufacturing” of firearms and require government license and oversight. 

    In addition, CIFTA would authorize the U.S. federal government (and open the door to international entities) to supervise and regulate virtually the entire American firearms industry. Making matters worse is the fact that, as a treaty, this Act does not have to be passed by both houses of Congress, nor is it subject to judicial oversight. All Obama needs to do in order to enact this unconstitutional and egregious form of gun control is convince a Democratic-controlled Senate to pass it. 

    Obviously, the United Nations, from its very inception, has been one of the world’s most ardent gun control proponents. As anyone who has ever driven by the U.N. building in New York City knows, a huge statue of an American-made revolver with its barrel twisted in the shape of a pretzel greets every visitor. The CIFTA treaty is one of the U.N.’s pet projects in order to achieve this long-held ambition. 

    Of course, Obama is a longtime liberal radical when it comes to the Second Amendment. As a senator, he voted against the Second Amendment at every opportunity. He has never seen a piece of gun control legislation that he did not support. And as I have said before in this column, gun control is high on the list of priorities for the newly elected President Barack Obama. 

    For Obama to intimate that 90% of the firearms used by Mexican drug cartels come from the United States reveals either a truly dishonest and deceptive mind or a totally misinformed and naive one. Many studies have thoroughly debunked the 90% myth, including one by William La Jeunesse and Maxim Lott in a recent Fox News report. According to these researchers, the real number is closer to 17%. 

    According to La Jeunesse and Lott, Mexican drug cartels, which control billions of dollars, obtain the overwhelming majority of their guns from the Black Market, Russian crime syndicates, South America, China, Guatemala, and even from the Mexican army. 

    In fact, Mexico is a virtual arms bazaar: AK-47s from China; fragmentation grenades from South Korea; shoulder-fired rocket launchers from Spain, Israel and former Soviet bloc dealers; assault weapons from China; and explosives from Korea–just to name a few sources. 

    In addition, according to Mexican Congressman Robert Badillo, more than 150,000 Mexican soldiers have deserted in just the last six years. The vast majority of them took their weapons with them, including the standard issue M-16 assault rifle made in Belgium. 

    And please do not forget that corruption within the Mexican government is rampant. Many news sources have covered stories of how drug cartels bribe Mexican officials. An article in the New York Times last year reported, “One of Mexico’s most notorious drug cartels made huge cash payments to officials in the Mexican attorney general’s office in exchange for confidential information on anti-drug operations . . . the cartel might have had an informant inside the American embassy.” 

    The Mexican drug cartels control a multi-billion dollar enterprise that has more than enough resources to obtain planeloads of weapons from all over the world. For Obama to assert that 90% of the Mexican drug cartels’ firearms come from the United States is a bald-faced lie! Again, either Obama is stupid and naive or he is deliberately lying to the American people in order to “sell” the CIFTA treaty to the U.S. Senate. I think we all know that Mr. Obama is anything but stupid and naive. 

    Read more about the CIFTA treaty. 

    In addition to the CIFTA treaty, liberal Chicago Democrat Congressman Bobby Rush has introduced H.R. 45 in the House of Representatives. This bill is anything but subtle. It is an in-your-face gun control bill that would make “Mr. Gun Control,” the late Senator Howard Metzenbaum, shout Hallelujah. 

    H.R. 45 would require a federal license for all handguns and semiautomatics, including the ones you already possess. It would require handgun and semi-auto owners to be thumbprinted at a police station and sign a certificate that the gun will not be kept in a place where it could be used for the defense of the gun owner’s family. 

    Read more about H.R. 45. 

    In all likelihood, H.R. 45 is probably a long shot at passing both houses of Congress, albeit gun owners should never take any proposed gun control bill for granted. The CIFTA treaty, however, is much more dangerous due to its subtlety and subterfuge, the less cumbersome process of passage, and the fact that it makes U.S. gun owners subject to international gun control laws. 

    All in all, freedom in America is on the Obama White House chopping block. And this much is certain: if the American people do not retain the right to keep and bear arms, every other freedom we hold dear will quickly disappear as well. Moreover, if we do retain the right to keep and bear arms, it will only be because enough of us — and our state and federal legislators–resist the tyrannical gun control machinations of Barack Obama. And that means defeating the CIFTA treaty and H.R. 45. 

    Copyright © 2009 Chuck Baldwin

     

    http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=61

    NLE 09: FEMA Takes Preparations for Martial Law to the Next Leve

    April 22, 2009

    topoff

    Kurt Nimmo
    Infowars
    April 21, 2009

     

    FEMA is preparing to take its martial law exercises to the next level this July. According to a factsheetburied on the FEMA website, the agency will host National Level Exercise 2009 (NLE 09) on July 27 through July 31, 2009.

    “NLE 09 will be the first major exercise conducted by the United States government that will focus exclusively on terrorism prevention and protection, as opposed to incident response and recovery,” the factsheet states. It is designated as a Tier I National Level Exercise, or TOPOFF, which are exercises conducted annually in accordance with the National Exercise Program (NEP), “which serves as the nation’s overarching exercise program for planning, organizing, conducting and evaluating national level exercises,” according to FEMA.

    NLE 09 “will focus on intelligence and information sharing among intelligence and law enforcement communities, and between international, federal, regional, state, tribal, local and private sector participants” in the “aftermath of a notional terrorist event outside of the United States.” So-called “exercise play” will concentrate on “preventing subsequent efforts by the terrorists to enter the United States and carry out additional attacks.”

    Such a large and coordinated exercise seems inappropriate, considering the fact there has not been a terrorist attack on the United States since September 11, 2001. In 2007, the neocon-connectedJamestown Foundation chalked this lack of threat up to “stepped-up counter-terrorist efforts after 9/11 and possibly the simple luck enjoyed by government authorities.”

    As the Washington Post noted in 2005, the government has a poor record when it comes to apprehending and prosecuting terrorists within the United States. “Except for a small number of well-known cases — such as truck driver Iyman Faris, who sought to take down the Brooklyn Bridge — few of those arrested appear to have been involved in active plots inside the United States.”

