The Burning Platform

Submitted by Brandon Smith of Alt-Market.com,

I have no personal experience in the business of false flag terrorism, but I imagine that engineering a successfully staged terror attack to be blamed on innocent or semi-innocent parties with the goal of psychologically manipulating a population requires that one also be an accomplished storyteller.  It demands an avid imagination and an organized sense of foresight.  And, most of all, it requires a consistency of narrative.  Without consistency, the audience’s ability to suspend its disbelief is damaged, and they become disconnected from the fantasy being portrayed.

If I were the “writer” behind the “story” of the Boston Marathon Bombing, I would consider my efforts an abject failure. 

The narrative of the event has changed multiple times in only a few days, following a hailstorm of conflicting observations from the government and the establishment-run media.  The “villain” of the original plotline was clearly meant to be “rightwing extremism” as numerous mainstream talking heads, led by federal agency inferences, began repeating the “homegrown right wing terrorist” meme everywhere.  This meme was partly abandoned after the alternative media and the Liberty Movement began its own investigation, revealing a large federal presence on the scene, including military Civil Support Teams often tied to the DHS and Northcom, as well as the witnesses who observed what on-scene officials called “training exercises” during the marathon.  I have no doubt that these citizen investigations forced the establishment to change the direction of their crime tale, and use Plan B patsies instead.  This, however, complicated the momentum of the fiction, and created even more questions. 

The Chechen brothers now implicated in the attack have been revealed as long time FBI contacts.  This is a bit awkward for the FBI considering they asked the American public to help them “identify the suspects in on-scene photos” while they failed to mention that they knew EXACTLY who the two young men were already (this is what we might call a contrived story arch).  Today, the older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, is conveniently dead.  The younger brother, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, had his throat conveniently shot out. The feds are now supplying the media with “written confessions” from Dzhokhar to which there is no proof of legitimacy.  For all we know the boy hasn’t written a word.      

The new “villains” get no voice in this drama, and thus become two dimensional characters.  They exist so that we can hate them.  Understanding them, or hearing their side of events from their own lips, is certainly out of the question.  Poorly fleshed out antagonists are a sure sign of a poorly constructed story.

Finally, we get to the “heroes”.  Though the criminal elements of our federal government and adjoining alphabet agencies did not yet get the right wing patriot patsy they obviously wanted, they have still so far gleaned considerable social capital from the bombings.  The point of a false flag is to frighten the population of any given nation into relinquishing freedom in the name of safety, which in the process gives the central government even more control.  In the wake of the Boston attack, the establishment is having a field day…

Martial Law Conditioning

For a few days, Boston became an Orwellian nightmare.  The city lockdown and subsequent militarization was swift, though any intelligent and guilty suspect could have easily left the area before hand.  This kind of response to catch only two supposed perpetrators is outlandish, unless you understand that it was not about catching the bombers.  Rather, it was an exercise designed to test the malleability of the American people during a crisis scenario.  In Watertown, residents were not only forced into lockdown; they were also subjected to house-to-house searches without warrant, pat downs, and numerous other violations of their 4th Amendment rights.  Take note that almost everything you see in the video below is an illegal and unconstitutional action on the part of Boston authorities:

As this was occurring, officials were consistently pushing media cameras away from the area in the name of “safety”, even though media cameramen are sent into domestic shootouts and foreign warzones on a regular basis.  The only real purpose that I can see to removing them from the scene was to reduce the amount of video footage depicting these illegal searches and seizures:

For those who can’t grasp what has happened here, let me explain; the dynamics of liberty have just been erased.  This kind of behavior on the part of government will not be limited to disasters like Boston, or New Orleans during Katrina; a precedence is being set to use martial law-style tactics anywhere for any reason at anytime.  The “national security argument” is being used as a free license to institute any measure regardless of law to achieve a particular combat objective.  The environment we saw in the dark days of Boston is an environment we’ll soon see all over the country, and here is why…

Escalation

Boston represents a clear escalation of the use of NDAA and martial law measures in the aftermath of a security event.  After the arrest of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 2012, his Miranda Rights under the Constitution were denied due to “extraneous circumstances of national security”.  Numerous lawmakers called for the suspect to be treated as an “enemy combatant” so that he could be interrogated under the laws of war without due process:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/22/dzhokhar-tsarnaev-enemy-combatant_n_3132815.html

The Obama White House has cleverly called for a civilian trial of Tsarnaev in order to reduce criticisms of its support for numerous unconstitutional measures, including the NDAA and the use of assassination against American citizens.  The White House has always claimed that it would not use the combatant provisions against American citizens, but has never denied that those provisions could be applied to us.  The idea is that while the president does have these powers at his disposal, we’re supposed to have “faith” that he will not abuse them.  During the debate over the passage of the NDAA, Obama opposed certain language within the legislation that REQUIRED him to treat accused domestic terrorists as enemy combatants, not because he thought it was wrong, or unconstitutional, but because he wanted the OPTION to decide whether he would or would not black bag a citizen and throw him into an unspecified hole.   He has simply exercised his “option” for a citizen trial, at least this time around…

In the meantime, a simultaneous and so far poorly verified “train attack” has been averted in Canada, opening the door for more discussion on something the establishment has been trying to squeeze out of the populace for years:  consent for the federalized lockdown of travel and public events.  Whether through TSA, or the use of state authorities under the watch of the DHS, the government has been desperately clamoring to expand the control grid out of airports and federal buildings into the bus stations, subways, trains, highways and sidewalks of America:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/23/us-arrests-usa-railroads-idUSBRE93M1IZ20130423

I believe that we will soon see much greater presence of TSA VIPR teams at large public arenas and in transportation venues outside of airports, and that the Boston Bombing will be used as a primer for this expansion.  Recent comments by NY Mayor Michael Bloomberg only reinforce my belief.  Bloomberg, in reference to the marathon attack, stated that:

“…we live in a complex word where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.”

“Look, we live in a very dangerous world. We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms. New Yorkers probably know that as much if not more than anybody else after the terrible tragedy of 9/11…”

“We have to understand that in the world going forward, we’re going to have more cameras and that kind of stuff. That’s good in some sense, but it’s different from what we are used to…”

Ironically, the only enemy out there that appears ready to “take our freedoms away” are men like Bloomberg; snakes in the grass that pay lip service to the Constitution while constantly trying to undermine it. 

Free Speech Is Next

The bombings in Boston took place, apparently by coincidence, just before Oath Keepers, a national organization of current serving military, police officers, and veterans promoting adherence to their constitutional oath was to hold a large rally at Lexington Green.  The Lexington Green board, one member of which had been openly hostile to Oath Keepers in the past, decided to use the crisis as an excuse to deny the rally permit already attained by the liberty minded group. 

The Lexington Selectmen claimed that under the suggestions of “state officials” the rally had to be cancelled due to the “lack of police” available to secure the area and ensure public safety.  However, when Oath Keepers held a brief oath ceremony at the Green in protest of the decision, a police force was sent to watch them:

http://lexington.patch.com/articles/amid-manhunt-mayhem-oath-keepers-assemble-by-lexington-s-battle-green

This means that public safety was not the issue.  Rather, safety and security were being used yet again to deny a constitutional right, and this time it was the most vital and valuable right of all – free speech.

