About Gun Control—most folks don’t get it

By Al Benson Jr.

Since Aurora and Newtown there has been an ongoing dialogue about gun control. It ranges all the way from the liberals who want extensive gun control (for everyone except themselves and/or their bodyguards) to those who want no gun control whatever, and I have to admit that I lean more toward the latter than the former.

The bought-and-paid-for “news” media, quite understandably, leans toward the former. After all it’s what they are paid to do. Any ministry of propaganda can always be depended on to parrot the official government line and the media is much more about propaganda than it is about real news.
I don’t know how many columnists I have read that note that most of these horrible shootings take place in gun free zones where gun control laws are already in effect, and they are right. I can’t argue with them. Others say the federal government ought to pass laws that restrict more criminals from getting guns or they should enact new laws which allow them to track mentally ill people to stop them from getting guns, or whatever.

We hear about the present Mayor of Chicago, Comrade Obama’s good buddy, talking about how we need more and more gun control. This from a man who has one of the most “gun-free” cities in the country and where criminals kill others with guns weekly—and yet Mr. Emmanuel is still hollering for more gun control for honest citizens.

These anti-gun politicians are not stupid or ignorant. They have to realize that the gun-free areas in this country and around the world are the areas where more crime is committed by criminals against unarmed citizens than in areas where folks still (for now) have guns at home. They talk long and loud about “protecting children” and citizens in general from crime—but let’s don’t kid ourselves—what they are really pushing for is an agenda of total gun confiscation, quickly if they can, more slowly if they must. But, in the final analysis, what they want is all the guns belonging to honest people. About the guns in criminal hands they couldn’t care less. The current and prevailing Marxist agenda in this country is gun confiscation. What did Hitler, Stalin, Lenin and Mao do when they came to power? They took the guns. That act eliminated most of the opposition. That’s what is going on here.. Gun confiscation will eliminate most opposition to Comrade Obama’s agenda (well, it’s really the agenda of the CFR people that pull his strings). But Obama agrees with it.

So let’s don’t kid ourselves that the federal government is concerned about protecting children. They are concerned about getting our guns and that’s their sole concern in this area. They want to protect themselves from us—period. Most folks don’t seem to really get this. They continue to think it’s all about watching out for the kids, cutting down on crime, etc. It isn’t! It’s about taking away the guns of honest, law-abiding citizens. If this government was truly concerned about the lives of children would it have permitted the killing of 55 million aborted babies since 1973? Children are being used as an excuse to seek to confiscate our firearms and to do away with the Second Amendment. That’s what it’s all about.

The Second Amendment was put into the Bill of Rights to protect citizens from a tyrannical federal government that was out of control and usurping their rights. How can people protect themselves from a tyrannical government if they have no guns? Firearms confiscation is the prelude to even more tyranny than we have seen in the last few years (and, yes, such is possible).

So if you want to experience the joys of life in a country like North Korea or the old Soviet Union, then just turn in your guns when they come for them and you will experience what you wanted. You will reap what you have sown.

Just remember, after all the political rhetoric and baloney is over, it’s still all about gun confiscation.


Newtown—the story changes—again

By Al Benson Jr.

We’ve heard all manner of news reports about the situation in Newtown, Connecticut that is being used as a major part of Obama’s premier push for gun registration/confiscation. Of course they won’t admit that, but then they won’t admit that “global warming” is a hoax either, which those emails from Britain pretty much confirmed a couple years ago.
With our Marxist government you have to understand that the agenda is everything and that truth, documentation or whatever may be out there will be twisted all out of shape to conform to the agenda. Actual truth means nothing. Marxist truth is all.

I feel that it is pretty much the same with the Newtown situation. The agenda of gun registration/confiscation has been on the table for quite awhile now (although the media has not seen fit to inform us of that) and I do not doubt that, until the attitude on gun control (confiscation) improves, the shootings will continue.

One article I read noted that “Police Change Story, Found 2 More Handguns Near The Shooter: Newtown C…” It was noted that “Officials have changed up their story and are saying they found 4 handguns near the shooter’s body now.”

This story is, no doubt, what led to the NBC video and commentary by Pete Williams, NBC’s chief Justice correspondent. The NBC video stated: “…but we have some new information this morning (one month ago) from a couple of federal officials and state officials. They say now there were actually four handguns inside the school, not just two as we were initially told. Four handguns and apparently only handguns that were taken into the school.” This was noted on http://www.ijreview.com  A couple questions here. The newscaster said they got this information from “a couple of federal officials and state officials.” Now that the story has been changed yet again you have to wonder—who were these federal and state officials that told us about the four handguns? Since, with the newer, more politically correct version of the story now being floated about the assault rifle and only two pistols being found in the school I am forced to ask if these federal and state officials were being just a bit disingenuous? Why tell us it was four handguns if the story was either untrue or going to be changed back?