    In fact, as recently leaked Department of Homeland Security, FBI, and local law enforcement (in particular, the Missouri State Police) documents reveal, the real target is not al-Qaeda or Muslim terrorists, but rather “rightwing extremists” who support the Second Amendment and states’ rights and oppose abortion and open borders. The liberal corporate media has worked tirelessly with the government to demonize activists and supporters of these movements. It has orchestrated a disinformation campaign against the Tea Party movement and has attempted to link the alleged white supremacist cop killer Richard Poplawski to Alex Jones and others erroneously classified as “rightwing extremists.”

    The FEMA factsheet states NLE 09 “will focus on intelligence and information sharing among intelligence and law enforcement communities, and between international, federal, regional, state, tribal, local and private sector participants.” In other words, the exercise will concentrate on surveillance and counter-intelligence targeted at “terrorists” (rightwing extremists) who will – according to the NLE scenario – carry out attacks following a vaguely defined international terrorist event. A FEMA bullet point underscores the need for “counter-terror investigation and law enforcement.” Local law enforcement, through relationships previously established by DHS, the FBI and the CIA, will be on the front lines of this surveillance effort.

    The FBI in particular has experience in surveilling Americans. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, for instance, the FBI kept a list – dubbed the “ADEX” list – of over 100,000 persons to be rounded up as subversive. More recently, the Inspector General of the Justice Department reported that the Terrorist Screening Center (the FBI-administered organization that consolidates terrorist watch list information in the United States) had over 700,000 names in its database as of April 2007. The list was growing by an average of over 20,000 records per month, according to the ACLU. The list now totals well over a million entries.

    Although not specifically mentioned in the FEMA factsheet, NLE 09 will also include exercises designed to round-up and intern suspected terrorists. Under REX 84 and other operations, FEMA, in association with 34 other federal civil departments and agencies, trained to detain large numbers of American citizens.

    During Hurricane Katrina, FEMA performed a “dry-run” of this unconstitutional power in New Orleans, not only rounding up “refugees” and “relocating” them in camps, but also testing its ability to confiscate firearms from law-abiding citizens. Blackwater USA, a private mercenary outfit, participated in this illegal confiscation.

    InfraGard, the FBI organized “public-private partnership” (classical fascism as defined by Mussolini), will participate in NLE 09, as they have in past TOPOFF exercises.

    As Matthew Rothschild documented last March, there are more than 23,000 representatives of private industry working quietly with the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. InfraGard “may be closer to a corporate TIPS program, turning private-sector corporations – some of which may be in a position to observe the activities of millions of individual customers – into surrogate eyes and ears for the FBI,” Rothschild explains, citing the ACLU. The FBI has given the private organization the ability to use lethal force against suspected “terrorists.”

    FEMA’s National Level Exercise 2009 represents the next phase of preparations to implement martial law in America under the guise of fighting loosely defined terrorists. As the DHS, FBI, and MIAC reports indicate, the government now defines terrorists as “rightwing extremists” and indicates the threat is not from fanatics with beards in caves half way around the world, but from law-abiding Americans who are opposed to government policies.

    The FEMA camps corporate media shill Glenn Beck insists do not exist but are documented to in fact exist around the country are not for Muslims, but the real threat to government – increasing numbers of Americans determined to return the nagtion to a constitutionally limited republic.

     

    http://www.infowars.com/nle-09-fema-takes-preparations-for-martial-law-to-the-next-level/

    Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading

    April 22, 2009

    gun_owners_of_america1

    Obama Pushing Treaty To Ban Reloading 
    — Even BB guns could be on the chopping block 

    Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
    8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
    Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
    http://www.gunowners.org 

    Tuesday, April 21, 2009 

    Remember CANDIDATE Barack Obama?  The guy who “wasn’t going to take away 
    our guns”? 

    Well, guess what? 

    Less than 100 days into his administration, he’s never met a gun he 
    didn’t hate. 

    A week ago, Obama went to Mexico, whined about the United States, and 
    bemoaned (before the whole world) the fact that he didn’t have the 
    political power to take away our semi-automatics.  Nevertheless, that 
    didn’t keep him from pushing additional restrictions on American gun 
    owners. 

    It’s called the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing 
    of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other 
    Related Materials.  To be sure, this imponderable title masks a really 
    nasty piece of work. 

    First of all, when the treaty purports to ban the “illicit” 
    manufacture 
    of firearms, what does that mean? 

    1. “Illicit manufacturing” of firearms is defined as 
    “assembly of 
    firearms [or] ammunition… without a license….” 

    Hence, reloading ammunition — or putting together a lawful firearm from 
    a kit — is clearly “illicit manufacturing.” 

    Modifying a firearm in any way would surely be “illicit 
    manufacturing.” 
    And, while it would be a stretch, assembling a firearm after cleaning it 
    could, in any plain reading of the words, come within the screwy 
    definition of “illicit manufacturing.” 

    2. “Firearm” has a similarly questionable definition. 

    “[A]ny other weapon” is a “firearm,” according to 
    the treaty — and the 
    term “weapon” is nowhere defined. 

    So, is a BB gun a “firearm”?  Probably. 

    A toy gun?  Possibly. 

    A pistol grip or firing pin?  Probably.  And who knows what else. 

    If these provisions (and others) become the law of the land, the Obama 
    administration could have a heyday in enforcing them.  Consider some of 
    the other provisions in the treaty: 

    * Banning Reloading.  In Article IV of the treaty, countries commit to 
    adopting “necessary legislative or other measures” to criminalize 
    illicit manufacturing and trafficking in firearms. 

    Remember that “illicit manufacturing” includes reloading and 
    modifying 
    or assembling a firearm in any way.  This would mean that the Obama 
    administration could promulgate regulations banning reloading on the 
    basis of this treaty — just as it is currently circumventing Congress 
    to write legislation taxing greenhouse gases. 

    * Banning Gun Clubs.  Article IV goes on to state that the criminalized 
    acts should include “association or conspiracy” in connection 
    with said 
    offenses — which is arguably a term broad enough to allow, by 
    regulation, the criminalization of entire pro-gun organizations or gun 
    clubs, based on the facilities which they provide their membership. 

    * Extraditing US Gun Dealers. Article V requires each party to “adopt 
    such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the 
    offenses it has established in accordance with this Convention” under a 
    variety of circumstances. 

