As of Thursday, May 16, 2013 there are four impeachable scandals growing.
AP Wire Tapping
and now it turns out the US DOJ bugged the House Cloak Room.
If you would like to be on the immediate list for mailings please email article-ten at mainetv.net with "A-10" in the subject line.
Want to understand the US today?
A friend of mine recently forwarded me a question a friend of his had posed: "If/when our Federal Government comes to pilfer, pillage, plunder our property and destroy our lives, what good can a handgun do against an army with advanced weaponry, tanks, missiles, planes, or whatever else they might have at their disposal to achieve their nefarious goals? (I'm not being facetious: I accept the possibility that what happened in Germany, or similar, could happen here; I'm just not sure that the potential good from an armed citizenry in such a situation outweighs the day-to-day problems caused by masses of idiots who own guns.)" If I may, I'd like to try to answer that question. I certainly do not think the writer facetious for asking it. The subject is a serious one that I have given much research and considerable thought to. I believe that upon the answer to this question depends the future of our Constitutional republic, our liberty and perhaps our lives. My friend Aaron Zelman, one of the founders of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, once told me:
"If every Jewish and anti-nazi family in Germany had owned a Mauser rifle and twenty rounds of ammunition AND THE WILL TO USE IT (emphasis supplied, MV), Adolf Hitler would be a little-known footnote to the history of the Weimar Republic."
Note well that phrase: "and the will to use it," for the simply-stated question, "What good can a handgun do against an army?", is in fact a complex one and must be answered at length and carefully. It is a military question. It is also a political question. But above all it is a moral question which strikes to the heart of what makes men free, and what makes them slaves. First, let's answer the military question. Most military questions have both a strategic and a tactical component. Let's consider the tactical.
A friend of mine owns an instructive piece of history. It is a small, crude pistol, made out of sheet-metal stampings by the U.S. during World War II. While it fits in the palm of your hand and is a slowly-operated, single-shot arm, it's powerful .45 caliber projectile will kill a man with brutal efficiency. With a short, smooth-bore barrel it can reliably kill only at point blank ranges, so its use requires the will (brave or foolhardy) to get in close before firing. It is less a soldier's weapon than an assassin's tool. The U.S. manufactured them by the million during the war, not for our own forces but rather to be air-dropped behind German lines to resistance units in occupied Europe. Crude and slow (the fired case had to be knocked out of the breech by means of a little wooden dowel, a fresh round procured from the storage area in the grip and then manually reloaded and cocked) and so wildly inaccurate it couldn't hit the broad side of a French barn at 50 meters, to the Resistance man or woman who had no firearm it still looked pretty darn good. The theory and practice of it was this: First, you approach a German sentry with your little pistol hidden in your coat pocket and, with Academy-award sincerity, ask him for a light for your cigarette (or the time the train leaves for Paris, or if he wants to buy some non-army-issue food or a perhaps half-hour with your "sister"). When he smiles and casts a nervous glance down the street to see where his Sergeant is at, you blow his brains out with your first and only shot, then take his rifle and ammunition. Your next few minutes are occupied with "getting out of Dodge," for such critters generally go around in packs. After that (assuming you evade your late benefactor's friends) you keep the rifle and hand your little pistol to a fellow Resistance fighter so they can go get their own rifle.
Or maybe you then use your rifle to get a submachine gun from the Sergeant when he comes running. Perhaps you get very lucky and pickup a light machine gun, two boxes of ammunition and a haversack of hand grenades. With two of the grenades and the expenditure of a half-a-box of ammunition at a hasty roadblock the next night, you and your friends get a truck full of arms and ammunition. (Some of the cargo is sticky with "Boche" blood, but you don't mind terribly.)
Pretty soon you've got the best armed little maquis unit in your part of France, all from that cheap little pistol and the guts to use it. (One wonders if the current political elite's opposition to so-called "Saturday Night Specials" doesn't come from some adopted racial memory of previous failed tyrants. Even cheap little pistols are a threat to oppressive regimes.)
They called the pistol the "Liberator." Not a bad name, all in all. Now let's consider the strategic aspect of the question, "What good can a handgun do against an army....?" We have seen that even a poor pistol can make a great deal of difference to the military career and postwar plans of one enemy soldier. That's tactical. But consider what a million pistols, or a hundred million pistols (which may approach the actual number of handguns in the U.S. today), can mean to the military planner who seeks to carry out operations against a populace so armed. Mention "Afghanistan" or "Chechnya" to a member of the current Russian military hierarchy and watch them shudder at the bloody memories. Then you begin to get the idea that modern munitions, air superiority and overwhelming, precision-guided violence still are not enough to make victory certain when the targets are not sitting Christmas-present fashion out in the middle of the desert.
I forget the name of the Senator who observed, "You know, a million here and a million there, and pretty soon you're talking about serious money." Consider that there are at least as many firearms--handguns, rifles and shotguns--as there are citizens of the United States. Consider that last year there were more than 14 million Americans who bought licenses to hunt deer in the country. 14 million--that's a number greater than the largest five professional armies in the world combined. Consider also that those deer hunters are not only armed, but they own items of military utility--everything from camouflage clothing to infrared "game finders", Global Positioning System devices and night vision scopes. Consider also that quite a few of these hunters are military veterans. Just as moving around in the woods and stalking game are second nature, military operations are no mystery to them, especially those who were on the receiving end of guerrilla war in Southeast Asia. Indeed, such men, aging though they may be, may be more psychologically prepared for the exigencies of civil war (for this is what we are talking about) than their younger active-duty brother-soldiers whose only military experience involved neatly defined enemies and fronts in the Grand Campaign against Saddam. Not since 1861-1865 has the American military attempted to wage a war athwart its own logistical tail (nor indeed has it ever had to use modern conventional munitions on the Main Streets of its own hometowns and through its' relatives backyards, nor has it tested the obedience of soldiers who took a very different oath with orders to kill their "rebellious" neighbors, but that touches on the political aspect of the question).