A little further digging, this time on http://intellectualrevolutionary.wordpress.com  turned up a few more interesting comments. In part, they state: “It was originally claimed that the lone gunman had 2 pistols, then they said a rifle and a pistol, then they said a rifle and a shotgun, and finally they said Adam Lanza had an automatic rifle (AR-15), a 12 gauge shotgun, and 2 pistols. If you are familiar with the details in the Aurora, Colorado shooting then you should have alarm bells going off in your head right now. These are the EXACT SAME WEAPONS that James Holmes supposedly used!…Why these weapons? Because AR-15s have what they call high capacity magazines, which is exactly what this administration has been trying to ban! This is so only law enforcement and the military can have these, and if the people were to rise up and try to start a revolution, they would have us outgunned.” I know one thing—if some sort of revolt did break out, then ordinary folks would run out of ammunition long before government mercenaries would with the 750 million rounds the feds recently bought.

I checked out some commentary about the Colorado shooting and, sure enough, James Holmes used an AR-15 assault rifle, a Remington 12 gauge 870 shotgun, and two 40-caliber Glock handguns. Coincidence? Sure, all these similarities in all these shootings are all coincidences—just like the Spanish American War starting up after the Maine was sunk. Pure coincidence—with a little help from someone who wanted to make sure the US took over a lot of Spanish territory and made a lot of money off of it.

On top of this, some are finding a few discrepancies and a lot of questions arise. A writer on http://theconservativetreehouse.com  has asked some interesting questions. Here are a few: “According to the official story, Adam Lanza was found with his older brother’s ID, and it was not stolen. However, older brother Ryan—who officials say is very cooperative—claims not to have seen his brother since 2010. Where would Adam get his ID? According to the official story, Adam Lanza was wearing a black outfit with a mask and bulletproof vest. Why would he want to hide his identity, and why would he wear a bulletproof vest, if he planned to kill himself? Where did he get the bulletproof vest? Guns stolen from Mom—vest too? If so, why did she need one? The medical examiner asserts that all wounds were caused by a rifle or other long weapon…But Adam Lanza was found dead in the school with only handguns…What did he kill himself with? Kind of hard to use a .223 long gun.” There were a lot more questions, some of them quite penetrating if folks would stop and think.

What first got my attention to this story was the comments about the NBC video and the statements that there were only 4 handguns found in the school. That must have got lots of people’s attention because the Internet was loaded with it. It was easy to find on the Internet. I watched it several times myself on different sites. If this were (or is) true, then that would tend to punch a hole in Obama’s need to limit (confiscate) so-called assault rifles. So, could such a premise be allowed to stand? Apparently not, because we now have the latest state police report from Newtown saying just what Obama would like it to say—that all the folks in Newtown were killed with an assault rifle. Again, does the “all” include Lanza? Lots of questions I don’t expect we will ever get answers to. Where did Lanza get the bulletproof vest? Where did the shooter in Aurora get all the military-style equipment he had? That was expensive stuff. I doubt he picked it up at the local Army-Navy store.

The whole situation looks more and more dicey to me and I don’t expect we will get any more honest answers out of this than we did with “Fast and Furious.” It all comes down to this—this Marxist administration is out to confiscate the guns of the American people and it will use any means, no matter how devious, to accomplish that. Can’t have an armed populace out there resisting tyranny now, can we? After all, if you can’t trust your government…..?

NBC Gives Obama Indigestion—“assault rifle” not used in Newtown shooting.

By Al Benson Jr.

Everyone who knows the score realizes that Obama’s alligator tears over the twenty kids supposedly killed in Newtown, Connecticut are about as genuine as the Clinton Three Dollar Bill.

His impassioned plea to the country to get rid of “assault rifles” is becoming more and more a thinly veiled attempt at gun confiscation and those that have awakened enough to begin to smell the coffee are realizing that. They are contacting their congresspersons and letting them know they do not appreciate the tinkering that is now going on with the Second Amendment prior to the Obama/CFR orchestration of its demise.

