Real Time Web Analytics

Behold a Pale Gun Confiscation Agenda David Risselada


David Risselada


Our nation continues to unravel at an alarming pace. We are now living in a society that seems devoid of all hope for the future as we continue to chug along on the fundamental transformation choo choo train promised by President Obama. To the average person who pays no attention to the fine details, America seems to be a place where mass violence occurs on a daily basis, white people are the most privileged in society and hateful of all other races, everyone is living under the brutal, unfair practices of a capitalistic society and America continues to rape the natural world for resources causing global warming. These false beliefs have caused the unwashed masses to demand change, and in many cases, as demonstrated by movements like Occupy Wall Street, the change they are demanding is socialism. This is what you get when a community organizer is elected president. The very purpose of community organizing is to whip up hate and discontent for the purpose of obtaining political power, period. It is a tactic that was finely tuned by none other than Saul Alinsky and executed perfectly by Barack Obama. The whole idea is to get people to lose hope and eventually accept things they normally wouldn’t. Is it possible that the same tactic is being used in the never ending fight against the second amendment? Can Americans be pushed to the point where they will willingly accept gun confiscation? Sadly, that is the agenda being employed against us and in true Alinsky form; the ends justify the means no matter what they are.
alinsky picture
Community Organizing tactic called institutional deviance: To destroy the structure of apathy by stirring up dissatisfaction and discontent; disrupt existing complacent expectations, and breaking down the individualistic orientations of community residents.“The practice of Macro Social Work.” 
 Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future. “Rules For Radicals”
 Affecting social change generally works on the principles defined in the Hegelian dialectic, which is otherwise known as the problem, reaction, solution strategy.  Those in power that are seeking change, deliberately cause problems in an effort to get the masses to demand the change they wish to implement. Looking at government today it is easy to argue that this strategy is being employed on a large scale as certain populations of people are deliberately left living in poverty while greedy politicians make promises they never keep. The end result is the continual demand that further government action be taken to solve the problem. On a larger scale yet, it could be theorized that the destruction of the economy was done on purpose so that it would be accepted as a necessary step to implement a communist economic system, which is the desired end by many in power. This is more than theory, this concept is highlighted quite well Richard Cloward’s and Frances Fox Piven’s “The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to end Poverty.” Here, the argument is that the creation of an over bloated, unsustainable welfare state would crash the economy and force the government to provide a living wage for all. Looking at society today, it is safe to say that this is one application of the Hegelian Dialectic that is in full implementation phase.

Are we paying attention to all the warning signs?