But forget the psychological and political for a moment, and consider just the numbers. To paraphrase the Senator, "A million pistols here, a million rifles there, pretty soon you're talking serious firepower." No one, repeat, no one, will conquer America, from within or without, until its citizenry are disarmed. We remain, as a British officer had reason to complain at the start of our Revolution, "a people numerous and armed." The Second Amendment is a political issue today only because of the military reality that underlies it. Politicians who fear the people seek to disarm them. People who fear their government's intentions refuse to be disarmed. The Founders understood this. So, too, does every tyrant who ever lived. Liberty-loving Americans forget it at their peril. Until they do, American gun owners in the aggregate represent a strategic military fact and an impediment to foreign tyranny. They also represent the greatest political challenge to home-grown would-be tyrants. If the people cannot be forcibly disarmed against their will, then they must be persuaded to give up their arms voluntarily. This is the siren song of "gun control," which is to say "government control of all guns," although few self-respecting gun-grabbers such as Charles Schumer would be quite so bold as to phrase it so honestly.
Joseph Stalin, when informed after World War II that the Pope disapproved of Russian troops occupying Trieste, turned to his advisors and asked, "The Pope? The Pope? How many divisions does he have?" Dictators are unmoved by moral suasion. Fortunately, our Founders saw the wisdom of backing the First Amendment up with the Second. The "divisions" of the army of American constitutional liberty get into their cars and drive to work in this country every day to jobs that are hardly military in nature. Most of them are unmindful of the service they provide. Their arms depots may be found in innumerable closets, gunracks and gunsafes. They have no appointed officers, nor will they need any until they are mobilized by events. Such guardians of our liberty perform this service merely by existing. And although they may be an ever-diminishing minority within their own country, as gun ownership is demonized and discouraged by the ruling elites, still they are as yet more than enough to perform their vital task. And if they are unaware of the impediment they present to their would-be rulers, their would-be rulers are painfully aware of these "divisions of liberty", as evidenced by their incessant calls for individual disarmament. They understand moral versus military force just as clearly as Stalin, but they would not be so indelicate as to quote him. The Roman Republic failed because they could not successfully answer the question, "Who Shall Guard the Guards?" The Founders of this Republic answered that question with both the First and Second Amendments. Like Stalin, the Clintonistas could care less what common folk say about them, but the concept of the armed citizenry as guarantors of their own liberties sets their teeth on edge and disturbs their statist sleep. Governments, some great men once avowed, derive their legitimacy from "the consent of the governed." In the country that these men founded, it should not be required to remind anyone that the people do not obtain their natural, God-given liberties by "the consent of the Government." Yet in this century, our once great constitutional republic has been so profaned in the pursuit of power and social engineering by corrupt leaders as to be unrecognizable to the Founders. And in large measure we have ourselves to blame because at each crucial step along the way the usurpers of our liberties have obtained the consent of a majority of the governed to do what they have done, often in the name of "democracy"--a political system rejected by the Founders. Another good friend of mine gave the best description of pure democracy I have ever heard. "Democracy," he concluded, "is three wolves and a sheep sitting down to vote on what to have for dinner." The rights of the sheep in this system are by no means guaranteed.
Now it is true that our present wolf-like, would-be rulers do not as yet seek to eat that sheep and its peaceable wooly cousins (We, the people). They are, however, most desirous that the sheep be shorn of taxes, and if possible and when necessary, be reminded of their rightful place in society as "good citizen sheep" whose safety from the big bad wolves outside their barn doors is only guaranteed by the omni-presence in the barn of the "good wolves" of the government. Indeed, they do not present themselves as wolves at all, but rather these lupines parade around in sheep's clothing, bleating insistently in falsetto about the welfare of the flock and the necessity to surrender liberty and property "for the children", er, ah, I mean "the lambs." In order to ensure future generations of compliant sheep, they are careful to educate the lambs in the way of "political correctness," tutoring them in the totalitarian faiths that "it takes a barnyard to raise a lamb" and "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." Every now and then, some tough old independent-minded ram refuses to be shorn and tries to remind the flock that they once decided affairs themselves according to the rule of law of their ancestors, and without the help of their "betters." When that happens, the fangs become apparent and the conspicuously unwilling are shunned, cowed, driven off or (occasionally) killed. But flashing teeth or not, the majority of the flock has learned over time not to resist the Lupine-Mandarin class which herds it. Their Founders, who were fiercely independent rams, would have long ago chased off such usurpers. Any present members of the flock who think like that are denounced as antediluvian or mentally deranged. There are some of these dissidents the lupines would like to punish, but they dare not--for their teeth are every bit as long as their "betters." Indeed, this is the reason the wolves haven't eaten any sheep in generations. To the wolves chagrin, this portion of the flock is armed and they outnumber the wolves by a considerable margin. For now the wolves are content to watch the numbers of these "armed sheep" diminish, as long teeth are no longer fashionable in polite society. (Indeed, they are considered by the literati to be an anachronism best forgotten and such sheep are dismissed by the Mandarins as "Tooth Nuts" or "Right Leg Fanatics".) When the numbers of armed sheep fall below a level that the wolves can feel safe to do so, the eating will begin. The wolves are patient, and proceed by infinitesimal degrees like the slowly-boiling frog. It took them generations to lull the sheep into accepting them as rulers instead of elected representatives. If it takes another generation or two of sheep to complete the process, the wolves can wait. This is our "Animal Farm," without apology to George Orwell.