In the midst of his gun registration/confiscation push Obama has now been confronted with the fact that NBC (that’s right folks, NBC of all people) has had to admit that there was no “assault rifle” used in the Newtown shooting, or whatever took place there.
Both http://my2ndamendment.us and http://www.ijreview.com among many, many others have admitted: “When the president surrounds himself with children while giving his announcement that reasonable gun control measures are necessary, bear in mind that those ‘assault rifles’ the government is sure to be going after were not even used in the Newtown, Connecticut elementary shooting. As NBC admits in the video above, four handguns were used to carry out that despicable atrocity.” There was a video on the site this information came from which I obviously cannot reproduce here but I did watch it. There was another video also showing the police finding an “assault rifle” in the trunk of the car Lanza supposedly drove to the school, only from people who really know firearms, I was informed that this was really not an “assault rifle” but possibly a semi-automatic shotgun, not that the “news” media would ever pass that along. I’m wondering why NBC finally admitted that there were only four pistols found in the school and no assault rifle. Those who have been following this knew a month ago that four pistols had been found in the building—and no rifle. So it would seem that Obama’s weapon of choice for this shooting or whatever happened was not even involved.

Will Obama moderate his call for gun control/confiscation now that the “assault rifle” was not involved? Who’s kidding who? If he does it will be because his CFR handlers told him to back off for now. If that’s the case then it will probably take another mass shooting or two before he can bring up confiscation again—but not to worry—if another good crises should arise it will be taken advantage of and manipulated into fitting the anti-gun agenda.

It’s no secret that those who exist inside the Washington Beltway are 100% Yankee/Marxists that look down their political noses at us great unwashed hoards of barbarians out here in flyover country. All we are good for is to pay their fat salaries and provide our sons and daughters as fodder for their ever-expanding no-win wars—in the service of the United Nations.

Obama’s concern for the middle class is so much twaddle. You have to understand that, in his Marxist mentality, the middle class exists to be removed, just like the guns. From the middle class you get resistance to Marxist doctrine and so the middle class needs to be destroyed financially and every other way possible, all the while conning them into believing that he is really trying to help them. And he is trying to help them—to their demise—because they are a thorn in the side of Marxist ideologues.

Even Bill Clinton, good old Slick Willy, can see the handwriting on the wall if Obama pushes too hard too fast against gun owners. On http://dyn.politico.com  it was noted that Bill Clinton warned a group of Democratic donors at a private meeting Saturday that they should not underestimate “the passions that gun control stirs among many Americans.” Clinton said: “Do not patronize the passionate supporters of your opponents by looking down your nose at them. A lot of these people live in a world very different from the world lived in by the people proposing these things. I know because I came from this world.”

As much as I hate to agree with Slick Willie on anything, he has called it accurately here. Most of us in much of the South, as well as rural parts of the West and Midwest do indeed live in a different world than do those inside the Beltway and their rich friends—thank Heaven. At least in the morning we can wake up, look at the sunshine and thank God for our blessings. The scions of the Beltway want to be God. Had they been in the Garden of Eden when Eve ate the forbidden fruit they would have cheered her on, but then they are descended from the serpent anyway.

So I would recommend that all of us add to Comrade Obama’s discomfort by contacting our congresspersons and letting them know, in no uncertain terms, that we expect them to vote to support and uphold  the Second Amendment when a vote comes up, which it will if Obama has his way. Also let them know that if they decide to vote for whatever registration/confiscation plan (it’s all the same) Obama proposes that you will do all in your power to defeat them in the next election. They took an oath to support and defend the Constitution and the Second Amendment was part of that Constitution the last time I checked, though I have no doubt they will try to neutralize it while keeping the wording so folks won’t catch on. We need to let them know we will be watching what they do.

There are several county sheriffs around the country that have written letters stating that they will refuse to enforce unconstitutional gun confiscation if it is implemented. We need another 100 or so sheriffs to stand up and do the same thing. May the Lord give more the backbone to see what needs to be done and to do it.

New York’s Charles Rangel—the Culture Dictator

By Al Benson Jr.

Rep. Charlie Rangel is a liberal/progressive (socialist) congressperson from New York State. Culture seems to be one of his main interests nowadays. It seems that Mr. Rangel has taken an interest in the culture of the Southern states. People with dictatorial mindsets are always wanting to stick their long noses into what other people do and how they live so they can satisfy their innate desire for divinity by changing what other people in other areas do and how they think.