During the height of the civil rights marches of the 50’s and 60’s, the exact same tactics were used to silence dissent.  Black protesters were told that they could not obtain proper permits for peaceful marches because their “own safety” and the safety of the public could not be ensured.  This matter of using broad hypothetical dangers as a catalyst for censorship was finally argued before the Supreme Court in Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham.  The court sided with the protestors, pointing out that the use of undefined safety concerns and “prior restraint” to silence speech was unconstitutional.  Unfortunately, the decision has not prevented the U.S. government from slowly undermining public protest rights ever since.  

The fascinating thing about incremental tyranny is the way in which naïve members of our society try to rationalize it.  They debate using logical fallacies like:

“How have your rights been violated in particular?  If your rights haven’t been violated, what right do you have to complain?”

And how about this gem…

“Yeah, there are problems in this country, but at least we have some freedom.  In many countries, you wouldn’t be allowed to complain the way you are…”

This is statist psychology at work.  Freedom, in their minds, is a privilege doled out by governments, rather than an inborn attribute outside of the realm of law.  They do not understand that the violation of the rights of one American is a violation of the rights of ALL Americans.  They do not understand that the destruction of some constitutional protections will one day lead to the destruction of ALL constitutional protections. 

The establishment and the useful idiots they manipulate want to make the “threat” the center of attention, but ultimately, the threat is irrelevant.  There will always be the danger of terrorism and death.  Always!  And, if our government is following the Operation Gladio false flag model (look it up, folks, it was openly admitted government funded terrorism), as I believe they are, then we can count on Boston-style bombings all over the U.S. very soon. 

True crisis lay in what we refuse to see, and the greatest crisis today is not the bombing of a marathon, but the destruction of our freedoms in the name of “security”.  The bottom line?  Our civil liberties are not up for compromise.  Period.  Shootings, bombs, nukes, nothing!  There is no rationalization that will ever make tyranny a moral enterprise.  I, like many other Americans, do not care what boogeyman fantasy is paraded in front of me.  We are not frightened, and we are not ignorant.  No attack, no matter how heinous, will ever convince us to hand over our freedom.

Submitted by Brandon Smith of Alt-Market blog,

Preparation for disaster, whether natural or man-made, should be as vital as any ideal found in the various practices of religion and spiritualism. Preparedness should be treated with reverence, discipline and duty. The drive for preparation should be seated in the very heart of humanity. As individuals and as a society, we should hold preparedness dear, for it is an expression of the desire for survival and the key to maintaining our inherent freedoms. Without self-sufficiency, we set ourselves up for endless failure and enslavement.

Preparedness must be approached with passionate resolve; otherwise, there is no point. Halfhearted survivalists are just as likely, if not more likely, to get themselves killed as the average oblivious urbanite and suburbanite. Unfortunately, even in the liberty movement, I have come across many halfhearted and lazy survivalists who would rather hope for the best than prepare for the worst.

The primary issue has always been one of “distraction.” Even those who are fully informed of the very real and immediate dangers to our economy and our Nation as a whole find it difficult not to get wrapped up in the concerns of the old America. Mind-numbing job environments, superficial family dramas, television hypnosis, Facebook narcissism, consumer addictions, improving one’s perceived social status: all of these things waste precious time in our daily lives, making us weak and sapping our resiliency. They encourage us toward apathy. Always, we are telling ourselves: “I did nothing today, but tomorrow will be different.”

I hear many excuses and conflicts in my work as an economic analyst and preparedness adviser. Some come from people who are already in the liberty movement and should know better. Others come from people who for one reason or another seek to dissuade us from personal preparation. Here are just a handful of the many irrational arguments against survival planning that I am confronted with on a daily basis.

“Prepping Is For Crazy People And Chicken Littles”

Catastrophes occur all the time. Sometimes they are regional, sometimes they are national, and sometimes they are global. Since the age of the baby boomer, America has been spared widespread disaster for the most part, and this has bred in us a deep-rooted normalcy bias. We wander about in ignorance, thinking that tomorrow will always be just as comfortable as today and that because we have never witnessed real pain and suffering, we likely never will. To me, this attitude is far more unbalanced and insane than the forward-thinking mindset of the average prepper.

Hilariously, survivalists are called “crazy” simply because they refuse to operate on foolish assumptions like the rest of society. We know from modern historical example — from the Great Depression to Weimar Germany to the collapse of the Soviet Union, Bosnia, Argentina, Greece, etc. — that the prepared and independent live, while the rest often die. We refuse to assume, especially in light of recent events, that such calamity will not occur in the United States.

“Survivalism Is Stigmatized By Unpleasant Associations”

It’s true, propaganda organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center have gone out of their way to attack and marginalize survival culture. They seek to draw false associations between us and racist, extremist domestic terrorist, blah, blah, blah. In the end, none of this matters. The SPLC is an irrelevant entity clamoring desperately for relevance, and America’s survival communities continue to grow despite their subversive activities. The truth, once recognized, has a way of steamrolling over groups of liars.

Individual preppers and potential preppers need to stop worrying about what everyone else thinks and do what they need to do to ensure the longevity of themselves and their families. Labels are only as powerful as the credence we give them.

“My Family Is Not On Board”

I hear this one all the time; and, really, it doesn’t matter. If you can’t take preparatory actions without constant approval from your family, then perhaps you need to examine your family dynamic rather than throwing away your survival plans. Doing the right thing is not reliant on the affirmations of a spouse or relative. Doing the right thing means taking action regardless of the obstacle, even if that obstacle is family.

It might not seem like it now, but survivalism is worth all those late-night quarrels, angry stares and sarcastic rolling eyes. If they can’t accept that preparedness is a part of your life, then that is ultimately their problem, not yours. You can continue in the knowledge that, one day, they will thank you for ignoring their ankle-biting and self-absorption.

“I’m Always Too Busy”

No one is too busy for preparedness. Much of what the average American does each day is designed to distract and entertain him, rather than enrich him in a useful way. The sad reality of the American lifestyle is that it revolves around the desire to avoid being alone with our own thoughts. In fact, the consumer ideology thrives on people’s need to fill the vacuum with incessant entertainment and diversion. Much of what we call being “busy” is actually a self-created matrix of illusory and shallow amusement designed to help us forget the more important and vexing matters of the world.

Turn off the TV, skip a few parties, rethink the career you hate, take your eyes off your damn iPhone for a day and consider what is really important. Stop worrying about what is comfortable and accept that very soon all the conveniences you now find yourself attached to may disappear anyway. Wean yourself off the teat of the establishment now or be forced to go cold turkey later. These are your options. Get used to it.

“I Can’t Afford To Prepare”

In some cases, I find this to be true. We are, after all, in the midst of an economic collapse, and many Americans are indeed falling into poverty. However, in at least half of the instances where I hear this excuse, it turns out not to be true.