Even so, the truth is that one man with a pistol CAN defeat an army, given a righteous cause to fight for, enough determination to risk death for that cause, and enough brains, luck and friends to win the struggle. This is true in war but also in politics, and it is not necessary to be a Prussian militarist to see it. The dirty little secret of today's ruling elite as represented by the Clintonistas is that they want people of conscience and principle to be divided in as many ways as possible ("wedge issues" the consultants call them) so that they may be more easily manipulated. No issue of race, religion, class or economics is left unexploited. Lost in the din of jostling special interests are the few voices who point out that if we refuse to be divided from what truly unites us as a people, we cannot be defeated on the large issues of principle, faith, the constitutional republic and the rule of law. More importantly, woe and ridicule will be heaped upon anyone who points out that like the blustering Wizard of Oz, the federal tax and regulation machine is not as omniscient, omnipotent or fearsome as they would have us believe. Like the Wizard, they fan the scary flames higher and shout, "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!"
For the truth is, they are frightened that we will find out how pitifully few they are compared to the mass of the citizenry they seek to frighten into compliance with their tax collections, property seizures and bureaucratic, unconstitutional power-shifting. I strongly recommend everyone see the new animated movie "A Bug's Life". Simple truths may often be found sheltering beneath unlikely overhangs, there protected from the pelting storm of lies that soak us everyday. "A Bug's Life", a childrens' movie of all things, is just such a place.
The plot revolves around an ant hill on an unnamed island, where the ants placate predatory grasshoppers by offering them each year one-half of the food they gather (sounds a lot like the IRS, right?). Driven to desperation by the insatiable tax demands of the large, fearsome grasshoppers, one enterprising ant goes abroad seeking bug mercenaries who will return with him and defend the anthill when the grasshoppers return. (If this sounds a lot like an animated "Magnificent Seven", you're right.) The grasshoppers (who roar about like some biker gang or perhaps the ATF in black helicopters, take your pick) are, at one point in the movie, lounging around in a "bug cantina" down in Mexico, living off the bounty of the land. The harvest seeds they eat are dispensed one at a time from an upturned bar bottle. Two grasshoppers suggest to their leader, a menacing fellow named "Hopper" (whose voice characterization by Kevin Spacey is suitably evil personified), that they should forget about the poor ants on the island. Here, they say, we can live off the fat of the land, why worry about some upstart ants? Hopper turns on them instantly. "Would you like a seed?" he quietly asks one. "Sure," answers the skeptical grasshopper thug. "Would you like one?" Hopper asks the other. "Yeah," says he. Hopper manipulates the spigot on the bar bottle twice, and distributes the seeds to them.
"So, you want to know why we have to go back to the island, do you?" Hopper asks menacingly as the thugs munch on their seeds. "I'll show you why!" he shouts, removing the cap from the bottle entirely with one quick blow. The seeds, no longer restrained by the cap, respond to gravity and rush out all at once, inundating the two grasshoppers and crushing them. Hopper turns to his remaining fellow grasshoppers and shrieks, "That's why!" I'm paraphrasing from memory here, for I've only seen the movie once. But Hopper then explains, "Don't you remember the upstart ant on that island? They outnumber us a hundred to one. How long do you think we'll last if they ever figure that out?"
"If the ants are not frightened of us," Hopper tells them, "our game is finished. We're finished."
Of course it comes as no surprise that in the end the ants figure that out. Would that liberty-loving Americans were as smart as animated ants. Courage to stand against tyranny, fortunately, is not only found on videotape. Courage flowers from the heart, from the twin roots of deeply-held principle and faith in God. There are American heroes living today who have not yet performed the deeds of principled courage that future history books will record. They have not yet had to stand in the gap, to plug it with their own fragile bodies and lives against the evil that portends. Not yet have they been required to pledge "their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor." Yet they will have to. I believe with all my heart the lesson that history teaches: That each and every generation of Americans is given, along with the liberty and opportunity that is their heritage, the duty to defend America against the tyrannies of their day. Our father's fathers fought this same fight. Our mother's mother's mothers fought it as well. From the Revolution through the world wars, from the Cold War through to the Gulf, they fought to secure their liberty in conflicts great and small, within and without.
They stood faithful to the oath that our Founders gave us: To bear true faith and allegiance--not to a man; not to the land; not to a political party, but to an idea. The idea is liberty, as codified in the Constitution of the United States. We swear, as did they, an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And throughout the years they paid in blood and treasure the terrible price of that oath. That was their day. This is ours. The clouds we can see on the horizon may be a simple rain or a vast hurricane, but there is a storm coming. Make no mistake.
Lincoln said that this nation cannot long exist half slave and half free. I say, if I may humbly paraphrase, that this nation cannot long exist one-third slave, one-third uncommitted, and one-third free. The slavery today is of the mind and soul not the body, but it is slavery without a doubt that the Clintons and their toadies are pushing.
It is slavery to worship our nominally-elected representatives as our rulers instead of requiring their trustworthiness as our servants. It is slavery of the mind and soul that demands that God-given rights that our Forefathers secured with their blood and sacrifice be traded for the false security of a nanny-state which will tend to our "legitimate needs" as they are perceived by that government. It is slavery of a more traditional sort that extorts half of our incomes to pay, like slaves of old, for the privilege of serving and supporting our master's regime.
It is slavery to worship humanism as religion and slavery to deny life and liberty to unborn Americans. As people of faith in God, whatever our denomination, we are in bondage to a plantation system that steals our money; seizes our property; denies our ancient liberties; denies even our very history, supplanting it with sanitized and politicized "correctness"; denies our children a real public education; denies them even the mention of God in school; denies, in fact, the very existence of God.
So finally we are faced with, we must return to, the moral component of the question: "What good can a handgun do against an army?" The answer is "Nothing," or "Everything." The outcome depends upon the mind and heart and soul of the man or woman who holds it. One may also ask, "What good can a sling in the hands of a boy do against a marauding giant?" If your cause is just and righteous much can be done, but only if you are willing to risk the consequences of failure and to bear the burdens of eternal vigilance.