Mr. Rangel has recently stated that: “New York is different and more progressive than a lot of areas in other states, and some of the Southern areas have cultures that we have to overcome…” Now what exactly does he mean by that? Does he want to “change” parts of the South because they are not up to his “progressive” (socialist) expectations? I wouldn’t doubt that for a minute. Progressives are always trying to “change” other people—to remake them in their own image—all for their own good of course! All I can say is God help the South if we end up with too many more personalities like Charlie Rangel. We have too many already.

Mr. Rangel is right, New York is more “progressive” (socialist) than we are down here, and I am willing to be there are some folks in New York that are not real happy with that. Rangel’s mindset can probably be summed up in three words—“Ramrod, wreckage, and ruin.” His kind will ramrod their views down our throats and create wreckage and ruin in our area if we are foolish enough not to embrace his dictatorial benevolence.

It never seems to occur to people like Rangel that Southern culture is none of his business. I’m sure he would be highly incensed if someone from Alabama said we have to “overcome” Northern culture. He’d be on his high horse about “outside interference” in his home state—but it’s alright for him to interfere in other states with his progressive drivel. Rangel is so typical of what I refer to as the “Yankee/Marxist mindset.” He gets to tell everyone all around the country how to live because his own culture is so very superior to everyone else’s. Well, Charlie, I’ve got a piece of news for you—as the Southern folks say “We don’t care how you do it up North.” I was born and raised in the North and, having spent a little over twelve years of my life in the South I have to say I will take Southern culture every time—it’s one among several reasons that we live in the South rather than up North.
Southern folks seem to have one good trait that has apparently escaped notice in much of the North—they mind their own business and don’t try to tell the rest of the world how to live. Telling the rest of the world how to live is a peculiarly Yankee/Marxist habit—and if you fail to take their generous “advice” why then they will get a law enacted to force you to do it—for your own good of course.

My advice to Rangel would be to get his own house in order up in New York and keep his nose out of what we do in the South. Quite frankly it’s none of his business what we do here. His comment about Southern cultures that “we have to overcome” smacks of coercion and we’ve already had enough of that concerning our firearms from the “Red” (White) House.

If Rangel doesn’t like our culture down here then, please, let him stay home in New York and mind his own business. We don’t need him or his cultural edicts here. As a former Northerner who has embraced Southern culture I would be perfectly happy if Mr. Rangel never set foot south of the Mason-Dixon Line.

Illegal Gun Control/Confiscation Effort?

by Al Benson Jr.

A friend in Alabama sent me this on 1/16/13 and I thought it was worth passing along in lieu of the very strong possibility that Comrade Obama will probably try to nullify our Second Amendment rights–quickly if he can, slowly if he must, but he’d rather do it all at once.

Anyway, read what my friend sent me:
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOG RECORD: Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws, the federal CORPORATE government (federal government defined as corporation under 28 U.S.C. Section 3002 (15) and the states are subdivisions of the corporation, 28 U.S.C. Section 3002 (10), cannot ban arms or stop people from defending themselves against a tyrannical government. The prohibitions of the Constitution were designed to apply to all the branches of the National Government and they cannot be nullified by the Executive or by the Executive and Senate combined.

Did you understand what the Supreme Court said here? No Executive Order, Presidential Directive, Executive Agreement, no NAFTA, GATT/WTO agreement/treaty, passed by ANYONE, can supersede the Constitution. FACT. No question! At some point in life people have to make a choice where to draw the line and to what means they will protect anyone from crossing that line.

I’m not sure, in the last sentence, whether they mean “protest anyone from crossing that line” or not, but I am sending this along as it was sent to me.

I hope that, at some point (preferably sooner than later) some pro-gun organization will check into this, and private gun owners as well.

One Last Warning For Gun Owners

By Al Benson Jr.

I have talked to several that own guns in the past weeks and passed on to them information as to what is going on in Washington and how their weapons will probably be confiscated. Most of them don’t like the thought of that, but what will they do about it? Most will do what they do about most things, gripe and moan a little and will then do little else.

In recent months I have talked with only one man who was concerned enough to take action. He made copies of the material I gave him and passed them along to his friends in an adjoining parish who he felt could contact legislators and get some reaction from them. Most others think the potential Obama gun confiscation is just terrible but they have or will do nothing to prevent it. Our public education system has dumbed them down to the point where they do not any longer know how to write a letter to the editor of their local paper or to their “elected representatives” telling them they want them to stand against this assault on the Second Amendment. The educrats knew what they were doing when they purposely dumbed the kids down—they were silencing any future opposition to Big Brother and they have done a masterful job of it.