    We know that Mexico is blaming U.S. gun dealers for the fact that its 
    streets are flowing with blood.  And we know it is possible for Mexico 
    to define offenses “committed in its territory” in a very 
    broad way. 
    And we know that we have an extradition obligation under Article XIX of 
    the proposed treaty.  So we know that Mexico could try to use the treaty 
    to demand to extradition of American gun dealers. 

    Under Article XXIX, if Mexico demands the extradition of a lawful 
    American gun dealer, the U.S. would be required to resolve the dispute 
    through “other means of peaceful settlement.” 

    Does anyone want to risk twenty years in a sweltering Mexican jail on 
    the proposition that the Obama administration would apply this provision 
    in a pro-gun manner? 

    * Microstamping.  Article VI requires “appropriate markings” on 
    firearms.  And, it is not inconceivable that this provision could be 
    used to require microstamping of firearms and/or ammunition — a 
    requirement which is clearly intended to impose specifications which are 
    not technologically possible or which are possible only at a 
    prohibitively expensive cost. 

    * Gun Registration.  Article XI requires the maintenance of any records, 
    for a “reasonable time,” that the government determines to be 
    necessary 
    to trace firearms.  This provision would almost certainly repeal 
    portions of McClure-Volkmer and could arguably be used to require a 
    national registry or database. 

    ACTION:  Write your Senators and urge them to oppose the Inter-American 
    Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, 
    Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials. 

    Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at 
    http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the 
    pre-written e-mail message below. 

    —– Pre-written letter —– 

    Dear Senator: 

    I am urging you, in the strongest terms, to oppose the Inter-American 
    Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, 
    Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials. 

    This anti-gun treaty was written by international bureaucrats who are 
    either stupid or virulently anti-gun — or both. 

    This treaty could very well ban the ability to reload ammunition, to put 
    new stocks on rifles lawfully owned by American citizens, and, possibly, 
    even ban BB guns! 

    There are too many problems with this treaty to mention them all in this 
    letter.  The rest can be read on the website of Gun Owners of America 
    at: 
    http://www.gunowners.org/fs0901.htm 

    Please do not tell me the treaty has not yet been abused in this way by 
    the bevy of Third World countries which have signed it.  We do not 
    expect the real ramifications of the treaty to become clear until the 
    big prize — the U.S. — has stepped into the trap. 

    For all of these reasons, I must insist that you oppose ratification of 
    the treaty. 

    Sincerely, 

    (your name)

    Just Released: Obama’s Gun Ban List

    April 18, 2009

     

    gun_control_works2

    Here it is, folks, and it is bad news. The framework for legislation is always laid, and the Democrats have the votes to pass anything they want to impose upon us. They really do not believe you need anything more than a brick to defend your home and family. Look at the list and see how many you own. Remember, it is registration, then confiscation. It has happened in the UK, in Australia, in Europe, in China, and what they have found is that for some reason the criminals do not turn in their weapons, but will know that you did.

    Remember, the first step in establishing a dictatorship is to disarm the citizens.

    Gun-ban list proposed. Slipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration when they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th Congress). It serves as a framework for the new list the Brady’s plan to introduce shortly. I have an outline of the Brady’s current plans and targets of opportunity. It’s horrific. They’re going after the courts, regulatory agencies, firearms dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people. They’ve made little mention of criminals. Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical. Gun bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process, confiscated property, states’ rights, free speech, right to assemble and more, in addition to the Second Amendment. The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal (final list will be worse):

    Rifles (or copies or duplicates):
    M1 Carbine,
    Sturm Ruger Mini-14,
    AR-15,
    Bushmaster XM15,
    Armalite M15,
    AR-10,
    Thompson 1927,
    Thompson M1;
    AK,
    AKM,
    AKS,
    AK-47,
    AK-74,
    ARM,
    MAK90,
    NHM 90,
    NHM 91,
    SA 85,
    SA 93,
    VEPR;
    Olympic Arms PCR;
    AR70,
    Calico Liberty ,
    Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU,
    Fabrique National FN/FAL,
    FN/LAR, or FNC,
    Hi-Point20Carbine,
    HK-91,
    HK-93,
    HK-94,
    HK-PSG-1,
    Thompson 1927 Commando,
    Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;
    Saiga,
    SAR-8,
    SAR-4800,
    SKS with detachable magazine,
    SLG 95,
    SLR 95 or 96,
    Steyr AU,
    Tavor,
    Uzi,
    Galil and Uzi Sporter,
    Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle ( Galatz ).
    Pistols (or copies or duplicates):
    Calico M-110,
    MAC-10,
    MAC-11, or MPA3,
    Olympic Arms OA,
    TEC-9,
    TEC-DC9,
    TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10,
    Uzi.
    Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):
    Armscor 30 BG,
    SPAS 12 or LAW 12,
    Striker 12,
    Streetsweeper. Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs):
    A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has:
    (i) a folding or telescoping stock,
    (ii) a threaded barrel,
    (iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see below),
    (iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud.
    Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rim fire rifles).
    A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has:
    (i) a second pistol grip,
    (ii) a threaded barrel,
    (iii) a barrel shroud or
    (iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip, and
    (v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.
    A semiautomatic shotgun with:
    (i) a folding or telescoping stock,
    (ii) a pistol grip (see definition below),
    (iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds, and
    (iv) a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

    Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion kits.
    Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will: Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any “semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General.”

    Note that Obama’s pick for this office, Eric Holder, wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home. In making this determination, the bill says, “there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.” In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.

    The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn’t have a sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose — is that devious or what? And of course, “sporting purpose” is a rights infringement with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their cause of disarming the innocent.

    Respectfully submitted, Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of America http://www.gunlaws.com/gloa.htm

    Forward or send to every gun owner you know…
    Watch This, If You Want More Proof:
    YouTube – CNN- Obama To BAN Guns SPREAD THIS FOLKS, PLZ!

    A partial list of gun rights groups:

    Gun Owners of America
    http://gunowners.org/

    Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership
    http://www.jpfo.org/

    FREEDOM=GUNS
    http://www.tcsn.net/doncicci/freedom.htm

    National Rifle Association
    http://www.nra.org/

    Second Amendment Committee
    http://www.libertygunrights.com/

    Second Amendment Foundation
    http://www.saf.org/

    Second Amendment Sisters
    http://www.2asisters.org/

    Women Against Gun Control
    http://www.wagc.com/

    Gun Facts – Your Guide to Debunking Gun Control Myths

    April 8, 2009

    16

    INTRODUCTION:  Gun Facts is a free e-book that debunks common myths about gun control.  It is intended as a reference guide for journalists, activists, politicians, and other people interested in restoring honesty to the debate about guns, crime, and the 2nd Amendment.