Many people are fully aware that there is an agenda to implement full, Soviet style gun confiscation in America. With John Kerry illegally signing the U.N. Small Arms Treaty, many know that there is a day of reckoning coming where Americans will have to decide once and for all where they stand. The idea that many of these recent mass shootings could be “false flag”attacks against the second amendment is commonplace amongst many patriots and conspiracy theorists. Why shouldn’t it be? History proves that false flags are anything but conspiracy as our nation has engaged in several “false flag” style attacks that were used as justification to bring us into unwanted wars. Operation Northwoods comes to mind as does the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which was used to bring us into Vietnam incidentally. Northwoods was an operation where the Joint Chiefs of Staff were considering staging attacks against the American people, and then blaming it on Cuba because they wanted control of the Island.  In the Gulf of Tonkin, two American destroyers were said to be attacked by Vietnamese vessels, only, it never happened at all. It was a lie perpetrated by president Lyndon B. Johnson (D) used to start a war with North Vietnam. This was declassified in 2010. While events like these seem to give credibility to the idea that our seemingly never ending rash of mass shootings may be false flag events; the truth may have a more sinister twist on it. A Truth we may be contributing to ourselves, and it all revolves around another Alinsky style tactic.
 Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian Church can live up to Christianity. “Rules for Radicals”
Obama calls evil good
 The left has an uncanny ability to politicize any issue and make it appear as if it is a huge problem that needs to be solved. As mentioned earlier, this is the tactic of community organizing. Anything we say or do as conservatives is fair game to the left as they twist every word and action in an effort to discredit and humiliate everything we believe in. Is it possible that the second amendment in which we fight for, is nothing but a political tool to the left, being used against us in a way many would never even imagine? The professional left gets away with many of the things they do because many people simply cannot comprehend the depths of their depravity. They do not understand the way that they view concepts like principles and morality. To the left morality itself, is just a concept construed in the minds of men to justify action. Principles are nothing more than excuses used to achieve a political goal. The left believes the highest level of morality is corrupting one’s self in order to achieve the political state of “Utopia.”
 In action, one does not always enjoy the luxury of a decision that is consistent both with one’s individual conscience and the good of mankind. The choice must always be for the latter. Action is for mass salvation and not for personal salvation. He who sacrifices the mass good for his personal conscience has a peculiar concept of “personal salvation.” He doesn’t care enough for the people to be corrupted for them. “Rules for Radicals”
 This is the depraved mind of the left. They believe, based on their own opinions mind you, that they know what is best for society and they are willing to engage, as evidenced by the above statement, in corrupt practices in order to achieve their goal because they know what is best for us. This means that virtually anything is possible. When it comes to the second amendment, they are using it as a political weapon, and virtually everything we do in its defense becomes fuel for their agenda in labeling us as radicals, and “gun nuts” that care more about our rights than the lives of those taken in mass shooting incidents.  We all know that this is not the case because we would argue that all people have an inalienable right to defend their lives; and the true act of showing no compassion towards the lives of victims is passing laws that left them defenseless in the first place. The effectiveness of mass media combined with community organizing tactics generally whips up an emotional frenzy where people are unable to see the truth, and are coaxed into simply following along. Even if the people pushing for gun confiscation are actually in the minority, the use of media and propaganda on a grand scale can give the impression to the uninformed that there is a mass movement taking place. Remember, all it takes is a tireless, irate minority to affect social change.
 William Cooper was a radio talk show host and author of the book “Behold a Pale Horse.” His subjects included many of the same concerns conspiracy theorists share today including, one world government, population reduction, alien agendas and of course, gun confiscation. William cooper was killed in a shoot out with police in 2001 after the U.S. Marshall Service declared him a fugitive from justice over unpaid taxes. Cooper was of course convinced that the government had targeted him for his beliefs. While that can be left to pure speculation, the events that transpired at Waco and Ruby Ridge probably fueled his alleged paranoia. In chapter twelve of Behold a Pale Horse cooper writes of a government agenda where the proliferation of military style weapons would be deliberately allowed under the pretexts of the second amendment in an attempt to scare the masses into accepting gun confiscation. He wrote that with the use of drugs and hypnosis, people could be conditioned to perform these mass shooting events  by command, i.e. brainwashing, and that people would become so fed up with the constant exposure to violence they would literally demand their rights be taken away.
 “The government encouraged the manufacture and importation of military firearms for the criminals to use. This is intended to foster a feeling of insecurity, which would lead the American people to voluntarily disarm themselves by passing laws against firearms. Using drugs and hypnosis on mental patients in a process called Orion, the CIA inculcated the desire in these people to open fire on schoolyards and thus inflame the antigun lobby. This plan is well under way, and so far is working perfectly. The middle class is begging the government to do away with the 2nd amendment.
 Author’s Note: I have found that these events have indeed happened all over the country. In every instance that I have investigated — the incident at the women’s school in Canada, the shopping center incident in Canada, the Stockton, California, massacre, and the murder of Rabbi Meir Kahane — the shooters were all ex-mental patients or were current mental patients who were ALL ON THE DRUG PROZAC! This drug, when taken in certain doses, increases the serotonin level in the patient, causing extreme violence. Couple that with a posthypnotic suggestion or control through an electronic brain implant or microwave or E.L.F. intrusion and you get mass murder, ending in every case with the suicide of the perpetrator. Exhume the bodies of the murderers and check for a brain implant. I think you are going to be surprised. In every case the name of the murderer’s doctor or mental treatment facility has been withheld. I believe we will be able to establish intelligence-community connections and/or connections to known CIA experimental mind control programs when we finally discover who these doctors of death really are.” William Cooper “Behold a Pale Horse” pp. 225
 Looking at the mass shootings we are witnessing today, they all tell the same story, a mentally disturbed person who is taking some type of mental health medication and the ease in which they are able to obtain firearms.  In all of the recent shootings there was a deliberate point on the part of the media, to reveal that the firearms were all legally purchased. This is an example of using our rules against us. We argue that background checks don’t work and that criminals will always be able to get guns. What the uniformed is seeing is a system that doesn’t prevent criminals from getting guns and the left deliberately uses that as an excuse to push for total confiscation.  For us it becomes almost a no win situation because the left can twist anything to fit their narrative, and as mentioned earlier, the more we fight for our gun rights, the more they are able to make us appear as if we are radicals. Don’t misunderstand; we must continue to fight for the second amendment because we all know what happens in gun confiscation scenarios.  We need to turn the narrative around and show it is those denying people the right to self defense that are the uncompassionate ones showing no value for human life. Fortunately this appears to be happening, and William Cooper’s predictions may turn out to be wrong. People are growing tired of the same old rhetoric by President Obama concerning gun control. There are enough incidents of gun use in self defense to prove beyond any doubt the insanity of gun free zones. Americans may be slow to awaken but they awaken nonetheless and they can see that no matter what gun control laws may be enacted, criminals won’t follow them. The left thinks we are stupid and frankly, if you don’t understand that all of these shootings occur where there already is gun control, then indeed you are.  Don’t give up the fight America, the left is counting on you tiring out when the real fight is about to begin.
This article originally appeared on
To learn more about the psychopolitical agenda and communist indoctrination check out my book Not on My Watch: Exposing the Marxist Agenda in Education.