An article on http://www.gunsamerica.com recently stated: “This week the media is trying to convince us that support for Diane Feinstein’s anti-gun legislation is weak, but if we are not PRO-ACTIVE, the legislation will pass as written. You will wake up just in time for…new laws that make your AR-15 a Class 3 weapon. This means that if you want to keep your tactical rifles, you will have to register them, pay a $5-$200 tax, and notify the government if you intend to take them out of state. You will also completely waive your 4th Amendment rights to reasonable search and seizure. ATF will have the right to knock on your door and inspect the weapons anytime they want…This isn’t a threat. It isn’t political posturing. Diane Feinstein and the anti-gun machine have already introduced the legislation, and it will be rammed through Congress and signed by the President if we do not stand As One and act today.”

This article exhorts gun owners to contact their legislators immediately. It also exhorts you to contact all of the gun companies that you’ve done business with and ask them to take some action. The article notes: “All of them (gun companies) have mail lists, and all of them are sitting on them pretending they don’t have any responsibility, while doing record business in the stuff that is going to be banned or regulated.” The Second Amendment is about more than making record gun sales. It is about people being able to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. Our “elected representatives” need to hear from us and know that if they waffle on this issue we will work to defeat them in their next election bid.

You can bet the farm that those in the anti-gun lobby are contacting Senate and House members, telling them that the voters will not really care if they vote for the evisceration of the Second Amendment, so just go ahead and take away the guns—it’s for the children you know. Of course all that is hogwash. The anti-gun people couldn’t care less about the kids, but they do care about power and influence to push their agenda. And right now they have a man in the White (Red) House who is just salivating to do what they want so he can consolidate his own power and that of those who are his handlers. So all gun owners and those in the sporting goods business where they sell guns need to contact your legislators in Washington. They need to know in no uncertain terms that the voting and gun-owning public is ticked off and this gun-grabbing attempt.

The article ends with this: “Diane Feinstein doesn’t care how much survival food you have in your bunker. But what she does have is the actual power to halt the production of an entire class of firearms and magazines, and she plans to do that this week. Get out of your armchair and get into action.” As to how much survival food you have in your bunker, if you don’t have the firearms to defend it, will it really matter?  Someone from the government or the gangs (is there much difference?) will come by shortly to relieve you of it if you have no guns.

So please get out there and at least try to do something. The guns you save may be your own.

The Bushmaster Bull-Throwers

By Al Benson Jr.

As the federal assault on the Second Amendment continues the public is being treated to the usual dog and pony show by Joe Biden and his “committee.” We are still being told that the Bushmaster AR-15 rifle is the murder weapon in Newtown, Connecticut, but even that “fact” seems to be somewhat in doubt and the tales we have been getting from the “news” media run the gamut from frenzy to panic.

Members of six different pro-gun groups have met with Biden and/or his people. In an article on http://www.newsmax.com  it was stated: “The Friday session followed a tense Thursday afternoon meeting with six gun-rights groups including the NRA which denounced the meeting as a strategy meeting on how to thwart the Second Amendment. ‘We were disappointed with how little this meeting had to do with keeping our children safe and how much it had to do with an agenda to attack the Second Amendment’ the gun group said in a statement…Chris Cox, the NRA’s chief lobbyist who attended the meeting on Friday described it to Fox News as a ‘dog and pony show.’ It became very clear very early that they weren’t looking to hear from gun owners, they were looking to blame gun owners.”

Well, finally someone that gets it!

Of course they are not looking for solutions to keep children safer. They are looking, in spite of what prevarications they spin for the public, for ways to confiscate our guns—if not right now then as soon as they can manufacture a way to pull it off. I would hope this would be obvious to most people, but then, maybe I hope for too much.

But it seems that not everyone in the NRA gets it. Joel McDurman, in an article on http://americanvisionnews.com  observed that “In May of 1999, NRA Executive VP Wayne LaPierre testified before Congress in favor of…a gun control law, stating, ‘We think its reasonable to support the Federal Gun-Free School Zones Act.” Mr. McDurman feels that the NRA doesn’t understand the Second Amendment. He says “Indeed, the NRA seems to have been riding the wave of sentiment that said ‘we need to allow arms in schools,’ but its solution is not concealed carry by random and freely-deciding qualified teachers or parents, but to allow only government guns in school.” Mr. McDurmon says of this solution :It is the exact opposite of the reason the Second Amendment exists to begin with. The Second Amendment was put in the Constitution so that citizens could protect themselves against a tyrannical government, not so the government could bear arms against us, or even on behalf of us. The moment the government declares where we can or cannot bear arms, and then installs government arms to enforce that decree, it is doing just the opposite of what the Second Amendment exists to ensure.”