    Gun Facts has 94 pages of information.  Divided into chapters based on gun control topics (assault weapons, ballistic finger printing, firearm availability, etc.), finding information is quick and easy.

    Each chapter lists common gun control myths, then lists a number of documented and cited facts (with over 480 detailed footnotes) that directly dispute the gun control claim.  Thus when a neighbor, editor or politician repeats some slogan propagated by the gun control industry, you can quickly find that myth then rebuke with real information.

    Gun Facts E-Book Link:

    http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/5.0/GunFacts5-0-screen.pdf

     

     

     

     

    http://www.gunfacts.info/

    Lib Blogs Kick into Frothing Overdrive in Reaction to Pittsburgh Shootings

    April 6, 2009

    “Listen all of these shooting are extremely tragic. And there is no one to blame except the man who has snapped. Of course the non-credible, pentagon paid-off, bottom feeding, rat toothed journalists are going to blame it on 2nd Amendment supporters and whistle blowers like Alex Jones. Of course you have to demonize common sense when you’re pushing insanity on your mind numb public.  It’s really getting to be like a Twilight Zone episode out on the streets today. I really can’t see how a person cannot see through Obama and his Administration. He has absolutely been handed the baton from Bush and is running with it. He has changed little to nothing in policy and frankly is making government even bigger and scarier. I’m not sure what trip Obama supporters are on still but it’s pretty fuckin’ bizarre if you ask me. 

    So back to the shootings… many people are upset because they are losing their jobs and waking up to the real reasons why the economy has crashed. They are upset about our completely corrupt and out of control Federal government. They are upset that the majority of our politicians do not listen to the American people at all. With that being said… I still think that these guys who take their anger out on cops and innocent people are fucking idiot cowards. It is also very important to realize that some of the laws that the Obama administration are trying to push are extremely unconstitutional and tyrannical.  Even with all of these unfortunate random shootings, you have to realize the number of responsible gun owners far outweighs these tragic shootings. With all do respect to the police officers and innocent victims of this gun violence……. still, the logic behind Obama & Holders, (Or any of our puppet politicians who have pushed for gun control), is 100% illogical. Sorry folks. If  there was a shred of logic behind the idea of gun control then we should ban or heavily regulate the use of automobiles because when they are used negligently they kill hundreds of thousands more every year than guns. We should probably get rid of swimming pools too. Yes, swimming pools kill thousands more every year than firearms do when used negligently. The fact is our government is extremely scared of the American public having the ability to defend themselves and or fight against a tyrannical government… our own tyrannical government. The whole point of the 2nd Amendment was precisely that!  It can happen, it is happening.

    I don’t know who can still watch main stream media anymore but do what you gotta to do, I guess? I’m soo tired of trying to reason with peoples insane way of thinking. Speaking of insane thinking… I still don’t put it past C.I.A. having some connections with at least a few of these random shootings we are seeing plastered across the news and the ones we will be seeing in the future. The U.S. Government is a very powerful machine and they have many different agendas and one big one is gun control. It’s very very very very simple to stop their machine… smarten up and come together.

    F.F. 2/6/09

     

    “No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms.
    The strongest reason for the people
    to retain their right to keep and bear arms
    is as a last resort to protect themselves
    against tyranny in government.” –Thomas Jefferson

     

     

     

    OK, Now For The Story…

     

    Kurt Nimmo
    Infowars
    April 4, 2009

     

    In the wake of the violence in Pittsburgh earlier today, the pro-Obama liberal blogs are blaming those of us who support the Second Amendment for the murder of four police officers.

    David Neiwert, of Crooks and Liars, has grabbed a hold of comments made by Edward Perkovic, described as alleged shooter Richard Poplawski’s best friend. Perkovic said Poplawski feared “the Obama gun ban that’s on the way” and “didn’t like our rights being infringed upon.” Neiwert basically placed the blame for the murders on Fox News host Glenn Beck and Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the NRA, because they are worried about the Second Amendment under the Obama administration.

    In an interview by WPXI in Pittsburgh, Perkovic made comments about Poplawski’s fear the Obama administration will go after the Second Amendment.

    “We’ve been reporting for awhile on the surge in gun sales, and how the paranoia around guns is making the more unstable elements of the right particularly edgy,” writes Neiwert. “Inevitably, that edginess is going to break out into actual violence — as it appears to have done today.”

    Neiwert may want to put aside the partisan zeal and think about his criticism of what he deems “the more unstable elements of the right.” He might want take a look at the facts.

    Obama is indeed a gun-grabber and Americans in support of the Second Amendment have a right to fear his agenda.

    As a junior senator from Illinois, Obama opposed a bill designed to assert a right of citizens to protect themselves against home invasions. He supported state and local constraint on the exercise of the Second Amendment. Obama endorsed a state ban on the sale and possession of handguns in Illinois. He supported the enforcement of gun licensing and a limit on gun purchases. He would ban semi-automatic weapons. (See Barack Obama on Gun Control.)

    Obama’s attorney general, Eric Holder, is a veteran gun-grabber. In February, Holder pushed for the long dormant “assault weapon” ban (any weapon that is semi-automatic is considered an “assault weapon” by these folks). Holder shamelessly (and minus facts) blamed drug cartel violence in Mexico on the Second Amendment. “I would support banning the sale of ammunition for assault weapons and limiting the sale of ammunition for handguns,” Obama said in 2003.

    In addition to slandering as mental cases those of us who support the Second Amendment, David Neiwert came out in support of MIAC, the state police outfit in Missouri that designated supporters of Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr as militia terrorists and cop killers. In Stalinist fashion, Neiwert wants to go after those on the other side of the fake right-left paradigm.

    “Ironically, this is exactly the kind of incident that law-enforcement intelligence-gathering is supposed to help prevent — intelligence like the Missouri State Patrol report so hysterically attacked by these same paranoid right-wingers,” Neiwert writes. “I tried to explain at the time that these kinds of extremists are in fact a very real danger to people in law enforcement, but all anyone on the right wanted to talk about was Ron Paul bumper stickers. Well, there you go.”