Every survivalist starts out with nothing. He first builds a foundation, usually with a storage made up of essential bulk foods, and then expands. Food is the greatest Achilles’ heel of our culture. With the freight system our country has in place, grocery stores keep little to no real inventory and only a normal week’s worth of supplies on the shelf at any given time. During a crisis, this food disappears within hours, not days. Any imbalance in our freight system (like an explosion in gas prices) would result in a complete loss of national supply. A mere six weeks of disruption (as things stand today) would likely wipe out about 80 percent to 90 percent of the U.S. population through starvation.

Today, a single paycheck ($600 to $1,200) could be used to purchase enough dry bulk foods to last a family of four close to a year. Though variety may be lost, at least starvation is averted. Yet, many people, including those in the liberty movement, do not have even a year’s supply of basic staples, despite their low cost. If every family in the United States used one paycheck to purchase a food foundation, the effects of an economic collapse would be vastly minimized.

“I Like The Convenience Of The City, Even Though It Will Be Dangerous During Collapse”

The city is a distraction addict’s paradise. There is always something to mesmerize the senses at any given hour. On top of this, many cities are slathered with Federal funds, which the cities use to pour into beautification projects that give residents the illusion of economic improvement and progress. On a recent speaking tour in the Los Angeles area, I was reminded of the conundrum of the city environment. Millions of people on welfare and food stamps, exponential homelessness, massive potential for violence and destruction: yet they are surrounded by sharp, sleek, new shopping centers and refurbished business districts. The reality of many cities is that they are financially imploding, but on the surface everything glows like gold. This gives the average person and even some preppers a false sense of security.

If they refuse to move away from their beloved metropolis, preppers should at least have a retreat location relatively far from the area — at minimum, a day’s drive away and several days’ walking distance. If you do not have this, you are not prepared. The bottom line is: more people, more problems. Anyone who claims otherwise has never studied the collapse histories of other modernized nations.

“What’s The Point Of Preparing? You’re All Going To Die Anyway”

This is the nihilist argument, and it’s my favorite. Nihilists are weak-minded and weak-spirited people who realize, at least subconsciously, that they are incapable of struggle and survival. Deep down, they feel shame and self-loathing. But they would never admit to this openly. Instead, they project their weaknesses on the rest of humanity. In their mind, if they can’t survive, nobody can survive. By assuming that their weakness is everybody’s weakness, they protect their own fragile ego and avoid admitting that they are the only ones that have no chance of weathering a disaster.

“Stop Living In Fear: Humanity Is Adaptable, Technology Will Save Us”

This is probably the most idiotically pretentious philosophy being peddled around the liberty movement today, and it stems from what I call “delusional optimism.” You see, looking into the abyss and accepting the fact that you are about to be pushed over the edge is a difficult thing to do. Some people respond to the terror through fantasy. They imagine that the worst could not possibly happen, that there will be no consequences, that the pain of hitting the bottom will not be so bad, that in mid-drop someone will come along and teach them to fly. They search and search for that silver bullet solution that will save them from the wretched horror of full-blown social destruction.

This delusion manifests itself in many ways, but lately I have seen it coalesce in a movement toward technology worship.

Hell, I’m a fan of new technologies, too. And I certainly believe that many of them are suppressed by the establishment to keep the masses physically and psychologically dependent. That said, I am not foolhardy enough to believe that the mere presence of these technologies alone will save us from fiscal collapse and totalitarianism. Given time (lots of time), new technologies could help the masses break away from the mainstream system. This is time, I’m sorry to say, that we do not have. As I have discussed in recent articles on our economic situation, any tremor in the global system will be enough to send the entire edifice crashing down.

Hoping for a slow steady grind until we are able to adopt fantastic new tech is pushing the envelope of logic.

We already have the technological capability for the average person to live comfortably off the grid with electricity and other amenities we have grown fond of; yet the establishment elites are still in power, and they are still engineering numerous misfortunes. Until they are removed from power, no amount of invention is going to change a thing.  The technological fantasy is used by many people to avoid the reality that a very ugly fight is coming, and whether they like it or not, they may have to one day experience and perhaps even participate in that ugliness.

Finally, survivalists do not do what they do out of fear. We do what we do out of love. We love freedom. We love the principles of liberty that founded this country. We love our children and seek to secure their futures. We are not afraid of collapse, because we are ready for collapse. We do not need to con ourselves with false optimism and false hope, because we have already strengthened our souls with reason and courage. True survivalists are exactly what every American should be already; honorable individuals steeped in the confidence of their own ability to handle any adversity, no matter how monstrous it may be.

Submitted by Brandon Smith of Alt-Market.com,

Whenever I endeavor to explain America’s current economic situation to a person who likely receives most of his information from skewed mainstream news sources, I try to use two comparisons; the Great Depression, and Weimar Germany, because what we are experiencing is actually a combination of elements from both events.  Some people, unfortunately, have little understanding of the Weimar hyperinflationary crisis, but at the very least, the imagery of the Great Depression is present in the minds of most Americans, if only through television and film. 

When the depression is mentioned, they begin to grasp the gravity of our fiscal disaster, or at least what I am trying to convey.  However, those slow on the draw almost always sneer at the validity of the threat.  After all, during the Great Depression, there were bank runs, endless soup kitchen lines, roving masses of dirty homeless drifters looking for employment, shanty towns, and desperation everywhere.  We’ve all seen the old stock black and white photos, and the America of today looks nothing similar… 

We have shopping malls and imported fineries.  We have sports cars and HDTV and video games and iPads and Disneyland and pharmaceuticals in every color of the rainbow!  We have tract homes and gated communities and condos and beach houses and summer vacations and first-class flights and texting and nightclubs and lattes and credit cards!  When we turn on cable news, what do we see?  Progress!  Glorious progress!  All is in “recovery”.  All is as it was yesterday.  All is well…

For the average unaware citizen, as long as the commercials and the fast food continue, there is nothing to be concerned about.  What they have overlooked is that in this country we have had for at least the past decade the illusion of prosperity, and nothing more.  Our modern citizenry looks back at the Great Depression and sees a deteriorating exterior that matched the true state of the interior crisis.  They look at today, and see a fresh, glimmering, glossy exterior that cleverly hides the rotting financial sinew underneath.

They do not grasp how today’s implosion could be worse than that of any crisis yet seen in our history while still maintaining a visual facade of working order. 

In recent articles I discussed the black magic of the stock market, and summarized a position I have held for a very long time: 

That the Federal Reserve has been injecting a very large percentage of its QE, or fiat stimulus, into the Dow in order to keep the market propped and seemingly prosperous.  That this has been done by fueling international banks with capital and then allowing the institutions to flood stocks with purchase orders as well as direct interventions by the Fed itself. 