In fact, even the term “assault rifle” is a misnomer. Tim Macy on http:gunowners.org  has stated, and I believe correctly, that “So-called ‘assault weapons’ are not designed to assault anyone—they are defense weapons for Americans to defend out families, our country and our Constitution. In colonial times, the ‘defense weapon’ of the day was a musket, and our forefathers used muskets and cannons to fight the British to secure our freedom. Today, the modern analog of the colonial musket is the AR-15 style rifles that have the ability to use standard-capacity magazines for self-defense. Why would Americans give up the right to have the best possible defense weapons we can have to protect our home, family, state and nation from criminals of ALL kinds?” Tim Macy is associated with the Gun Owners of America,  which is an organization I endorse.

The old saying that “an armed society is a polite society” is not really all that far off. It has been noted that when the state of Florida started letting its citizens carry concealed weapons, Florida’s firearms homicide rate dropped by around 37% Other states that have passed concealed carry laws have lower crime rates. By the same token, places that have enacted more gun control experience higher crime rates.

These political demagogues that shout at us that we need more gun control to reduce crime are, quite frankly, either naïve or they are liars. While some may be truly naïve, in which case they probably should not occupy the offices they have, I believe that most of them err on the side of intentional falsehood. They can’t exercise the power and control over us they would really like to as long as we have guns and so if they can find some way of separating us from our firearms, even with various false flag events, this will become their agenda.

In the final analysis, as I have said before, it’s not about child safety—it’s about power and control. For those who are interested the Gun Owners of America’s mailing address is 8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, Virginia 22151.

King George III and King Barack I

By Al Benson Jr.

On April 19, 1775 the first shots of the American War of Secession from Great Britain were fired at Lexington and Concord, Massachusetts. Around 7-800 British regulars were ordered out of Boston, to go to Lexington and Concord to capture and destroy “military supplies” belonging to the colonial patriots. Loosely translated this means that the redcoats were sent out to capture colonial guns and powder. In other words, a British attempt at gun control precipitated the start of the American War of Independence.

The minions of George III in this country were gun control freaks and the best way to prevent colonial resistance was to simply take the guns and ammunition. In the time of George III it didn’t quite work out that way, but what will happen now—in the time of King Barack I? Will our couch potato and “reality show” generation, after over 150 years of public school “education” have the intestinal fortitude to do what the patriots in April of 1775 did? That remains to be seen. At this point I am doubtful and I hope I am wrong.

I have talked to several folks in this area that are hunters and none of them relishes the idea of having their guns confiscated and there are lots of hunters in the South, and other places. Obama and his handlers have to realize this and so I think they may end up doing this confiscation in stages. On the basis of these false flag shooting events in Newtown and other places I think they will make a pitch to get “assault rifles” banned while promising to leave the hunters’ deer rifles and “thirty-thirties” and shotguns alone. If such is the plan this will be done to neutralize the hunters so they will think “I don’t have to worry, he’s not coming after my guns.” And he won’t come after your guns—yet. But if he gets all the semi-automatics banned, how long will it be before we have another false flag shooting somewhere and the shooter uses a deer rifle? What then? You know the answer to that—now we have to have another congressional committee or a committee of some kind appointed by King Barack I to study the feasibility of banning deer rifles. Need I go any further? You all know where this is headed—total gun confiscation—whether they can do it quickly or whether it takes a little longer.

They may try to set the gun-owning community at odds with one another—the hunters vs. the survivalists or whatever. That weakens the gun-owners’ position—get them to start arguing with one another about what should be banned and when and they have neutralized you. The classic “divide and conquer” strategy.

Personally, I think King Barack I would love to get rid of all the guns yesterday, all at once, but his Council on Foreign Relations handlers probably won’t let him go that fast. They will make him do it a little slower, a little more gradually so the gun-owning community will not all get upset all at once when they see the proposals the federal government puts forth.
Since most Americans educated in public schools are seldom taught real history they do not know that the Second Amendment was put into the Bill of Rights so citizens would be able to protect themselves from a tyrannical government, not so they could hunt on the weekend.