A new friend of mine gave me a plaque the other day. Upon it is written these words by Winston Churchill, a man who knew much about fighting tyranny: "Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." The Spartans at Thermopylae knew this. The fighting Jews of Masada knew this, when every man, woman and child died rather than submit to Roman tyranny. The Texans who died at the Alamo knew this. The frozen patriots of Valley Forge knew this. The "expendable men" of Bataan and Corregidor knew this. If there is one lesson of Hitlerism and the Holocaust, it is that free men, if they wish to remain free, must resist would-be tyrants at the first opportunity and at every opportunity. Remember that whether they the come as conquerors or elected officials, the men who secretly wish to be your murderers must first convince you that you must accept them as your masters. Free men and women must not wait until they are "selected", divided and herded into Warsaw Ghettos, there to finally fight desperately, almost without weapons, and die outnumbered. The tyrant must be met at the door when he appears. At your door, or mine, wherever he shows his bloody appetite. He must be met by the pistol which can defeat an army. He must be met at every door, for in truth we outnumber him and his henchmen. It matters not whether they call themselves Communists or Nazis or something else. It matters not what flag they fly, nor what uniform they wear. It matters not what excuses they give for stealing your liberty, your property or your life. "By their works ye shall know them."
The time is late. Those who once has trouble reading the hour on their watches have no trouble seeing by the glare of the fire at Waco. Few of us realized at the time that the Constitution was burning right along with the Davidians. Now we know better.
We have had the advantage of that horrible illumination for more than five years now--five years in which the rule of law and the battered old parchment of our beloved Constitution have been smashed, shredded and besmirched by the Clintonistas. In this process they have been aided and abetted by the cowardly incompetence of the "opposition" Republican leadership, a fact made crystal clear by the Waco hearings. They have forgotten Daniel Webster's warning: "Miracles do not cluster. Hold on to the Constitution of the United States of America and the Republic for which it stands--what has happened once in six thousand years may never happen again. Hold on to your Constitution, for if the American Constitution shall fail there will be anarchy throughout the world." Yet being able to see what has happened has not helped us reverse, or even slow, the process. The sad fact is that we may have to resign ourselves to the prospect of having to maintain our principles and our liberty in the face of becoming a disenfranchised minority within our own country. The middle third of the populace, it seems, will continue to waffle in favor of the enemies of the Constitution until their comfort level with the economy is endangered. They've got theirs, Jack. The Republicans, who we thought could represent our interests and protect the Constitution and the rule of law, have been demonstrated to be political eunuchs. Alan Keyes was dead right when he characterized the last election as one between "the lawless Democrats and the gutless Republicans." The spectacular political failures of our current leaders are unrivaled in our history unless you recall the unprincipled jockeying for position and tragi-comedy of misunderstanding and miscommunication which lead to our first Civil War.
And make no mistake, it is civil war which may be the most horrible corollary of the Law of Unintended Consequences as it applies to the Clintonistas and their destruction of the rule of law. Because such people have no cause for which they are willing to die (all morality being relativistic to them, and all principles compromisable), they cannot fathom the motives or behavior of people who believe that there are some principles worth fighting and dying for. Out of such failures of understanding come wars. Particularly because although such elitists would not risk their own necks in a fight, they have no compunction about ordering others in their pay to fight for them. It is not the deaths of others, but their own deaths, that they fear. As a Christian, I cannot fear my own death, but rather I am commanded by my God to live in such a way as to make my death a homecoming. That this makes me incomprehensible and threatening to those who wish to be my masters is something I can do little about. I would suggest to them that they not poke their godless, tyrannical noses down my alley. As the coiled rattlesnake flag of the Revolution bluntly stated: "Don't Tread on Me!" Or, as our state motto here in Alabama says: "We Dare Defend Our Rights."
But can a handgun defeat an army? Yes. It remains to be seen whether the struggle of our generation against the tyrants of our day in the first decade of the 21st Century will bring a restoration of liberty and the rule of law or a dark and bloody descent into chaos and slavery. If it is to be the former, I will meet you at the new Yorktown. If it is to be the latter, I will meet you at Masada. But I will not be a slave. And I know that whether we succeed or fail, if we should fall along the way, our graves will one day be visited by other free Americans, thanking us that we did not forget that, with help of Almighty God, in the hands of a free man a handgun CAN defeat a tyrant's army.
The Official Oath of The Maine State Militia
This is what all of Congress swore to: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.” Collins, King, Michaud and Pingree all took that oath, yet, they have all chosen to take undermine the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. At best these four are oath breakers, in reality they are all four guilty of aiding and abetting the enemies of this country and are therefore guilty of treason.
Why the State Police loyalty to the citizens of the state is questioned. 9:26AM 4-18-2013
Wednesday, April 17, 2013 5:57PM EST Six votes taken in the Senate
king and Collins proof that they can be good, bad, and sown right ugly towards the Second Amendment, I wonder what part of, "Shall not be infringed" they don't understand, shame that two with so much education can't use a dictionary to look up the meaning fo the word "Infringed". Note: It takes sixty votes to pass an amendment. None of the six got the 60 needed votes.
S.Amdt. 725 to S. 649 To address gun violence, improve the availability of records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, address mental illness in the criminal justice system, and end straw purchases and trafficking of illegal firearms, and for other purposes. This went down by a vote of 52 to 48, needing 60 to pass, King Spit on the US Consitution, proving his contempt for it and us, Collins voted correctly.
Leahy of Vermont Amdt. No. 713, To increase public safety by punishing and deterring firearms trafficking. No is Patriotic Yea is communist. Both King and Collins voted for this, they both voted the way the communist party USA lobbied them to.
Grassley Amdt. No. 725; To address gun violence, improve the availability of records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, address mental illness in the criminal justice system, and end straw purchases and trafficking of illegal firearms, and for other purposes. Yea vote Bad, Nay vote Good. On this one King voted like a patriot and Collins like a Communist.
Feinstein Amdt. No. 711; To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes. 6:17PM This failed, but I am waiting for how Collins and King voted before putting up the link, but it failed. Collins and King both voted to kill this bill, they both did right.