What seemed obvious to those of us in independent economic analysis has been called “conspiracy theory” for the past few years.  Finally, the cat has been let out of the bag by former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan (the same man who admitted that the Federal Reserve is an independent entity that answers to no one, not even Congress, ending decades of misinformation).  In the following interview, Greenspan states quite nonchalantly that “only the stock market matters”, meaning, that the market is no longer a reflector of legitimate economic health or decrepitude, rather, it has become a primary psychological driver.  For Greenspan and the Fed, fundamental indicators like true supply and demand are of no importance.  The market must be kept inflated at all costs, because its success, no matter how artificial, is the only thing keeping our system from breaking apart:

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000148510&play=1

Richard Fisher of the Dallas Federal Reserve, clearly in response to Greenspan’s comments, openly admitted in a recent interview that the central bank has “artificially sustained markets”:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-02-21/least-they-are-finally-honest

This is, of course, dangerously backwards.  Strong data and legitimate profits are supposed to drive market psychology, which in turn is supposed to increase stock performance.  Instead, the market is being manipulated in order to maintain a false sense of economic optimism and keep ignorant investors and consumers spending in the hopes that tomorrow will bring better tidings! 

Interestingly, the latest minutes from the Fed indicate a “push for tapering” on bond market purchases, and a diminishment of QE, which is currently pumping over $85 billion per month into our fiscal structure.  Part of this effort has been led by Fisher, who owns over $1 million in personal gold holdings (meaning it is doubtful the banker believes that the Fed will actually stop printing, or that the dollar is going to hold its value for much longer).  I believe this is a bit of theater designed to remind the country how addicted to fiat we now are, as well as set the stage for the government alone (instead of the government in collusion with central bankers) to be blamed as the scapegoat for an inevitable collapse. 

Both Greenspan and Fisher in their latest interviews subtly introduce the meme that government indecision and “partisan bickering” are the ultimate culprits behind the continuing dysfunction of the economy.  Both parties do indeed play a role in the crisis, but not in the manner that central bankers assert.  The government’s greatest crime was allowing the private Federal Reserve to operate with impunity and create the mortgage and derivatives bubble in the first place, while aiding it in policies of inflation and manipulation.  The government is a danger to our fiscal system not because of “indecision”, but because it takes its marching orders from the Federal Reserve and colludes in now openly admitted market manipulation.   

Will the Fed cut off the flow of stimulus?  Possibly.

It is important to note that talk of a QE reduction has surfaced right as the Federal Government is set to make a decision on spending cuts and the raising of the national debt ceiling.  The first cuts, now called the “sequester” (a nicer word for “austerity”), will be administered in early March, and will apparently affect everything from school teaching positions to employment at the Department of Defense.  The White House claims that such cuts will damage the U.S. “recovery” and send the nation hurtling back into recession. 

Obama is, in a sense, correct.  However, I would point out that the federal cuts alone will not be the catalyst for collapse.  The Federal Reserve’s move to reduce QE in conjunction with cuts would be the true trigger of fiscal calamity…a controlled calamity with a purpose…

America’s financial and social systems only function today because of one thing – government spending.  The government is “officially” indebted in the amount of $16 trillion.  Unofficially, the number is closer to $120 trillion.  These massive liabilities have been accrued mainly through entitlement programs and state welfare.  Foreign investment in U.S. Treasury bonds does not produce anywhere near the capital needed to maintain such programs, which is why the Federal Reserve is now the world largest holder of U.S. debt (surpassing even China).  Without the Fed’s endless printing and bond buying schemes, the government cannot continue entitlement programs, and, it cannot feed money to dependent states.  These programs are the only thing keeping the illusion of a normal economy alive.

To give you a sense of what I mean (keep in mind that real numbers are likely much worse than reported statistics)…

Despite talk of recovery, U.S. poverty levels have hit all time highs.  Over 50 million Americans are below the official poverty line:

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012/11/15/census-u-s-poverty-rate-spikes-nearly-50-million-americans-affected/

In 2009, food stamp enrollment stood at around 32 million Americans.  Today that number has grown to around 48 million; a 50% increase in only 5 years:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/more_americans_on_food_stamps_QfLsaSyEHbnWxAZ0z7MMEP

The number of citizens on federal disability is at record highs, climbing to almost 9 million people, and has expanded every month for the past 192 months:

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/8830026-americans-disability-hits-new-record-192nd-straight-month

Requests for emergency food assistance are on the rise in most cities across the country, and homeless numbers continue to climb:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/20/us-usa-economy-hunger-idUSBRE8BJ14I20121220

Now ask yourself this:  How many people in this country rely on government money for most if not all of their survival needs? 

Without government funding, and without the fiat printing press at the Federal Reserve to feed that funding, the veil of financial recovery fades away, not just in the stock market, but everywhere.  All the poverty that has remained hidden for the past five years will suddenly be visible on our streets and doorsteps.  Welfare programs to individuals and to states ARE the modern day soup lines.  When they go, those reliant on them have nowhere to turn. 

Already, homeless shelters in numerous states are suffering from funding shortfalls and many are closing their doors:

http://www.christianpost.com/news/las-largest-emergency-homeless-shelter-seeks-funds-to-survive-77494/

http://bangordailynews.com/2012/12/10/news/midcoast/midcoasts-only-homeless-shelter-abruptly-closes-no-reason-given/

http://www.wbaltv.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/Tough-times-lead-to-homeless-shelter-s-closure/-/10131532/17589782/-/122ke1n/-/index.html?absolute=true

http://www.khou.com/news/Woman-seeks-help-as-her-southwest-Houston-homeless-shelter-faces-closure–177795891.html

Food Banks are stricken with heavy demand and a dwindling supply.  Interestingly, government cuts to food bank spending are being blamed on high food prices due to the latest “drought”.  No mention of inflation caused by dollar devaluation, of course:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/21/us-usa-hunger-holiday-idUSBRE8AK08Q20121121

The lesson here is that no one, not even the government, has the ability to “spend their way out of debt”.  And no one, including central bankers, has the ability to cure economic collapse by printing money out of thin air.  But the bankers already know this… 

The Fed is discussing QE reductions in the face of a “burgeoning recovery”, but they know as well as you and I that the fundamentals show no economic improvement whatsoever.  Why else would they manipulate the stock market with fiat stimulus?  Why else would they manipulate bond markets with fiat stimulus?  Why else would they keep interest rates at near zero and throw essentially free money at international banks?  Because this is their only means of hiding the reality they know to be true.   

Why would they suddenly decide to reduce QE when they KNOW that the result will be the fast moving exposure of true instability with the U.S.? 

There are two reasons that I would make such a move if I were them…

First, they have done this song and dance before; allowing markets to dive in the face of a prospective end to stimulus, and then jumping in to save the day with even larger fiat injections.  The Fed’s decision to spread the rumor of QE cuts just before the government is to decide on austerity measures and the debt ceiling is no accident.  The combination of Fed cuts and government cuts may be a deliberate effort to create a shock event that leads to the next stage of U.S. implosion.  Government cuts and “party conflict” (fake party conflict) will provide cover for the real cause of destabilization; the Fed’s shut down of the fiat life support machine.  The masses blame the lack of government “compromise”, and the Fed moves back in later with even more overwhelming QE measures, slowing the crisis slightly.