    Neiwert apparently has a short memory. It wasn’t that long ago similar operations by the FBI under COINTELPRO went after people like Neiwert on the so-called left side of the false right-left paradigm.

    “Eddie Perkovic, for his part, clearly must share some of Poplawski’s views, as his profile revealed a fear of ‘Zionists’ and some kind of ethnic takeover of America. Among Perkovic’s recommended reads were ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’ and The Turner Diaries,” writes the True Crime Report blog. “I can’t help but feel we’ll hear from more Richard Poplawskis in the years to come. There are changes happening in the world that they, to say the least, don’t like very much. After all, prior to 9/11/01, the worst modern act of terrorism committed on American soil was committed by Americans. And that American, Tim McVeigh, happened to have pages from The Turner Diaries with him when he was arrested.”

    The True Crime Report might want to look into the revelations of Jesse Trentadue, who discovered that the FBI planted informants in two McVeigh connected groups — a white supremacist paramilitary training compound at Elohim City and the Mid-West Bank Robbery Gang.

    In fact, the FBI has long supported “right-wing hate groups” of the sort mentioned by the True Crime Report. “In the guise of a COINTELPRO against ‘white hate groups,’ the FBI subsidized, armed, directed and protected the Klu Klux Klan and other right-wing groups,” writes Brian Glick (COINTELPRO Revisited: Spying & Disruption). The “FBI actually gave covert aid to the Ku Klux Klan, Minutemen, Nazis, and other racist vigilantes. These groups received substantial funds, information, and protection-and suffered only token FBI harassment-so long as they directed their violence against COINTELPRO targets,” Glick writes in COINTELPRO in the 60s.

    Edward Perkovic’s mention of The Turner Dairies, the writings of David Duke, and the long discredited Protocols of the Elders of Zion (see his MySpace page here) — and his reference to the “Zionist government” in the video linked above — are completely irrelevant to the fact the government is in the business of attacking the Second Amendment and incrementally establishing a police state through federalization of local law enforcement and the passage of numerous draconian federal and state laws.

    It is still early and a clear picture of who exactly Richard Poplawski is and what he may or may not believe has not been established. He may hold beliefs ascribed to him by Perkovic. Either way, the Perkovic case — and the murder of police officers in Oakland, California, and the shootings at the American Civic Services Center in New York — will be used by the government to push for more stringent gun laws and the presence of more black-clad police on the streets.

    In the meantime, we can expect the Obama libs to continue their demonization of those of us who not only value and support the Second Amendment – the very cornerstone of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights – but also those of us who realize government invariably plots against liberty and eventually enslaves the masses, as a glance at the last century reveals.

    Liberals need to realize that Obama is merely a front man for a cartel of international bankers. His assignment is to grease the skids for the implementation of world government. Included in that agenda is the ongoing effort to outlaw and eventually confiscate all firearms and militarize police around the country.

    It should be expected that the government will exploit the recent shootings in order further their propaganda and realize their master plan of an unarmed and helpless populace. It really is sad the liberals are helping them in this effort by offering themselves up as useful idiots.

    http://www.infowars.com/lib-blogs-kick-into-frothing-overdrive-in-reaction-to-pittsburgh-shootings/

    Health Care Records Leading To A Gun Database

    April 3, 2009

    gun_owners_of_america

    Health Plan Threatens to Feed Your Gun-related Data Into a National 
    Database 
    — And charge you $10,000 a year for the privilege 

    Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
    8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
    Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
    http://www.gunowners.org 

    Thursday, April 2, 2009 

    In a year when trillion dollar bailouts have become routine, many 
    Americans have become almost numb to our acceleration towards socialism. 

    But gun rights activists aren’t in that crowd, and so GOA has to inform 
    you of yet ANOTHER threat to your privacy, the Second Amendment, and 
    even your wallet. 

    It is called an “individual mandate” or, alternatively, the 
    “Massachusetts plan.”  And over the weekend, both the 
    Washington Post 
    and the New York Times worked hard to build momentum for it. 

    First, a little history. 

    We alerted you a few weeks ago to the gun control provisions in the 
    stimulus bill that President Obama signed in February.  Our government 
    will now spend between $12 and $20 BILLION to require the medical 
    community to retroactively put our most confidential medical records 
    into a government database — a database that could easily be used to 
    deny veterans (and other law-abiding Americans) who have sought 
    psychiatric treatment for things such as PTSD. 

    Currently, gun owners can avoid getting caught in this database by 
    refusing to purchase health insurance or by purchasing insurance with a 
    carrier that has not signed an agreement with the government to place 
    your records in a national database. 

    But that’s all about to change.  A budget resolution — to be voted on 
    this Friday in the Senate — will be the first domino in a process that 
    could FORCE you to buy government-approved insurance, thus making it 
    impossible to avoid the medical database. 

    Put another way:  If you do not have health insurance — or, 
    potentially, if you do not have the TYPE of health insurance the 
    government wants you to have — the government will force you to 
    purchase what it regards as “acceptable” health insurance.   
    And, in most 
    cases, you will have to pay for it out of your own pocket. 

    What would all this cost?  Based on comparable insurance currently on 
    the market, it could cost $10,000 a year — or more. 

    If you were jobless, the socialists would probably spot you the ten 
    grand.  But if you are middle class and can’t pay $10,000 because of 
    your mortgage payments, your small business, or your kids’ college 
    education, you would be fined (over $1,000 a year currently in 
    Massachusetts).  And, if you couldn’t pay the confiscatory fine, you 
    could ultimately be imprisoned. 

    Scary, you say.  But why is this a Second Amendment issue?  Under the 
    Massachusetts plan, your MANDATED insurance carrier has to feed your 
    medical data into a centralized database — freely accessible by the 
    government under federal privacy laws. 

    So… remember when your pediatrician asked your kid if you have a 
    firearm in the home?  Or when your dad was given a prescription for 
    Zoloft because of his Alzheimer’s?  Or when your wife mentioned to her 
    gynecologist that she had regularly smoked marijuana ten years ago? 

    All of this would be in a centralized database.  And all of it could 
    potentially be used to vastly expand the “prohibited persons” list 
    maintained by the FBI in West Virginia. 

    How serious a threat is this? 

    If it gets into the budget resolution the Senate will consider on 
    Friday, it will be almost impossible to strip out later. It will be as 
    much of a done-deal as the stimulus package was. 