Protection from federal tyranny was, and is, the real reason for the Second Amendment. For that reason, alone, citizens should not be prohibited from owning semi-automatic rifles, which are really not “assault rifles.”
King Barack I will do only what he has to do through Congress, which is more and more becoming a useless appendage, there only to fool the public into thinking they still have representative government while Obama really rules via executive decree as all dictators do.

It remains to be seen what gun owners will do when the rubber meets the road and confiscation of guns is ordered. Let us hope that, by God’s grace, they will uphold the Second Amendment.

They’re Worried About Public Safety? Hogwash! It’s All About Gun Confiscation

By Al Benson Jr.

On October 16, 1859 abolitionist/terrorist John Brown and his followers (gang) seized the Federal arsenal and armory in Harpers Ferry, Virginia. Brown’s forlorn hope, financed by some wealthy Northeasterners, who did not want to get their hands dirty while spilling Southern blood and promoting slave revolts, did not go well in Harpers Ferry. Interestingly, while supposedly trying to liberate slaves, Brown and his men were confronted by a black railroad baggage handler named Hayward Shepherd. Supposedly Shepherd was a free black. Brown’s men killed him.

The hoped-for slave revolt did not materialize, and what was worse, some of the townfolks there began shooting at Brown and his men. Local militia companies gathered, surrounding the armory and cutting off escape for Brown and his men.

If the federal government in that day had reacted like our federal government today the first thing they would have sought to do “in the name of public safety” was to disarm all the honest citizens in the town so they couldn’t shoot back at Brown’s men. Next they would have disbanded the militias, probably arresting the militia leaders and trying them for terrorism. After all, it is terrorism when you resist evil isn’t it? Our government “leaders” today seem to think it is.

After the spate of recent shootings in gun free zones the government’s answer to gun laws that are already being broken is more gun laws and eventual confiscation. Oh they will give lip service to the Second Amendment all the while they are trying to destroy it “in the name of public safety.”

There was an informative article on http://www.dailykos.com  for December 21, 2012 entitled “How to Ban Guns: A step by step, long term process.” Very informative article on how to effectually destroy the Second Amendment. I’m sure the total government types in Congress may have taken some pointers from it, if they didn’t already have a gun control bill sitting on Ms. Feinstein’s desk waiting for the right crisis to come along.

The ultra-liberal Mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg said, in the middle of last December, that Obama should just bypass Congress and issue an executive order on gun control, and that if he didn’t then 48,000 people would be killed with illegal guns. How does he know how many will be killed? Has someone told him?

Columnist Jan Morgan stated: “It seems to me that Bloomberg’s view of America is more like a Communist dictatorship rather than President of a Republic. Of course Bloomberg know the only way dictators can rule lives is to take away their ability to rise up and fight back against tyranny.” Obama knows that too—that’s why he and his handlers in the CFR want our guns—and for some reason they seem to feel that they need to confiscate them right now. Are they planning something they are afraid the public at large will shoot back at them for? Wouldn’t surprise me.

Another leftist mayor, Rahm Emmanuel from Chicago is also taking the same approach. He’d love all the guns all over the country to be confiscated “in the name of public safety” naturally. This from a man who is the mayor of a city that saw 500 people killed with illegal guns last year—and his solution—just ban all the legal guns. That will solve the problem. I somehow don’t think all the gang-bangers will line up in front of Mr. Emmanuel’s office next week to turn in their illegal weapons, and if the truth were known, neither does Mr. Emmanuel. But he’s not really worried about their guns—he wants yours! After all he’s the one that said “Never let a serious crisis go to waste” and his friends in Congress are implementing his advice in the wake of whatever it is that happened in Newtown, Connecticut. There have been so many conflicting stories that have come out of Newtown that who knows what happened anymore? All the supposed “shooters” in these cases either end up dead or mentally incapable of giving any testimony. Had I a suspicious mind it would make me wonder.

We’ve been told that “Newtown will be the 9/11 of gun control.” I take that to mean that there will be some sort of major push for major gun confiscation, again, “in the name of public safety.” It could be that the new gun control/registration/confiscation bill will be the “Patriot Act” of 2013.

Let’s don’t kid ourselves—this is all about doing away with the Second Amendment—gun confiscation. If the Second Amendment is gutted, then none of the other nine are safe—the Second protects the rest and our Marxist leadership realizes this—they just hope they can throw enough bovine fertilizer out there that the public doesn’t.