Second, the Fed and the globalists at the seat of our government may very well be preparing the populace for a default scenario.  Central banks around the world have been purchasing record amounts of gold, and establishing bilateral trade agreements that remove the dollar as the world reserve currency.  They are undoubtedly getting ready for extreme devaluation in the U.S. dollar.   

If QE is cut, or restricted to the point where debt obligations cannot be maintained, then this is exactly what will happen.  Again, government indecision and partisan debate will be blamed for the disaster while the Fed remains the “innocent bystander” who “tried to warn us all of what would happen…”   

The propaganda message sent to the public is: 

Government decentralization is going to destroy you.  Politics must be centralized and streamlined and checks and balances must be removed if you are to survive.  Politicians are unqualified to handle economic policy because they care too much about the opinions of citizens, who are too stupid to understand economic policy.  All fiscal decisions should be handled by the banking elite without interference so that they can remain “objective”.  The American economy is in need of a complete overhaul, and the American people need to hand over their economic sovereignty if they wish to continue any semblance of a comfortable living standard.

In the end, the madness of debt spending is going to annihilate this country anyway.  Fiat printing and infinite QE will eventually result in the dumping of our currency as the world reserve, causing devaluation and hyperstagflation.  Stimulus and the monetization of government liabilities are crippling us.  The problem is, this nation is irrevocably dependent on such measures.  Cuts will result in almost similar catastrophe, but on a faster time frame and perhaps a slightly shorter duration (depending on who runs the show in the aftermath).  I’ve been saying it since 2008 – there is no easy way out of this situation.  There is no silver bullet solution.  There will be struggle, and there will be consequence.  It is unavoidable.  All we have to decide now is how we will respond when the inevitable disaster comes.

Submitted by Brandon Smith from Alt-Market

Gun Rights: Are There Any Peaceful Solutions Left?

Throughout history, citizen disarmament generally leads to one of two inevitable outcomes:  Government tyranny and genocide, or, revolution and civil war.  Anti-gun statists would, of course, argue that countries like the UK and Australia have not suffered such a result.  My response would be – just give them time.   You may believe that gun control efforts are part and parcel of a totalitarian agenda (as they usually are), or, you may believe that gun registration and confiscation are a natural extension of the government’s concern for our “safety and well-being”.  Either way, the temptation of power that comes after a populace is made defenseless is almost always too great for any political entity to dismiss.  One way or another, for one reason or another, they WILL take advantage of the fact that the people have no leverage to determine their own cultural future beyond a twisted system of law and governance which is, in the end, easily corrupted.

The unawake and the unaware among us will also argue that revolution or extreme dissent against the establishment is not practical or necessary, because the government “is made of regular people like us, who can be elected or removed at any time”. 

This is the way a Republic is supposed to function, yes.  However, the system we have today has strayed far from the methods of a Free Republic and towards the machinations of a single party system.  Our government does NOT represent the common American anymore.  It has become a centralized and Sovietized monstrosity.  A seething hydra with two poisonous heads; one Democrat in name, one Republican in name.  Both heads feed the same bottomless stomach; the predatory and cannibalistic pit of socialized oligarchy.

On the Republican side, we are offered Neo-Con sharks like George W. Bush, John McCain, and Mitt Romney, who argue for “conservative” policies such as limited government interference and reduced spending, all while introducing legislation which does the exact opposite.  The recent passage of the “Safe Act” in New York with extensive Republican support proves that Republicans cannot be counted on to defend true conservative values. 

The Democrats get candidates like John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama, who claim to be anti-war and against government abuse of civil liberties, and yet, these same “progressive and compassionate” politicians now froth at the mouth like rabid dogs sinking their teeth into the flesh of the citizenry, expanding on every tyrannical initiative the Republicans began, and are bombing more civilian targets in more foreign countries than anyone with a conscience should be able to bear.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again; the government is not our buddy.  It is not our ally or friend.  It is not a “part of us”.  It is now a separate and dangerous entity.  A parasite feeding off the masses.  It has become a clear threat to the freedoms of average Americans.  It is time for the public to grow up, snap out of its childish delusions, and accept that there is no solace or justice to be found anymore in Washington D.C.  

Once we understand this fact, a question then arises – What do we do about it?  If we cannot redress our grievances through the election process because both parties favor the same authoritarian direction, and if our street protests are utterly ignored by the mainstream media and the establishment, and if civil suits do nothing but drag on for years with little to no benefit, then what is left for us?  Is the way of the gun the only answer left for the American people at this crossroads? 

I cannot deny that we are very close to such a conclusion.  Anyone who does deny it is living in a candy coated fantasy land.  However, there are still certain options that have not been exhausted, and we should utilize them if for no other reason than to maintain the moral high ground while the power elite continue to expose their own despotic innards.

State And County Nullification

The assertion of local authority in opposition to federal tyranny is already being applied across the country.  Multiple states, counties, and municipalities are issuing declarations of defiance and passing legislation which nullifies any future federal incursions against 2nd Amendment protections.  For instance, the Gilberton Borough Council in PA in conjunction with Police Chief Mark Kessler has recently adopted a resolution defending all 2nd Amendment rights within their municipal borders up to and including the denial of operations by federal officers:

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2013/02/03/first-molon-labe-town-in-america/

Approximately 283 county Sheriffs and multiple police officers have taken a hard stand, stating that they will either not aid federal enforcement officials with gun control related activities, or, that they will not allow such activities within their county, period:

http://cspoa.org/sheriffs-gun-rights/

This trend of dissent amongst law enforcement officials debunks the nihilistic view promoted by disinformation agents that “no one in law enforcement will have the guts to stand up to the government no matter how sour it turns”.   It has also shaken the Obama Administration enough that the White House is struggling to counter it by wining and dining police unions and sheriffs departments in order to form their own “coalition of the willing”.  Obama seems to believe that holding press conferences using children or police as background props will somehow earn him political capital in the battle for gun rights, but I have my doubts:

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-asks-police-help-pass-183056466.html

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/55716645-90/com-congress-doing-enforcement.html.csp

Multiple states have legislation on the table to nullify as well, and it would seem that the violent push by the establishment to extinguish the 2nd Amendment has actually sharply rekindled the public’s interest in States Rights and the 10th Amendment.

This does not mean, though, that we should rely on nullification alone.  While the gun grabbers are stumbling into severe resistance at the national level, some representatives are attempting to supplant gun rights at the state level, including New York, California, Washington State, and Missouri.  The goal here is obvious; counter states rights arguments by using anti-gun legislators to impose federal controls through the back door of state legislation.

They will claim that if we support states rights, then we have to abide by the decisions of regions like New York when they ban and confiscate firearms.  It’s sad how gun grabbers lose track of reality.  Neither federal authority, nor state authority, supplants the legal barriers of the Constitution itself, meaning, no federal or local authority has the right or power to remove our freedom of speech, our freedom of assembly, our freedom of privacy, OR our freedom to own firearms (including firearms of military utility).  The Constitution and the Bill of Rights supersede all other legal and political entities (including treaties, as ruled by the Supreme Court).  At least, that’s what the Founding Fathers intended when they established this nation.  The point is, a state is well within its rights to defy the Federal Government if it is enacting unconstitutional abuses, and the people are well within their rights to defy a state when it does the same.