    We have asked senators to introduce language to prohibit such an 
    individual mandate for socialized medicine that would violate the 
    privacy of gun owners. In the absence of such an amendment, we are 
    asking senators to vote against the budget resolution. 

    ACTION:  Write your U.S. Senators.  Urge them to vote against the budget 
    resolution if it does not contain language prohibiting a mandate that 
    Americans buy government-approved health insurance against their will. 

    Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at 
    http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the 
    pre-written e-mail message below. 

    —– Pre-written letter —– 

    Dear Senator: 

    A budget resolution that could end up requiring Americans to purchase 
    expensive health insurance policies against their will is truly 
    frightening. 

    And equally alarming is the fact that such mandated health care coverage 
    could easily become a shill for gun control. 

    Potentially, anyone who does not have health insurance– or does not 
    have the TYPE of health insurance the government wants them to have — 
    will be forced to purchase “acceptable” health insurance and 
    pay for it 
    out of our own pockets. 

    Based on the cost of comparable insurance currently on the market, that 
    could cost $10,000 a year — or more. 

    That’s bad enough. But far worse, such a “Massachusetts Plan” would 
    MANDATE that an insurance carrier feed medical data into a centralized 
    database — freely accessible by the government under federal privacy 
    laws. 

    Hence, a kid’s statement to his pediatrician about his parents’ 
    firearms… or a dad’s prescription for Zoloft because of his 
    Alzheimer’s… or a wife’s statement to her gynecologist about her 
    regular use of marijuana ten years ago… could all turn up in a federal 
    database and unconstitutionally expand the list of “prohibited 
    persons.” 
    Individuals would have no ability to opt out. 

    For all of these reasons, if the budget resolution does not contain 
    language prohibiting an “individual mandate” regarding health 
    care, I 
    would ask that you oppose the budget resolution. 

    Sincerely, 

    (your name)

    April 2, 2009

     

    April 1, 2009

     

    Dear Friend of Liberty,

    I am proud to report that our first-ever Campaign for Liberty Regional Conference was an outstanding success!

    Last weekend, hundreds of freedom-loving grassroots activists assembled in St. Louis to celebrate our movement and train for the future.

    On Friday night, nearly 1,000 people gathered at the Millennium Hotel for our Freedom Celebration. Ron Paul, Judge Andrew Napolitano, and staff members from C4L and Young Americans for Liberty spoke to the standing room only crowd concerning protecting civil liberties, restoring a policy of sound money, auditing the Federal Reserve, and continuing to educate ourselves in order to effectively defend our principles.

    Over 400 activists participated in our Saturday grassroots training sessions and C-SPAN 2 filmed Tom Woods’ lunchtime talk on the current economic crisis (based on his new book Meltdown) for Book TV.

    Click on the image below to view the first part of Friday night’s Celebration, and visit Campaign for Liberty’s blog here to see the rest of the program.

    Thank you to all of the staff and volunteers who worked so hard to make this an event to remember. Campaign for Liberty staffers Deb Wells and Allison Gibbs have both written on the C4L blog this week about the incredible work of our volunteers. Read Deb’s post here and Allison’s here. And click here to see our official pictures of the Celebration.

    Never before have our freedoms been under such constant assault, but never before has our movement been in such a strong position to champion our principles and achieve our goals. The St. Louis Conference sent a clear message that we will not be discouraged or deterred in our mission to reclaim the Republic and restore the Constitution. Together, we will once again secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

    In Liberty,

    John Tate

    President, Campaign for Liberty

     

    Greater Gun Rights Battles Looming

    April 2, 2009

    As Lands Bill Fight Ends 
    — Greater battles over gun rights loom 

    Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert 
    8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151 
    Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408 
    http://www.gunowners.org 

    Wednesday, April 1, 2009 

    In March, both the U.S. House and Senate finished up work on a massive, 
    anti-gun $10 billion omnibus federal land bill. 

    The bill had been held up for over a year in large part due to GOA 
    members fighting for Second Amendment rights on federal land — YOUR 
    land. 

    The Second Amendment has been null and void for many years on all land 
    controlled by the National Park Service (NPS).  While regulations 
    promulgated in the waning days of the Bush administration partially 
    reversed that gun ban, a federal judge recently blocked those rules from 
    taking effect. 

    GOA worked closely with pro-gun members of the House and Senate to add a 
    complete repeal of the NPS gun prohibition to the larger land bill. 
    While these efforts delayed passage of the bill, in the end the anti-gun 
    congressional leadership teamed up with “pro-gun” compromisers and 
    passed the measure without protecting the Second Amendment. 

    In an effort to appease gun owners, language was added to the bill to 
    protect hunting and fishing.  But, as GOA pointed out to the Congress, 
    the Founding Fathers did not pledge their lives, fortunes and sacred 
    honor to protect a recreational pastime. 

    The final attempt to protect the Second Amendment from NPS bureaucrats 
    came on a procedural vote in the House that would have made in order an 
    amendment, sponsored by pro-gun Reps. Doc Hastings (R-WA) and Rob Bishop 
    (R-UT), to repeal the gun ban.  That motion failed by a vote of 242-180. 

    So now not only does the gun ban remain in place, the new bill greatly 
    expands the total amount of NPS land.  Since NPS-controlled parks and 
    trails also include many busy roadways, hundreds of thousands of gun 
    owners can unwittingly find themselves in violation of the gun ban 
    without even knowing they are on federal land. 

    Representatives Hastings and Bishop, along with Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA), 
    have vowed to continue their efforts to wipe this unconstitutional gun 
    ban from the books.  In the Senate, Tom Coburn (R-OK) is also pushing 
    for the repeal of the anti-gun NPS regulations. 

    Gun Owners of America would like to thank the thousands upon thousands 
    of email subscribers who repeatedly contacted their congressmen in this 
    battle to protect the Second Amendment.  We were sold out by 
    compromisers this time, but we will “remember in November” 
    those who 
    voted against the Second Amendment. 

    Please help spread the word so we can get even more people contacting 
    their elected officials.  As the late Senator Everett Dirksen said, 
    “When I feel the heat, I see the light.” 

    And do we ever need to turn up the heat! 