They figure the media has finally got the public worked up to enough of a fever pitch that they will now demand gun control and/or confiscation. Supposedly 58% of the people now favor gun control, and yet we are told that 51% do not want to see assault rifles banned. We are also told, according to http://patriotupdate.com  for Thursday, January 3, 2013 that “While gun control advocates are scrambling to label many of America’s rifles as ‘assault weapons’ and ban them (in order to keep us safe) the government’s own law enforcement agency stats prove that rifles are not the problem. According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle.”

The real reason for the Second Amendment has never been so Uncle Harry could have the governmental “privilege” of hunting squirrels on the weekend. The real reason for the Second Amendment is so that ordinary citizens can protect themselves from tyranny from their own government. Anyone that tells you it’s all about hunting and target shooting is lying to you. People need to realize what this Amendment is really for because the government is not about to tell you. Did you ever learn what it was all about while you were in public school? I didn’t think so—neither did I!

Your Second Amendment rights (not privileges) are what protect you from a tyrannical government—and just maybe that’s why the sudden push for gun control/registration/confiscation. Would this government like to take away your guns? In a New York, Bloomberg minute they would, and will if they can get by with it. We need to contact our senators and representatives and let them know we want them to vote against any new gun control/registration/confiscation schemes that far-left members of Congress bring up. We need to begin to do whatever we can morally and legitimately do to protect our Second Amendment rights  because we will get no help from this Marxist regime in that pursuit. And once those rights are gone, you won’t get them back. Think about that. Remember, it’s not really all about “public safety.” It’s about taking your guns away.

Are We Being Suckered Yet Again?

By Al Benson Jr.

For any who have watched Speaker of the House John Boehner, you have to realize that he has made a career, as House Speaker, out of caving in to whatever demands our Marxist-in-Chief makes, no matter how ludicrous they are. You have to say that Boehner is the “loyal (CFR inspired) opposition”  to Obama’s Marxism, which means that he is no opposition at all but the Republicans try to make him look like he is.

The game has gotten so transparent that even some conservative Republicans in Washington can now see through it and they are demanding that Boehner resign when or before Congress convenes to enact Obama’s gun confiscation proposals. I saw one report that noted that the Republicans are already to cave in on that but they don’t want that to be made public as they want to engage us in the charade of thinking they are actually going to oppose Obama’s confiscation agenda.

Interestingly, some of the conservatives that want Boehner to resign are planning to support Eric Cantor as his replacement. This is supposed to be a conservative move in the right (no pun intended) direction. I wonder how many of these well-intentioned folks know anything about Eric Cantor. Maybe before they put his name up to replace Boehner, if they get to that point, they should do a little homework on Mr. Cantor to find out where he is really coming from. However, I don’t expect that to happen. Having some inkling of how Washington works, I have a funny feeling that if Boehner resigns, Eric Cantor as his replacement may be a done deal. It would be nice to be wrong and have the conservatives pick someone really conservative but I have a gut feeling that ain’t about to happen.

Cantor has all the right $$$ credentials and friends. In fact, as far back as November 2011, author Michael Collins Piper wrote an article in the American Free Press entitled “Wall Street ‘Mob’ bankrolls powerful Rep. Eric Cantor.”

Mr. Piper noted that Cantor is “unique” among House members—that while most of the rely on campaign contributions from their own districts, Cantor has “…an unusually expansive array of contributions pouring in from across the country…A brief sampling of Cantor’s New York state contributors demonstrates the real clout of these big Wall Street names—with wide-ranging ties to the international plutocratic elite—who are bankrolling this influential congressional power broker.” In other words, the big bucks boys are behind Cantor, which means that he has no real concern for the middle class.

Piper mentioned several of those that have financially aided Cantor and they are an interesting group. If you never heard of some of them it’s because the media and their masters have deemed that you should not be aware of them. One of them is Kenneth Bialkin. Piper described him as: “a longtime crime syndicate legal mouthpiece, former national chairman of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith…He is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.”

Another one he noted was Henry Kravis, who he described as: “A member of both the CFR and the Rothschild-controlled Bilderberg group…” And he also mentioned one James Tisch, who “bought control of CBS in the 1980s, is another CFR member and a scion of the billionaire Tisch family…These are just a few of the powerful New Yorkers who’ve been channeling funds to Cantor’s political enterprises.”

So it would seem that, even if the conservatives manage to cower Boehner into resigning as Speaker all we are going to get out of it is one more person sponsored by our ruling elite who will follow the agenda set up by the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderbergers and the rest of the One World crowd. Hardly anything changes in Washington except to get worse. So let’s keep an eye out and see if anything materializes out of all this jockeying around for power—at the expense of the taxpayer.