Lautenberg Amdt. No. 714; To regulate large capacity ammunition feeding devices. While Senator Collins voted correctly, good ole Angus de King voted to limit your ability to defend yuorself, your family and your country. There is something about the Second Amendment that this hypocrite hates. I guess a communist would hate a well armed Militia.
Burr Amdt. No. 720; To protect the Second Amendment rights of veterans and their families. Both king and Collins voted Yea. Update: April 4, 2013
So, you are not sure the US G0vernment has declared war against us?
What about Angus King? while he claims to be pro-Second amendment, he is a liar!
This was the bill: To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
And this is the official Roll Call Vote as recorded in the US Senate:
In the May issue of the Economist, there is a report about Angus King being pro-second, there is only one place they could have gotten that opinion, from King himself.
Angus King is following in the footsteps of haters of the Republic, the haters of freedom.
More proof that King hates our having guns. It takes 34 US Senators to kill a treaty, King, if he, as he has said, opposed the UN Gun Grab Treaty, would have been one of the 34 to sign saying they would vote against ratification. Click here for the list who did, notice Collins and King are not on the list. If Republic hatersm Collins and King sign now it means nothing. The treaty is all ready DOA.
28 January 2013: Do you know why big city mayors and others want honest working people disarmed?
There are two things, out of all proposed, that would make this latest round of ‘gun control laws' successful if they can be successfully implemented, all the others are wishful thinking dream list and/ or smoke screens. These are the two the democrat has marked MUST GET: First they have to stop people from buying at gun shows and from private parties where they can avoid background checks and g0vt knowledge of the guns. The other is Mental health, they must have the ability to eliminate a persons right to be armed, on the federal level, for ‘mental incompetence.
"It's no secret that those who promote obtuse gun control want a range of controls in place to prevent the mentally-ill from acquiring weapons to facilitate violent tendencies; aside from the patently obvious objections to the rhetoric, my objection here is the widening definition of mentally-ill and its application. ...freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2982381/posts"
Using the age old technique of 'follow the money' I am going to explain, in detail, why it is that big city mayors and politicians of both parties, those who serve the democrat, want honest hard working tax payers disarmed.. Two groups. vigilante grpups in the big cities with large gang membership and with large minority populations on welfare and Born Again Christians especially those who home school.
Logic tells you that if you have a crime problem, you put more armed people on the streets. But do big city mayors, chiefs of police and politicians know this?
They do. "guns prevent many crimes from even being attempted. A 1982-83 study of prison inmates by National Institute of Justice showed that two-fifths of them had decided not to attack a victim when they found out that he or she was armed. In the 1960s the Orlando police responded to a rape epidemic by training 2,500 women to use guns. The next year rape fell 88% and burglary by 25%. ..."
But you say that was then, what about today? Do today's police, sheriffs, mayors know it today?
They do. A sheriff who released a radio ad urging Milwaukee-area residents to learn to handle firearms so they can defend themselves while waiting for police said Friday that law enforcement cutbacks have changed the way police can respond to crime. In the 30-second commercial, Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke Jr. says personal safety is no longer a spectator sport. "I need you in the game," he says. "With officers laid off and furloughed, simply calling 911 and waiting is no longer your best option," he adds. "You can beg for mercy from a violent criminal, hide under the bed, or you can fight back. ... Consider taking a certified safety course in handling a firearm so you can defend yourself until we get there."...
So, why is it that big city mayors, National and State elected office holders and so many big city chiefs of police have come out against your right to carry and own any weapon you would like to? That is the question that promoted me to start researching and the answers I found are at first going to shock you but as you ponder, keeping this in mind what Jesus said about serving two masters; "Man cannot serve two masters, he cannot serve both God and mammon, for he will either hate the one and love the other or despise the one and cherish the other, but he cannot love both at the same time." You will see the logic and the connections.
First let me ask you to keep a few things in mind;
In the last election there were inner city precincts where Obama got in excess of 98% of the vote.
In those same communities black and other minority gangs ‘provided security' at the polls.
In those same communities black gangs have a close working relationship with ‘community organizers/get out the vote and voter registration gatherers'.
In those same communities there is a high number of ‘gang related shootings'.
Now keep in mind what I was looking for was a money trail, who was giving politicians their life blood, the thing the love almost as much as power, money. "Their money can buy the best politicians, the best cops, the best judges, whatever they need they just throw down stacks of cash and it is theirs! "
And while there is a kind of money trail showing the money drug dealers put into candidates coffers and pockets, for the most part, the drug dealers, that have the big money, are to smart, their politician buying, judge and police buying is to hard to draw a clear line to.
BUT, the other thing politicians crave, as members of the Fabian Society, is power. How does he or she get power? By getting elected and reelected. What does that take? Votes! Votes that are legitimate or illegitimate, from voters who are alive or dead, from voters who cast one, two or even more votes per person, all that matters is the numbers of votes, how they are gotten is not important, winning is all that counts.
Now to explaining what is the goal of this latest gun grab Fabian Society socialism at all cost. Let us start with the term we so often hear on the nightly propaganda hour, for yes folks, it is not news, for it is delivered in such a sway as to influence your thinking, not to give you the facts allowing you decide for yourself.
All to often, especially if you live in one of the big cites, you will hear this term used ‘gang related shootings'. Now when you hear that term, what do you think of?; what comes to mind? Don't you picture a little kid shot by gangs, caught in a cross fire or maybe a stray bullet from the gun of a drive by gang style shooting? Or maybe you picture the carnage left after two or more rival gangs have had a shoot out? or maybe a person shot down by gangs because they were a good ‘community activist trying to clean up his or her neighborhood'. Well in some cases you would be right, but not all, not by a far cry.
Gang related shooting is defined as any shooting where a known or suspected gang member is involved. This would of course involve two or more gangs having a shoot out and any and all casualties from it, as it would include deaths from drive by shootings, retaliatory shootings, etc. BUT, it also includes a fair number of vigilante sniper killings.