    Many important battles for your Second Amendment rights lay before us. 
    For instance, Barack Obama and his anti-gun cronies are making a massive 
    push to renew the Clinton semi-auto ban. 

    The President and his Attorney General, Eric Holder, are blaming the 
    current violence among Mexican drug cartels on firearms from the United 
    States.  This is another blatant attempt by anti-gun advocates to use 
    whatever situation they can find to further erode your Second Amendment 
    rights. 

    The problems of corruption and violence in Mexico should not be used as 
    an excuse to curtail your right to keep and bear arms.  But once again 
    law-abiding American gun owners are in danger of being punished for the 
    criminal actions of others. 

    The Clinton gun ban is just one of the attacks that you and GOA will be 
    fighting. 

    There is also a massive anti-gun bill in Congress, H.R. 45, that 
    includes universal gun owner licensing and registration, and the Obama 
    White House continues its efforts to ban private firearms transactions 
    at gun shows. 

    You can help us reach out to even more gun owners.   Please forward this 
    message to your friends and encourage them to sign up for the GOA email 
    alerts. 

    And if you haven’t already become a member of GOA, consider joining. 
    For a small amount of money such as $35, $50 or $100, you can join with 
    other Americans to save our Constitutional rights.  Visit 
    www.gunowners.org to join GOA today. 

    Thank you again for being part of the GOA team working to protect 
    American liberty.

    Willie’s World

    March 30, 2009

    “Man, I had to just email the writer of this article, which I’ve never done before, but this guy got to me. This bozo “Willie” writes a column in the S.F. Chronicle, I guess, called “Willie’s World.” Anyway, just another pawn being used in the retarded fight/logic behind gun control. Notice the use of black folks behind the gun control fight, Obama, Holder,  this Willie dude. If these sellouts had any minds of their own they would realize that the people who really need to be armed are all of the good black folks living in high crime areas, who are held hostage in their own homes because they are not allowed their God given right to protect themselves.  While little armed hood-rats terrorize the neighborhood… it’s just another form of slavery. I want all people to be able to protect themselves from street crime and from tyrannical governments.  Especially, poor folks and people who have dealt with a long history of oppression!

    Anyway, here’s the article & Willie says a lot of dumb stuff and makes a claim to the Oakland “Bart” shooting… and because of that incident we need to ban AK-47’s? Wasn’t that kid unarmed and shot by a cop with a hand gun? It’s just shows how silly the gun control issue is and how desperate this Obama/Holder/Clinton gun control posse is getting.

    (Willie’s email is at the bottom of the article if you want to contact him).

     

    Willie’s Little S.F. Chronicle Article:

    “Assault weapons have no place on streets”

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/29/BAN016NS9F.DTL

    Our Criminal Government Is Getting Predictable

    March 29, 2009

    “Jesus Christ… just like I said. You see once you get passed what ever it is that keeps you blinded from our governments corruption and evil agenda then you can literally sometimes predict their actions. I don’t think I’m johnny-smart-guy… there are a growing number of Americans who know exactly what I’m talking about.”

    The original post where I was saying that they would use the Mexican drug violence to further push gun control on law abiding American gun owners, (or “gun shop” owners in this article):

    https://thetruthorthefight.wordpress.com/2009/03/26/clinton-mexico-violence-fueled-by-americas-insatiable-demand-for-drugs/

    F.F. 3/28/09

     

     

    U.S. Gun Trial Echoes in Drug-Torn Mexico

    By JOEL MILLMAN

    PHOENIX — This week, an Arizona gun shop goes on trial in state court in what law-enforcement officials are calling a landmark case against gun dealers who sell weapons that end up in the hands of Mexican drug cartels, fueling horrific violence south of the border that killed more than 6,000 people last year.

    X-Caliber Guns LLC, is accused of knowingly selling hundreds of weapons, mostly AK-47s, to buyers who were posing as fronts for Mexican drug gangs. The gun store’s owner, 47-year-old George Iknadosian, has maintained his innocence in court filings.

    While the U.S. has long pressed Mexico to stop the flow of illegal drugs such as cocaine from crossing the border heading north, Mexico has complained that the U.S. doesn’t stop the flow of guns heading south. Mexican and U.S. officials estimate that more than 90% of the weapons used by Mexican drug cartels come from the U.S.

    Consider what happened last year in the Mexican border city of Nogales. The chief of the Sonora state anti-drug unit, Juan Manuel Pavón, was murdered by cartel hit men, just hours after attending a U.S. seminar on how to resist the tide of American firearms surging into Mexico. Several weapons linked to the crime traced back to X-Caliber Guns.

    “The three highest priorities for me in terms of U.S. cooperation in the drugs war are these: guns, guns, guns,” Mexican Attorney General Eduardo Medina Mora said in a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal. “These drug groups intimidate society and government because of their firepower. And their firepower comes from the U.S.”

    No one knows how many weapons cross the border into Mexico each year. Unlike contraband drugs, which are consumed, contraband guns “remain in circulation until they are captured,” says Terry Goddard, the Arizona Attorney General bringing the case against X-Caliber Guns.

    The number of U.S. guns in Mexico is growing. The Justice Department’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or ATF, says more than 7,700 guns sold in America were traced to Mexico in the fiscal year ending last September. That’s twice the 3,300 recorded the previous year and more than triple the 2,100 traced the year before that.

    U.S. officials acknowledge that U.S. gun laws are partly to blame. The 1994 ban on the sale of assault weapons like AK-47s in the U.S. led to a decrease of such weapons south of the border. But the ban expired in 2004, and the numbers in Mexico spiked. Last week, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said the Obama administration would seek to reinstate the ban. Contributing to the problem is the fact that Mexico’s customs control is famously weak, and authorities rarely check inbound traffic from the U.S.

    Meanwhile, Mexican drug gangs are stocking up on deadlier weapons. ATF officials say they have registered more purchases of high-powered FN Herstal rifles and pistols — the Belgian-made weapon called “matapolicias” in Mexico, or “cop killers,” for their ability to fire through body armor. Such items are sold in hundreds of Arizona gun shops, or by private owners advertising online.

    An FN rifle retails here for $2,200, but will resell in Mexico for “three to four times” the price, says William D. Newell, special agent in charge of Arizona for the ATF. “Money is no object to these guys,” he says.