Economic Nullification

There is actually a fantastic economic opportunity to be had by states and counties that nullify gun control legislation.  Many gun manufacturers and retail businesses are facing financial oblivion if the establishment has its way, and moving operations outside the U.S. is not necessarily practical for most of them (gun manufacturing is one of the last business models we still do better than the rest of the world).  Municipalities could offer safe haven to these businesses, allowing them to continue producing firearms and high capacity magazines, fulfill expanding public demand, and create a surging cash flow into their area while at the same time giving the federal government the finger.

This strategy does not come without dangers, though.  Many states and counties are addicted to federal funding, and some would go bankrupt without it.  The obvious first response by the feds to protesting local governments will be to cut off the river of cash and starve them into subservience. 

This brand of internal financial warfare can be countered by local governments by nullifying a few other unconstitutional regulations, including those issued by the EPA and the BLM.  States and counties could easily disable federal land development restrictions and begin using resource development as a means to generate supplemental income.  North Dakota is essentially doing this right now in the Bakken Oil Fields, becoming one of the few states in America that is actually creating legitimate high paying jobs (instead of part time wage slave jobs), and growing more prosperous every year.

This tactic is not limited to state governments either.  Counties also have the ability, with the right officials involved, to regain control of their economic destinies anytime they want.  All it takes is the courage to rock the establishment boat.

Refuse All Registration Schemes

National firearms registration and gun databases are almost always followed by full gun confiscation.  The process is usually done in a standardized manner:  First demand extensive registration and cataloging of gun owners.  Second, ban more effective styles of weaponry, including semi-automatics and high capacity rifles (Let the sport hunters keep their bolt actions for a time, and lure them onto your side with the promise that they will get to keep their .270 or their 30-06).  Then take all semi-auto handguns.  Then, ban high powered magnum style bolt actions by labeling them “sniper rifles”.  Then demand that the gun owners that still remain allow official “inspections” of their home by law enforcement to ensure that they are “storing their weapons properly”.  Then, force them to move those weapons to a designated “warehouse or range”, locked away for any use other than recreational shooting.  Then, when the public is thoroughly disconnected from their original right to bear arms, take everything that’s left. 

Keep in mind that the federal government and certain state governments are acting as if they would like to skip ALL of the preliminary steps and go straight to full confiscation.  I am not discounting that possibility.  But, they may feign certain concessions in the near term in order to get the one thing they really want – full registration. 

Registration must be the line in the sand for every single gun owner in this country, whether they own several semi-automatics, or one pump action shotgun.  Once you give in to being registered, fingerprinted, photographed, and tracked wherever you decide to live like a convicted sexual predator, you have shown that you have no will or spirit.  You have shown that you will submit to anything.

After a full registration has been enacted, every gun (and maybe every bullet) will be tracked.  If confiscation is utilized, they know exactly what you have and what you should not have, and exactly where you are.  Criminals will still acquire weapons illegally, as they always have.  The only people who will suffer are law abiding citizens. It’s a recipe for dictatorship and nothing more.             

Gun Barter Networks

The retail firearms and ammo markets are Sahara dry right now, and will probably remain that way in the foreseeable future.  Anything that is available for purchase is usually twice the price it was last year.  Extremely high demand is removing retail from the picture before any legislation is even passed.  Enter barter…

Cash will remain a bargaining tool for as long as the dollar remains the world reserve currency and holds at least some semblance of value (this will end sooner than most people think).  That said, as gun items become scarce, the allure of cash may be supplanted.  The signs of this are already evident.

Gun owners are now looking more to trade firearms and accessories for OTHER firearms and accessories, because they know that once they sell an item, they may never see it again, and the usefulness of cash is fleeting.  Gun Barter is not only a way for firearms enthusiasts to get what they need, it is also a way for them to move around any future gun sale restrictions that may arise.  Private gun sales are legal in some states, but do not count on this to last.  Barter leaves no paper trail, and thus, no traceable evidence of transaction.  For those who fear this idea as “legally questionable”, all I can do is remind them that an unconstitutional law is no law at all.  If it does not adhere to the guidelines of our founding principles, our founding documents, and our natural rights, then it is just a bunch of meaningless words on a meaningless piece of paper signed by a meaningless political puppet.            

3D Printing And Home Manufacturing

3D Printing is now available to the public and for those with the money, I recommend they invest quickly.  Unless the establishment wants to make the possession of these printers illegal, as well as shut down the internet, there will be no way to stop data streamers from supplying the software needed to make molds for every conceivable gun part, including high capacity mags.  This technology has been effectively promoted by the Wiki Weapons Project:

http://defensedistributed.com/

According to current ATF law, the home manufacture of gun parts is not technically illegal, as long as they are not being produced for sale.  But in a state or county where federal gun laws have been nullified, what the ATF says is irrelevant. 

Home manufacturing of gun parts and ammo would be a highly lucrative business in such safe haven areas.  And, the ability to build one’s own self defense platform is a vital skill in a sparse market environment.  The ultimate freedom is being able to supply your own needs without having to ask for materials or permission from others.  It should be the goal of every pro-gun activist to reach this independence.

Force The Establishment To Show Its True Colors

While some in the general public may be incensed by the trampling of our freedoms by government, many (including myself) would view direct action and aimless French Revolution-style violence as distasteful and disastrous.  The moral high ground is all that any dissenting movement has.  It will be hard enough to keep this ground with the constant demonization of liberty minded people that is being espoused by propaganda peddlers like the SPLC and numerous media outlets.  We do not need to help them do their jobs.

Now, to be clear, I have NO illusions that the above strategies will defuse a confrontation between those who value freedom, and those who desire power.  The hope is that enough people within our population will refuse to comply, and that this will make any future despotism impossible to construct.  However, it is far more likely that these acts of defiance will elicit a brutal response from the government.  And in a way, that is exactly what we want…

The Founding Fathers went through steps very similar to those I listed above and more to counter the tightening grip of the British Empire during the first American Revolution.  The idea is simple:

Peacefully deny the corrupt system’s authority over your life by supplying your own needs and your own security, rather than lashing out blindly.  Force them to show their true colors.  Expose their dishonor and maliciousness.  Make them come after you like the predators they are, and then, once they can no longer play the role of the “defending hero” in the eyes of the public, use your right to self defense to send them a message they won’t forget.

Skeptics will claim that physical defense is useless against a technologically advanced enemy.  They will claim that we need a “majority” we do not have in order to prevail.  These are usually people who have never fought for anything in their lives.  They do not understand that the “odds” are unimportant.  They mean nothing.  No revolution for good ever begins with “majority support”.  Each is fought by a minority of strong willed and aware individuals.  When all other methods of protest have been dismantled, the system leaves us with only two options: stand and fight, or kneel and beg for mercy.  All you need to know is what YOU would do when faced with that choice.  