This folks is what is happening in the inner cities, it is what Obama is attempting to stop with item # 6 of his 23 item executive order . "Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers." This EO would stop the sale of privately held guns to other private parties without them going through a licensed gun dealer complete with background checks of the seller and the buyer.
This is what Obama and the big city mayors are worried about, it is what they are trying to stop. What is going on and growing in the inner cities is this: Men, mostly black men, who are hard working family men with either US Army or US Marine Corps experience, all of which have graduated from boot camp and as such been taught to and required to demonstrate their proficiency in hitting a man sized target, in the kill zone, at 300 meters and beyond. These men, who have had enough of police corruption and inactivity, tired of judges turning gang members loose time after time, tired of lying cheating politicians paying lip service to cleaning up their neighborhoods, have had enough. They have started taking things into their own hands. They are taking a field trip out of the city and into the country side of their states and neighboring states, they are buying weapons from private parties, and bringing them home with enough ammo to get the job done. they are killing gang members using the sniper tactics they were taught in the service.
These are not crazed killers, these are men whose 13 year old daughters can't walk home from school without being sexually assaulted, verbally or physically, from the middle school down the street. Men who have had their wife assaulted on the streets in front of their homes, men whose homes have been broken into, they are men whose cars have been broken into, men whose sons are recruited and threatened by gangs while "the cops, the jduges, the paid politica hacks look the other way".
These men are forming two, three, and four man groups, as one goes out the others are 100% absolute alibis. The one that goes out, shoots and kills a gang member, takes the gang members valuables and weapons, then, takes the drugs, and dumps them down the sewers, then he quietly disappears. These men are making a difference in the big inner cities, but they are also hurting the voting corruption needed for the local, state, and national politicians to win time after time. They are doing this by disrupting gang activity, the very same gangs that provide security for the community organizers as they are ‘getting registrations for voters', the same gangs that provide security at the voting places ensuring obama 98% plus. The same gangs that, it appears, are obama's recruiting grounds for his private civilian force or men and women as well funded and armed as the US Military.
While running for the presidency, in 2008, Barack Obama made a mysterious and bizarre campaign promise. He said that as president he would create "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded" as the U.S. military, to advance his "objectives" for America.
The astonishing announcement, made July 2, 2008, to an audience in Colorado Springs, was ignored by virtually the entire media – except WND. Nobody bothered to ask Obama specifically what he meant, or how he could possibly assemble and fund such a massive civilian army, or why – and he never spoke of it again. While this report is about union members, there is no way he can get the scum needed by going only to unions. They have to come from the gangs as well.
So how does the democrat help the gangs without appearing to help the gangs? By disarming the men who are upcoming vigilantes, by preventing them from getting guns, by stopping private sales of guns.
The second group targeted by the democrat are Christians. Christian home scholled children are the intellect of the nation, they are the ones who know about the Constituion, that ahve read John Stormers books, the ones who know ans udnerstand what the three branches of g0vt are to do. this makes them despised. How will Christians be disarmed and worse? Well this is done using obama's second most ‘have to get' part of his unconsitutional 23 item EO.
Numbers: 2-5, 16-18, and 20-23 all have to do with mental qualifications.
2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.
3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.
4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.
5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.
7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.
16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.
17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.
18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.
20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.
21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.
22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.
23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.
Now on the surface you are probably looking at the above and asking yourself, what could be wrong with keeping guns out of the hands of mentally deranged men and women? The answer is in the definition of mentally incompetent.
Follow along with me here as we follow a young home schooling pastor through his annual physical exam.
Doctor: Well good morning Pastor how are we feeling today?
Pastor: Well fine doctor and you?
Doctor, while Pastor strip down to his birthday suit: wonderful, now tell me how is the home schooling going?
Pastor: Oh fine ....
Doctor several minutes later: Now Pastor I have to ask you these questions, it is a federal requirement in order for your insurance to pay, do you have any guns in your home?
Pastor, why yes, as you know I love to hunt, my family loves that deer I get each year.
So, as you can see, all this gun control malacky is geared to stopping the two groups that are hindering the democrat from taking over completely. Men who are actually doing something to end the gang control of inner cites and Born Again Christians especially those who are home schooling.
Let me, as I close, go a bit further, as all we who have served in the military know, "Fighting a war can be both fun and addictive. If you can work behind the enemy's lines in a small four man outfit isolated from command needing permission from no one, with no one above the rank of fire team leader, and when all four members of the team are close friends, war can be fun, profitable, and addictive. It is hard to bring those men back under control." These gun grabbing politicians know and fear that they too might soon become targets. They have to act fast, maybe as soon as the end of February, for they know that is only a matter of time before small groups target them and their pocket books both for gain and to end the corruption in their neighborhoods, aka Country.
22 January 2013 An open letter to the fools who have brought up more gun control.
In the USA there are about 330,000,000 men, women and children. Of that number, some 100,000,000 either have guns or have direct and immediate access to them/guns. Of that 100,000,000, there are many who will abide by whatever the g0vernment orders, but there are also 4% or so that will resist. That is 4,000,000 armed, some heavily armed, resisters or rebels if you will.
Think about what you have done. You have taken a group of 4,000, 000 armed and angry men and made them your personal enemies; Yes, your personal enemies. You do not have the Secret Service to protect you. You do not have the Capital Police to protect you. You don't even have guns to protect yourself and you have made it pretty near impossible to get any guns that you can use for protection.
Let me explain to you what is going to happen, unless you, yes you, can convince your gun grabbing lackeys in the oval office, the body politic, and the courts to not only drop the idea of more gun control but reverse all, yes that's right, all existing gun control laws dating back to 1930.