Here comes the Small Arms treaty Again

David Risselada


Recently, we have witnessed the circus that is the United States Senate; completely surrender its constitutional powers to the executive branch. Last November we went to the polls and handed the Republican establishment the largest majority it has had in decades, only to watch them capitulate to the Obama regime on every single issue. From failing to defund Obamacare, reigning in spending and most recently the Iran deal, the Republicans have shown themselves to be the traitorous, communist infiltrators they are. What people need to see is that there is a conditioning process taking place, and the events revolving around the Iran nuclear deal is the most recent example. Here, little by little Mitch McConnell, along with Bob Corker, virtually reworked the treaty provisions in the Constitution. The U.S. Senate is the only congressional body that has treaty making powers and they completely reworked the entire process giving the president nearly all of the advantage. Treaties, under the U.S. constitution, need a two thirds vote from senators for ratification. Under the Corker bill, in order to stop the Iran deal there would need to be a two thirds vote to stop it from being implemented by the White House. Why would the U.S. Senate surrender such an important aspect of their constitutional authority? Is there another agenda at work? Sadly the answer to that question is yes. Many argued that the Iran deal is not a treaty but an agreement. The Senate had the authority to make it a treaty. Why didn’t they? It all revolves around a conditioning process designed to get the masses to accept the next big agenda item; The U.N. Small Arms Treaty. Many U.S. Senators have openly stated that they refuse to ratify this traitorous treaty; however, the new process established by the Corker bill may very well have changed the way treaties are passed from here on out. On Monday, August 24th officials from the Obama Administration will be going to Mexico to discuss the implementation of the Small Arms treaty.
There has been a lot of controversy surrounding the Small Arms Treaty. Many insist that it isinternational in scope and in no way would affect your right as an American to keep and bear arms. This a foolish assumption motivated by a fear of taking the time to do some research.  The text of the treaty is quite clear in its intentions to disarm civilian populations, or people deemed to be “unauthorized recipients” of firearms and ammunition. The language of the treaty can be very misleading as there are paragraphs that seem to support an individual’s right to own firearms based on the nation state’s own laws and constitutional systems. Take this paragraph from the Annex concerning the pretext of the treaty for example-
Mindful of the legitimate trade and lawful ownership, and use of certain conventional arms for recreational, cultural, historical, and sporting activities, where such trade, ownership and use are permitted or protected by law,
Many people would read that and assume that because our constitution protects our rights to keep and bear arms this treaty would not affect us in anyway. The only problem with this assumption is that law makers from many states have changed their gun laws. Semi automatic rifles and high capacity magazines are no longer legal to own in several parts of the country. This changes the term “permitted or protected by law” drastically. States like New York, Oregon and Connecticut have already passed new gun registration laws that have yielded a low success rate of compliance. Situations like this are where the next part of the treaty would be helpful.
un-small-arms-treaty-draft picture
Article 16 International Assistance
  1. In implementing this Treaty, each State Party may seek assistance including legal or legislative assistance, institutional capacity-building, and technical, material or financial assistance. Such assistance may include stockpile management, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programs, model legislation, and effective practices for implementation. Each State Party in a position to do so shall provide such assistance, upon request.
  2. Each State Party may request, offer or receive assistance through, inter alia, the United Nations, international, regional, sub regional or national organizations, non-governmental organizations, or on a bilateral basis.
  3. A voluntary trust fund shall be established by States Parties to assist requesting States Parties requiring international assistance to implement this Treaty. Each State Party is encouraged to contribute resources to the fund.
President Obama would very much like to get Australian type gun control laws passed, in which case there would be very little that is “protected by law” that this treaty could not affect. In the event that people fail to comply with such laws, as they have in New York and other states, the U.N. would have legal authority to come in and assist local governments in disarming efforts. In fact, it is highly likely that the recent racial strife we have witnessed was intentionally fomented in order to push us into conflict; in which case, U.N. peace keepers would also have the authority to disarm conflicting parties under this treaty. The U.N. Program of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects states the following.
  1. To develop and implement, where possible, effective disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programs, including the effective collection, control, storage and destruction of small arms and light weapons, particularly in post-conflict situations, unless another form of disposition or use has been duly authorized and such weapons have been marked and the alternate form of disposition or use has been recorded, and to include, where applicable, specific provisions for these programs in peace agreements.
Many people believe that ratification of this treaty would be an act of treason against the United States constitution that our politicians have sworn to uphold and defend; and truthfully, it would be. Unfortunately plans to disarm the United States have been in place for nearly six decades. State Department Publication 7277 describes the objectives of the United States as seeking a world free from war where all nation states have been disarmed and merged into a system of international control in line with standards set by the United Nations.
U.N. troops
The over-all goal of the United States is a free, secure, and peaceful world of independent states adhering to common standards of justice and international conduct and subjecting the use of force to the rule of law; a world which has achieved general and complete disarmament under effective international control; and a world in which adjustment to change takes place in accordance with the principles of the United Nations.
In order to make possible the achievement of that goal, the program sets forth the following specific objectives toward which nations should direct their efforts:
  • The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations Peace Force;
  • The elimination from national arsenals of all armaments, including all weapons of mass destruction and the means for their delivery, other than those required for a United Nations Peace Force and for maintaining internal order;
  • The institution of effective means for the enforcement of international agreements, for the settlement of disputes, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the principles of the United Nations;
  • The establishment and effective operation of an International Disarmament Organization within the framework of the United Nations to insure compliance at all times with all disarmament obligations.
The U.N. Small Arms Treaty is the culmination of this plan. It is hard to argue that our military is not what it once was. Not only have our forces been reduced to almost nothing, they have been psychologically disarmed as they have become a breeding ground of political correctness and social experiments. Our police forces are also being psychologically disarmed as they are afraid to do their job due to the intentional fomenting of racial strife. The disarming of military forces is the first stage of this plan. Stage two would include the establishment of a permanent peace keeping force within the framework of the United Nations and stage three would be the destruction of all remaining arms in order to maintain international order. If you believe at this point that our second amendment will mean anything, you are foolish. If they are successful in disarming our military there is no chance they will allow the civilian population to be armed.
un statue 2
This is high treason on a grand scale. The Obama administration has been involved in numerous scandals which involved gun running operations. Fast and Furious, which was used as a pretext to discredit the second amendment; and Benghazi, which was a gun smuggling operation arming Islamic terrorists for the purpose of taking out Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad. President Obama has no right to move forward with this treaty and doing so is in fact, an act of treason against the American people. Only a mass movement of non compliance can stop this.
article for 11 july
                                       Will not be disarmed!




“Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.” Saul Alinsky “Rules for Radicals” pp. 128
Alinsky 7-28-15
The above quote is one of the infamous “power tactics” found in Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. It is arguably one of the most effective as it is used to continually discredit our values with an “in your face” type of attitude. The Obama administration thoroughly enjoys discrediting American culture while trying to give the appearance that everything we stand for is either backwards, racist or downright intolerant of anything we disagree with. In theory, they use this “rule” in every effort to prove that America cannot live up to its promise of “liberty and justice for all” by segregating society and classifying everyone as an oppressed minority. They will continue to push this tactic with any agenda item they have a problem accomplishing. This couldn’t be more evident than when it comes to the issue of gun control. Obama has made it perfectly clear that he plans to use his last eighteen months pushing the issue; and just as the case with other administration goals, he intends to use whatever tactics necessary. One of those tactics seems to be arming illegal immigrants.
The Obama Administration continues to allow undocumented people in the country at an alarming rate. It has become evident that their agenda is to turn red states blue in an attempt to secure Democrat voters for decades to come. What many people don’t realize is that these people are being given all rights and privileges of American citizens even though they are no longer being required to assimilate to our culture. In fact, they are no longer required to take the oath of allegiance as Obama took the liberty of “waiving” this requirement for all people looking to become citizens. If this isn’t alarming and offensive enough there is a rule put in place by Eric Holder in 2012 that allows immigrants to bypass the 90 day state residency requirement when it comes to purchasing firearms. This is rule number 1140-AA44 of the 2015 Unified Agenda which is a plan to force his fundamental transformation down our throats through regulatory agencies. This agenda contains several new regulations designed to strip Americans of their rights to bear arms, (the latest social security scam being a good example) while making it excessively easier for non-American citizens to have access to guns. Here is a list of some of the other rules listed in the 2015 Unified Agenda.
article for 11 july
Rule 1140-AA05 will “require a firearms purchaser’s affirmative statement of his or her state of residence”–although with states like California, New York and even Georgia providing drivers licenses to illegal aliens, a person could enter the country illegally and then purchase a gun on the same day.
Another rule, 1140-AA08, opens the door for nearly unrestricted importation of firearms and ammunition by non-immigrants, i.e., aliens that are in the country temporarily.
Generally, the importation of firearms or ammunition by non-immigrant aliens is prohibited by law. Yet the exemptions provided by 1140-AA08 would make sidestepping this prohibition as easy as being “admitted to the United States for lawful hunting or sporting purposes,” or by simply filling out a permit application and affirming that one is not in the country on a non-immigrant visa.
Due to Obama’s relaxation of border security and immigration enforcement, the nearly 12 million people who have crossed our borders without any type of visa have now been granted quasi-legal protections. Therefore, under 1140-AA08, this massive population is free to import arms and ammunition without any oversight after entering the country.(
This is a perfect application of the Alinsky rule listed above in many ways. First, this is a stick it in your face attitude displayed by Obama as he knows this move is going to irritate law abiding citizens who support the second amendment. He is using our support of gun rights against us by insisting that this right apply to all people in the country, legal or not. He is also hoping to create more problems related to gun violence that there will be an overwhelming demand to implement his gun control agenda. This was the purpose of the Fast and Furious scandal where guns were deliberately allowed to cross the border and fall into the hands of drug cartel members. This is also evident by the fact that violent gangs from South America like MS-13 are among the many hundreds of thousands entering the country illegally and actively recruiting new members in the United States. To put in bluntly, Obama is deliberately arming criminals and releasing violent prisoners while at the same time calling for more gun control.  Fortunately, Americans aren’t that stupid, (well conservative Americans aren’t anyways) because support for the second amendment has never been higher.
TPP picture 3
It has become all too apparent to anyone paying attention that this administration will not stop until it is stopped. These actions alone are criminal and warrant the arrest of Barrack Obama and Eric Holder. In just the same manner they deliberately stoked the flames of racial hatred and encouraged people to burn down cities, they are deliberately arming criminals in an attempt to scare the public into believing they need his “Alinsky style gun control.” Failure on the part of the Republican Party to stop him constitutes treason at the highest levels and history will remember them accordingly.
To learn about communist indoctrination and my personal stand against the academic left, check out my book “Not on my watch: Exposing the Marxist agenda in education.”