There is no other culture on earth that has the capacity, like Americans currently do, to defeat centralists, defend individual liberty, and end the pursuit of total global power in this lifetime.  We are the first and last line.  If freedom is undone here, it is undone everywhere for generations to come.  This is our responsibility.  This is our providence.  There can be no complacency.  There can be no compromise.  There can be no fear.  It ends on this ground.  One way, or another…

Feinstein’s Gun Control Bill Will Trigger The Next American Revolution

Submitted by Brandon Smith of Alt-Market blog,

All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party – Mao Tse Tung

After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn’t do it. I sure as hell wouldn’t want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military – William Burroughs

Revolution?  Yes, it all sounds rather “extreme”, but the cold hard reality of our era is not going to comfort us with diplomacies and niceties, so honestly, why should I have to sugar coat anything?  We live in extreme times and there is no longer room for prancing around the ultimate consequences of that which is taking place in America today.  This country is increasingly sliding towards the edge of internal conflict.  The Liberty Movement and true Constitutionalists see it, subsections of Republicans and Democrats see it, and most of all, the federal government sees it.  In fact, they may even be counting on it.

Over the past two years alone, multiple draconian policies have been enacted through executive order by the Obama Administration which build upon the civil liberty crushing actions of George W. Bush and press far beyond.  The Patriot Acts, the FISA domestic spy bill, the bailouts of corrupt international banks, attempts at CISPA and SOPA, actions like the NDAA authorizing the treatment of U.S. citizens as “enemy combatants” without rights to due process; all paint a picture so clear only a one-celled amoeba (or your average suburban yuppie) would not see it.  You and I, and everyone else for that matter, have been designated potential targets of the state.  Our rights have been made forfeit.

There is no ambiguous or muddled separation between the citizenry and the government anymore.  The separation is absolute.  It is undeniable.  It is vast.  It is only a matter of time and momentum, and eventually there will be unbridled oppression, dissent, and conflict.  All that is required is a trigger, and I believe that trigger has arrived…

Though made to appear “complex”, the gun control debate is actually an incredibly simple issue.  It all boils down to a couple of questions which gun grabbers rarely ask:  How does the 2nd Amendment affect the future?  That is to say, what was the original intent, and should we still value that intent as it applies to tomorrow?  And, what will really happen if it is forcibly removed?  Gun opponents act as though they are unaware of these questions, or maybe they don’t care.  However, it is vital to their safety and the safety of our culture in general that they do finally consider the bigger picture.

We’ve all heard the prefabricated gun control talking points before.  Some of them so old they predate us.  They are numerous and most of them incredibly thin.  The gist of the anti-gun position, though, could be boiled down to these three points…

Common Anti-Gun Arguments:

1) The 2nd Amendment is “outdated” and no longer relevant in today’s modern society.

2) We do not want to stop you from “defending yourself”, or interfere with the American tradition of hunting, but people do not need “military assault weapons” for either.

3) Your claimed freedom to own guns should not supersede my freedom to live without fear of guns.  We exist in a society, and our society requires us to give up certain freedoms so that it can function.

Again, in response to these arguments, I have to ask, what does the 2nd Amendment mean for the future?  What was its original intent?  Gun control advocates would like to ignore the fact that the Constitution specifically protects a broad application of gun ownership, but when they cannot deny the legality of it, they instead turn to more abstract and existential methods of attack.  They try to twist the original intent of the 2nd Amendment to further their goals.  To respond briefly to each of the above fallacies:

1) The right to self defense from ANY threat, whether it be an individual, or a criminal government, does not “outdate”.  It is a universal and eternal freedom.  It is a foundational pillar of natural law.  Even if the 2nd Amendment did not exist, I would still have the inborn right to arm and protect myself and those I love, and the best way to do that is to own firearms.  The men who drafted the Constitution were far more intelligent than any pithy gun grabber today, yet, these socialist errand boys seem to believe that they have “surpassed” the wisdom of the Founders.  The amount of ego required to fuel such an attitude boggles the mind…

Gun violence and violence in general will not end simply by banning firearms.  The very idea that any society can remove all weapons from their sight is naïve to begin with.  Criminals always find a way.  Murder, rape, and mayhem will continue until you confront the root problem, which is the human mind, and the human heart.  Only when these two things are balanced in all people will violence end.  Disarming good men and women has never made a society “safer”.  When the power of defense is removed from the people, someone, somewhere, will seek to abuse their weakness.  The most armed entity of the time invariably becomes the subjugator, and usually this is the government.  Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, Mao’s China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, etc, all contained disarmed populations.  The guns were gone, and still millions upon millions died.  Modern day Mexico is a perfect example of a disarmed population that is now living in terror because of criminal organizations (which, of course, still have guns).  Disarmament does NOT end gun violence, it only changes the dynamic of who uses that violence, and it makes innocent victims easier to attack.

2) Because the legal argument over the “interpretation” of the 2nd Amendment is essentially over, and the Supreme Court has ruled that gun rights do indeed apply to individuals, and not just collective bodies like the National Guard, gun grabbers are now reverting to the argument that we ARE allowed to defend ourselves with firearms, but the kinds of firearms we are able to use can still be limited.  The goal of this argument is to fool gun owners who only possess conventional firearms (hunting rifles) into believing that they will not be personally affected if they support a ban on military style weapons.  These wishy-washy hunting enthusiasts are often referred to as “Elmer Fudds” because of their gullibility.

All gun confiscation programs start by chipping away at the outer barriers of gun ownership.  Like termites slowly chewing away at the wooden skeleton of a home, anti-gun proponents start small and end by destroying the entire edifice.  Anyone who believes Feinstein’s legislation will begin and end with AR-15’s and AK-47’s is living in fantasy land.  That said, the 2nd Amendment was not established for hunting purposes.  Nowhere in the writings of the Founding Fathers do they mention “hunting” as their primary concern.  Instead, gun rights are protected in order to ensure that the citizenry remains dominant over any centralized government that turns to corruption.  We are supposed to police our own political leaders, and without military style arms, this becomes increasingly difficult.

Gun grabbers will argue that our government is not the enemy because it is derived through democratic elections.  They will say that we can change it anytime we like in the voting box.  I would point out that regardless of which party is placed in power through elections, nothing in terms of our direction as a country has been changed, and, that both parties support almost identical policies.  For instance, Obama has come out in favor of nearly identical policy initiatives to Bush, and I can almost guarantee that many Republicans will sign onto the gun control efforts of Democrats despite their supposed pro-gun rhetoric.  When the two party system becomes a one party system, voting becomes irrelevant.

Finally, they will admonish the idea of an armed citizenry keeping the government in check as a “fairy tale”.  They will claim that in the face of modern military might, constitutionalists would be crushed.  For what can an AK-47 do to an F-15?  Apparently, they have never heard of Afghanistan, which has used AK-47’s and 30 year old armaments to repel two technologically advanced armies; the Soviet Union and the U.S.  Of course, the Afghanis did not allow themselves to be disarmed…

3) Here is where we get into the nonsense of intellectual idiocy.  The only real skill which academics seem to have is jumbling piles of logical fallacies together to make a single argument that sounds “rational”, but, in fact, isn’t.  The third debate point is an extremely collectivist one, and collectivist arguments generally exploit the idea that individuals must sacrifice their personal freedoms in order for the group to function.