Civil unrest:. Civil unrest will interfere with commerce, public transportation, schools, courts, police activity, etc. Civil unrest will result in targeted deaths of politicians, police, judges, media personalities, and others, targeted rightfully or not, who are declared by whomever to be enemies of the Republic. Do you think that a minimum of 4,000,000 armed men, some heavily armed, are simply going to do nothing after you and your flunkies who declare them to be criminals?
Do you think they are going to sit calmly by when they find they cannot take their kid to a doc for fear of being grilled about gun ownership?
Do you think they are going to sit idly by as they are forced to lie about gun ownership on the tax forms, and other official g0vt documents?
You have pushed them too far. They, like a spring, can not be pushed back any further before striking out. You are a fool. If I were you, and I thank God He never made me so stupid, I would roll back every law going back as far as 1860. I would do whatever I had to do to prevent civil unrest, knowing that now the number wanting to revolt is growing every single day. Knowing that with the first shot, a torrent will be released, a torrent the police cannot suppress. Aand even if they could, outside of easily starved out cites they will not risk life, limb, and family to suppress their fellow countrymen. Many police and military will mutiny. Have you considered that? Let me let you in on another little known fact., Fighting a war can be both fun and addictive., If you can work behind the enemy's lines in a small four man outfit isolated from command needing permission from no one, with no one above the rank of fire team leader, and when all four members of the team are close friends, war can be fun and addictive. It is hard to bring those men back under control.
Now, while I am not an artist, let me paint a little picture for you so that you can see what you have started. For you are the ones who started it and you are the only ones that can prevent it. There is not one militia leader, not one preacher, not one gun rights advocate alive than can stop the tide that is swelling, not one, not one group. You have started a massive tide of resentment, fright, and spine stiffening resolve.
Farmer by day, warrior by night. Cop by night, warrior by day.
The Constitution/Freedom haters' attacks on the Second Amendment is the catalysts for a rebellion. What will it look like? How will it be fought?
You do not have to be a historian to know how to win the rebellion that may have already started. You don't have to study how the founding fathers beat the British, for the Viet Cong used exactly the same techniques. They were common working folk during the day and warriors at night. They formed into small local groups that had larger group and regional ties, but for the most part acted independently, setting their own targets and schedules. But they were working to achieve the regional agenda, the goal of independence.
Now, I know they were communist, and I know that this time the g0vt are the communist, but they fought to the point where the United States of America surrendered. I am no way suggesting we become communist. That is the g0vt we are rebelling against. Do we go head to head in the streets? No., Look at Syria., Do you think the g0vt of barak hussien obama is going to play any less viciously? No, we will not go head to head., What we will do is learn from the two recent fights where large armies, the US and the Russians, had to surrender; Vietnam and Afghanistan.
The Cong drove the US to the surrender table by being workers by day and warriors by night. The Afgans beat the Russians out of their country by exactly the same methods. Where did their leaders learn these methods? They did study history and they followed the basic principals of our founding fathers; they were farmers and shop keepers by day and warriors by night. They, our founding fathers, took a little time off from planting and, hiding behind trees, ambushed the enemy, then took off like smart fellows to return to their chores, blend in with the people, and to fight another day.
You see, US freedom fighters, rebels if you will, are not going to put on uniforms., They are not going to fight the military of obama, the UN, and God only knows who else obama will bring in, head to head in the streets. No, they are going to be as invisible as possible: the gal who serves them coffee at the local caféé; the guy who fills their tanks with gas, checks their oil and laughs at their jokes; they are the ones that at night look thru the scope of a .308. Others will be using the .50 Cal. This is going to be a long fight. Freedom, God willing and with His help, will win., But we want the infrastructure to remain so that after it is almost over, focus can be on building a federation of states., This federation will have no central command and a Constitution that learns from the mistakes that have been made in this Republic... a federation that does not shield politician... a federation that makes it the death penalty for corrupt politicians.
You liberal linguine -spined leftists have started this. There is no reason the rebels should compromise. You have started it and more and more each day are committing to finishing it. You and only you can get your lackeys in g0vernment to reverse enough laws to prevent the oncoming rebellion. Where are you going to get your food? Where are you going to get your fuel for heat? Where are you going to work? Where are you going to run? How are you going to fight back?
Face it..., you pushed to hard..., you messed up. Now surrender. Admit defeat, and work to calm those 4,000,000 down. Just don't wait too long. Start today.
You may never see this in either the Bridgton News or the Advertise Democrat, but as of noon January 5, 2013 it was emailed to them both as a letter to the editor.
An Open Letter to:
Senator Angus King
Senator Susan Collins,
Representative Chellie Pingree
Representative Michael Michaud
Dear Member of Congress;
I have read the proposed new gun law being put forth by Senator Feinstien, I think it is important for you to understand that I consider this nothing more than a way to take from me, by force perhaps, my legally owned property. If you, as my representatives in Washington, vote for this, and if it passes, and if it comes to fruition that anyone comes for my guns, I will hold you personably responsible.
Fienstiens legislation is clearly unconstitutional, you have sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution, The few guns I own are mine legally, they are not slaves that can be taken with the stroke of a pen as done in the civil war, they are inanimate objects that were legally purchased and I will not tolerate their being removed from my possession.
Let me close by quoting from a friend:
“ What you’ll see in the rebellion Written By: Bob Owens - Dec• 28•12
Let me explain, gun grabbers, how your confiscatory fantasy plays out. Let us imagine for a moment that a sweeping gun control bill similar to the one currently suggested is passed by the House and Senate, and signed into law by a contemptuous President.
Perhaps 50-100 million firearms currently owned by law-abiding citizens will become contraband with the stroke of a pen. Citizens will either register their firearms, or turn them in to agents of the federal government, or risk becoming criminals themselves. Faced with this choice, millions will indeed register their arms. Perhaps as many will claim they’ve sold their arms, or had them stolen. Suppose that as many as 200-250 million weapons of other types will go unregistered.