    Although U.S. gun laws generally forbid the sale of weapons to noncitizens, the X-Caliber case shows how Mexican purchasers used intermediaries — or “straw buyers” — to flout the rules.

    The scheme, according to the prosecution, was simple: The buyers, usually 19- to 22-year-old U.S. citizens with no police record, declared that the firearm was for personal use, but instead passed it along to an associate of a Mexican cartel. The buyer filled out a standard form used by the ATF to track firearms. Lying on the form is punishable by up to 10 years in prison. But ATF agents here say buyers in the X-Caliber case were paid a fee to run that risk — up to $100 on each transaction.

    Gun shops generally rely on ATF recordkeeping to check them before selling to the wrong buyer. Ken Logan, a manager at the Shooters World gun store in Phoenix says the ATF form, once approved after being checked against a national data base, relieves the store of responsibility. “The ATF says ‘yea’ or ‘nay,’ on who I can sell a gun to,” he says.

    Gun stores run the risk of lawsuits if they’re deemed to be “profiling” — refusing to sell guns to young Latinos, for instance. Mr. Logan concedes he has seen men enter gun stores, point out to a girlfriend what weapon they should buy, and leave. The girlfriend fills out the form, attesting the firearm is for her personal use.

    Getting bullets is even easier. Gun dealers here must report anyone purchasing more than one handgun during a single five-day period, but there is no restriction on ammunition. Last Christmas Eve, salesmen at Cabela’s Sporting Goods store in Phoenix were surprised when two Hispanic men bought 24,000 rounds of bullets — the same caliber used in FN “cop killers.” They paid in cash — more than $10,000. When the buyers were seen loading their purchase into a car with Mexican license plates, store managers summoned police. Authorities found 12 FN rifles and three “cop killer” handguns.

    Police arrested the buyers, but only because they were foreign nationals, thus forbidden from possessing arms in the U.S.

    The murder of Mr. Pavón last year illustrates how Arizona’s gun-friendly culture contributes to mayhem in Mexico. Last October, the men under Mr. Pavón’s command fought gangs of narco-pistoleros in gun battles across the state. On October 24, a caravan of heavily armed assassins descended on Nogales, only to be repelled, leaving 10 gunmen dead. A week later, they attacked a police substation about a mile from the U.S. border crossing.

    Days later, Mr. Pavón was in Arizona for consultations with U.S. officials.

    At a farewell picnic at a federal shooting range in Tucson, the Mexican policeman was invited to test fire a powerful American weapon that has been surfacing lately in the narco-gangs’ arsenals: the 50 caliber Barrett rifle, powerful enough to pierce a tank’s armor.

    “We had a shootout,” recalls Mr. Newell, the ATF agent. “He won.”

    The following night, Commander Pavón was ambushed as he entered a Nogales hotel.

    —José de Córdoba contributed to this article.Write to Joel Millman at joel.millman@wsj.com

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123595012797004865.html

    FOOTNOTE:

    Subject: Prohibiting guns and drugs

    (There’s a civil war going on in Mexico. It’s the drug cartels, funded by obscene black market profits, versus the government, funded by obscene taxes.

    Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Mexico this week. She’s from the U.S. Federal Government and she was there to help. She promised . . .

    * More taxpayer money to fight Mexico’s war on drugs
    * Gun control laws here in the U.S.A. . . .

    . . .to stop the flow of guns to the Mexican drug cartels.

    Ms. Clinton seems to think that gun prohibition is the way to enforce drug prohibition. She’s right about one thing. Drug prohibition and gun prohibition are the same issue.

    Now, you might think drugs are bad. You might believe them to be so harmful you’d never use them. But you probably expect the politicians to keep their hands off your firearms.
     
    On the other hand, you may think guns are evil. You might believe they’re so dangerous, you’d never own one. But you think you have every right to choose what substances you take into to your own body. 

    Both positions are correct. Guns and drugs are both dangerous to people who don’t use them prudently. But prohibition laws mean that no one is allowed to use them prudently. And the one form of prohibition ends up being used as a justification for the other, as Ms. Clinton made clear in Mexico this week.

    We think it’s time to put the special pleading aside. Drug prohibition and gun control aren’t two separate issues, they are the same issue, and should be governed by the same principle. The only thing that should be prohibited is government prohibition in all its forms. 

    We don’t need to renew the Assault Weapons Ban, or give money to Mexico to fight the war on drugs. 

    What we need is less government coercion, not more. 

    Downsize DC! That’s the winning formula here. 

    Our government should end drug prohibition. That will defund the Mexican cartels (and the terrorists too), then they won’t be able to buy the guns. It would also reduce violent crime here at home and remove much of the supposed justification for gun prohibition).

    If you see the wisdom in this please our free Educate the Powerful System to ask Congress to end prohibition. 

    Then, please help spread the word. Digg this message on our blog.

    Thank you for being part of the growing Downsize DC Army, which has grown in two months time from 24,095 to 24,649.

    Jim Babka
    President
    DownsizeDC.org, Inc.  

    “No time in America’s history…

    March 29, 2009

    has their been a better opportunity to unit our melting pot of people under a common cause. Most of us admire each other and want to learn from one another. It’s our government and (government controlled) media that perpetuates the divide & the hate.”

    F.F. 3/28/09

    “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to heaven, we were all going direct the other way – in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only.”
    —Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities.  English novelist (1812 – 1870)

     

    Popular Anti-Stimulus Video Blogger Summoned to White House

    March 28, 2009

    WorldNetDaily is reporting that Bob Basso, who has released videos urging Americans take their government back from corrupt politicians, was reportedly “summoned to the White House by President Obama to discuss the subject matter of the short films.”

     

    n the video below, Basso, who portrays Thomas Paine, author of the “Common Sense” pamphlet that made the case for independence during the American Revolution, has called for Americans to send tea bags to Congress. Basso strongly criticizes Congress for approving the “largest spending bill in history without reading it” and takes Americans to task because “you did nothing.”

    The video, “We The People Stimulus Package,” has over a million views.

    Basso is a former award winning news director for NBC TV and visiting professor at UCLA.

    He was scheduled to appear on the Jerry Doyle radio show but canceled after Obama had personally invited him to meet in the White House “to discuss the disturbing nature of the videos,” according to WND.

     

    http://www.infowars.com/popular-anti-stimulus-video-blogger-summoned-to-white-house/