The truth is, the group does not matter.  The perceived collective concerns and fears of a mass of people are not relevant.  All that matters are the concerns of the singular man or woman, and whether or not those concerns are legitimate.  If a person “fears” guns and gun violence, then that is their private problem, not the problem of our entire society.  We as gun owners should not have to relinquish our rights because others are afraid of what MIGHT happen to them.  We should demand that they control THEIR fear, instead of being allowed to control OUR guns.  Just because a portion of our country shares this individual fear does not make that fear any more credible, or any more our problem.

Do They Know What They Are In For…?

Feinstein’s campaign for gun control is not hers alone; it has been the overall establishment’s work in progress for decades.  I covered the broad based arguments of gun control advocates above because I wanted to illustrate the tangibility of gun ownership.  I want to show you where we stand as constitutionalists, and I can say confidently that our moral and intellectual footing is strong.  To be clear, when defenders of a particular idea are right in their position, they are much more likely to fight and die for that position, and they are much more likely to win.

In the beginning I asked what the 2nd Amendment means for the future of this country.  Not only if it continues, but if it disappears.  If I was a gun control proponent, I would weigh the aftereffects of my actions carefully, because the penalties will likely be dire…

I have heard it argued that Americans are passive.  We didn’t rise up against the last Assault Weapons Ban. We didn’t rise up against the Patriot Act.  We didn’t rise up against TSA molestation.  We didn’t rise up against warrantless wiretapping, the assassination of U.S. citizens, or even the NDAA.  The people who make this point, though, are not looking at the larger issue.  It is one thing for our government to pass legislation; the wider application of that legislation on our streets and at our doorsteps is another matter.

Feinstein’s bill is unprecedented in the history of this country, and requires widespread enforcement in every town and hamlet in order to be effective.  The way in which it is designed makes a violent response from the public inevitable.  It reaches far beyond the Assault Weapons Ban of the 1990’s, calling for the creation of a massive database of almost all gun owners in the United States.  This database will require citizens to submit their EXISTING firearms to cataloging, and the owners to be filed and fingerprinted like criminals.

The bill will ban the outright the sale, manufacture, and transfer of at least 120 models of firearms (which have not yet been named).  It will ban the manufacture and sale of most if not all semi-automatic rifles and the bill specifically targets handguns as well.  Large capacity mags and mag fed weapons will essentially disappear from gun stores.  Though, those guns designated as “hunting rifles” will be exempt (for now).

Feinstein has also openly agreed with NY Governor Andrew Cuomo that government buy back programs (forced selling of firearms at a reduced price) and even physical confiscations are on the table:

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/guns/new-york-governor-andrew-cuomo-says-gun-confiscation-could-be-option

http://washingtonexaminer.com/sen.-feinstein-suggests-national-buyback-of-guns/article/2516648

To put this bluntly, there are approximately 50 million gun owners (according to official estimates) in the United States.  If only 2% of those gun owners refuse to submit to the Feinstein Database, and the feds attempt confiscation, they will have a massive revolution on their hands.

Many Americans, including myself, will not be strolling into the local Fusion Center to register our weapons.  Why?  Because gun registration reeks of fascism!  Some might call this “cliche”, but let’s just examine the guidelines of the Nazi Gun Registration Program of 1938:

- Classified guns for “sporting purposes”

- All citizens who wished to purchase firearms had to register with the Nazi officials and have a background check.

- Presumed German citizens were hostile and thereby exempted Nazis from the gun control law (meaning officials could have guns, citizens could not).

- Gave Nazis unrestricted power to decide what kinds of firearms could, or could not be owned by private persons.

- The types of ammunition that were legal were subject to control by bureaucrats.

- Juveniles under 18 years could not buy firearms and ammunition.

You see, we’ve witnessed the Feinstein gun bill before, many times through history.  We know how it ends, so, there is very little incentive for us to go along quietly.

The database itself is truly the crux of it all.  It basically begs to be defied.  When a government has become openly hostile to common people, destructive of their economy, and oppressive of their individual rights, it only follows that gun registration will lead to outright confiscation later down the road or imprisonment for the owner.  Many Americans are simply not going to fall into the same trap that past societies have fallen into.  The eventual refusal of millions of citizens to voluntarily register will lead to a definite federal response.

The Department Of Homeland Security has obviously taken this into account, at least partly, by stockpiling over 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition in the span of a year, most of which are used in weapons distributed by the government for domestic enforcement.  Their projected scenario, I believe, involves limited resistance from people like myself; “gun nuts” and “liberty freaks” who are on the “fringe” of the populous.  At least, that’s what the headlines will say.  In the end, who will care if a few “conspiracy theorists” take a bullet in the quest to end gun violence, right?  But then again…

What I see in America is a much harder stance against gun confiscation than at any time in recent memory, and far less compromising than in the 1990’s.  Gun grabbers are, in my view, walking into a hornets nest.  Most average firearms enthusiast may be less aware of the deeper problems at hand, but they know when they are about to be raped, and will react in kind.  We in the Liberty Movement are often accused of “radicalizing” people against government authority, but I have to say, if that is the case, then the Feds are doing a much better job than we ever could.

Simultaneously, the UN (which most gun owners despise) is helping matters along by using the recent Sandy Hook shooting as a springboard for a reintroduction of their failed international Small Arms Treaty:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/28/un-arms-treaty-nra_n_2373417.html

“European and other U.N. delegates who support the arms trade treaty told Reuters on condition of anonymity they hoped Newtown would boost support for the convention in the United States, where gun control is an explosive political issue.”

“Newtown has opened the debate within the United States on weapons controls in ways that it has not been opened in the past,” Abramson said, adding that “the conversation within the U.S. will give the (Obama) administration more leeway.”

The UN has always claimed that their small arms treaty would NOT restrict private gun ownership in the U.S., and that it only deals with the international trade of illicit arms.  Yet, they try to use gun control actions in the face of Sandy Hook as a rationale for reopening negotiations?  They can’t have it both ways.  Either they are trying to tie the treaty to domestic gun ownership in the U.S, or they aren’t.  Will our government sign on to an international agreement to restrict private gun ownership on top of Feinstein’s gun grab bill?

To put this in the most basic terms: registration and restriction equals revolution.  Count on it.  It is not a matter of what we “want”, it is a matter of what is necessary.  Without a citizenry armed with weapons of military application, we lose our last deterrent to tyranny, and thus, we lose everything.  When backed into a corner, a victim has two options: he can lie down and die, or, he can fight regardless of the odds.  Sadly, this is where we are in America; fear, servitude, subservience, or civil war.

Let us hope our weapons are never needed –but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government — and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws – Edward Abbey