Tens of millions of Americans will refuse to comply with an order that is clearly a violation of the explicit intent of the Second Amendment. Among the most ardent opposing these measures will be military veterans, active duty servicemen, and local law enforcement officers. Many of these individuals will refuse to carry out what they view as Constitutionally illegal orders. Perhaps 40-50 million citizens will view such a law as treason. Perhaps ten percent of those, 4-5 million, would support a rebellion in some way, and maybe 40,000-100,000 Americans will form small independently-functioning active resistance cells, or become lone-wolves.
They will be leaderless, stateless, difficult to track, and considering the number of military veterans that would likely be among their number, extremely skilled at sabotage, assassination, and ambush.
After a number of carefully-planned, highly-publicized, and successful raids by the government, one or more will invariably end “badly.” Whether innocents are gunned down, a city block is burned to ash, or especially fierce resistance leads to a disastrously failed raid doesn’t particularly matter. What matters is that when illusion of the government’s invincibility and infallibility is broken, the hunters will become the hunted.
Unnamed citizens and federal agents will be the first to die, and they will die by the dozens and maybe hundreds, but famous politicians will soon join them in a spate of revenge killings, many of which will go unsolved.
Ironically, while the gun grab was intended to keep citizens from preserving their liberties with medium-powered weapons, it completely ignored the longer-ranged rifles perfect for shooting at ranges far beyond what a security detail can protect, and suppressed .22LR weapons proven deadly in urban sniping in Europe and Asia.
While the Secret Service will be able to protect the President in the White House, he will not dare leave his gilded cage except in carefully controlled circumstances. Even then he will be forced to move like a criminal. He will never be seen outdoors in public again. Not in this country.
The 535 members of the House and Senate in both parties that allowed such a law to pass would largely be on their own; the Secret Service is too small to protect all of them and their families, the Capitol Police too unskilled, and competent private security not particularly interested in working against their own best interests at any price. The elites will be steadily whittled down, and if they can not be reached directly, the targets will become their staffers, spouses, children, and grandchildren. Grandstanding media figures loyal to the regime would die in droves, executed as enemies of the Republic.
You can expect congressional staffs to disintegrate with just a few shootings, and expect elected officials themselves to resign well before a quarter of their number are eliminated, leaving us with a boxed-in executive, his cabinet loyalists trapped in the same win, die, or flee the country circumstance, military regime loyalists, and whatever State Governors who desire to risk their necks as well.
Here, the President will doubtlessly order the activation of National Guard units and the regular military to impose martial law, setting the largest and most powerful military in the world against its own people. Unfortunately, the tighter the President clinches his tyrannical fist, the more rebels he makes.
Military commands and federal agencies will be whittled down as servicemen and agents will desert or defect. Some may leave as individuals, others may join the Rebellion in squad and larger-sized units with all their weapons, tactics, skills, and insider intelligence. The regime will be unable to trust its own people, and because they cannot trust them, they will lose more in a vicious cycle of collapse.
Some of these defectors will be true “operators,” with the skills and background to turn ragtag militia cells into the kind of forces that decimate loyalist troops, allowing them no rest and no respite, striking them when they are away from their most potent weapons. Military vehicles are formidable, but they are thirsty beasts, in terms of fuel, ammo, time, and maintenance. Tanks and bombers are formidable only when they have gas, guns, and can be maintained. In a war without a front, logistics are incredibly easy to destroy, and mechanics and supply clerks are not particularly adept at defending themselves.
Eventually, the government will turn upon itself. The President will be captured or perhaps killed by his own protectors. A dictatorship will form in the vacuum.
If we’re lucky, the United States of America, or whatever amalgam results, will again try to rebuild. If we’re very lucky, the victors will reinstate the Constitution as the law of the land. Just as likely though, we’ll face fractious civil wars fought over issues we’ve not begun to fathom, and a much diminished state or states will result, perhaps guided by foreign interests.
It will not be pretty. There will be no “winners,” and perhaps hundreds of thousands to millions of dead.
Yet, this is the future we face if the power-mad among us are not soundly defeated at the ballot box before they affect more “change” than we, the People, are willing to surrender to would-be tyrants.” End Bob Ownes quote.
Members of Congress; As an Honorably Discharged Veteran of the United States Marine Corps, I want to make it clear to you that I did not serve so that members of Congress could rule over me or steal from me, and I will tolerate neither.
Rev. Robert M. Celeste
34 Duck Pond Rd.
Harrison, Maine 04040
Folks, I know that I am no smarter than our members of Congress, I know I am no smarter than Barak Hussien Obama, I know that Gov. Paul LePage is every bit as smart, if not smarter than me, as are the majority of Maine's Legislature, Sheriffs, Police, Courts and Media. So, it only stands to reason that if I am smart enough to know that by making schools gun free zones, by making it illegal for anyone who works for the schools to be armed, it is only inviting criminals and evil doers, so are they.
Yet, the politicians, the police, the media, the courts, all have done their part to make sure that when a crazed killer wants to attack a school there will be no one there to interfere with his, her, or their evil deed. These sheriffs, those police, courts, politicians and media are just as guilty, just as responsible for the deaths of those twenty 5 and 6 year olds as are the killers. And I for one will no longer hold them harmless.
A little note for teaches in Maine to ponder:
Do you think, even for one moment, that if you pull out a gun and stop a crazed killer in a school here in Maine, that any cop, outside of Portland, would dare to arrest you? Do you think for even a minute that the people in that community would allow the superintendent, the principal or anyone else to fire you, demote you, or do anything other than applaud you?
Oh sure, the Portland police would arrest you if you were in a Portland school, you would, if you teach in Portland and broke a rule to save a kids or kids, be fired, harassed, arrested, prosecuted and sentenced to life under the jail, but in the rest of the state you would be a hero.
Teachers who love the kids should do two things, one get out of the union and two get and carry a concealed weapon at all times when you are in school.
Support Maine, support the people of Maine, bow down to no man. .
counter works only when authorized
.20 on 11/17