Article written by 


The left needs the NICS back ground check to fail


David Risselada


Earlier this week, the news broke that the NICS background check had failed and human error allowed Dylan Roof to purchase a handgun when in fact, he should not have been able too. Apparently, there was some trouble accessing some paper work concerning a drug arrest. Federal law states that any back ground check not completed within three days can be treated as a “proceed with sale.” For many of us who purchase firearms the legal way we know that sometimes it is possible for the sale to be put on “hold” simply because the FBI may have come across something that has the slightest relevance to your name. The more information you give about yourself of course, the less likely this is to occur; however, even if it does, the FBI generally clears up the misunderstanding. If they fail to do so within the specified time frame, the dealer may proceed with the sale, or chose to deny. It is likely, if dealing with repeat customers that have no problems, that they will complete the transaction. There is nothing inherently wrong with this system except for the fact that it is unconstitutional and it has done absolutely nothing to prevent criminals from acquiring firearms illegally. In fact, the only thing it has done is prepare the groundwork for back door gun registration as your info along with the weapon type and serial number are now on paper every time you complete one. Shall not be infringed indeed.

Many gun right enthusiasts see this as a victory of sorts. A situation in which gun control initiatives failed to prevent a crime and a “bad guy” was able to get a gun despite the efforts of over intrusive government. It is certainly no victory to see anyone harmed in criminal activity, please do not misunderstand my meaning. Many of us on the right are fighting tooth and nail to get people to see the truth about the failures of gun control. This is a misguided approach because many of us also don’t understand the real game being played here. The left simply cannot be reasoned with, nor do they want to be.

Many seem to think that we are playing a game of facts with people who truly have everyone’s best interest at heart, and will be willing to adjust their thinking when presented with hard evidence of their failures. This is not the case at all. Failure is a friend of the left because every system that is broken or ineffective in preventing “gun violence” only advances their agenda. In other words, the left knows that the back ground check system doesn’t prevent criminals from getting guns; in fact, they are counting on it. This is a subtle application of the Hegelian Dialectic, the Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis formula. In other words, the left uses the fact that the thousands of gun laws on the books, including the back ground check, are ineffective so they can continue to drive their agenda towards total confiscation on the grounds that all of their “other solutions” have been ineffective. They literally need the masses to see no other alternative than to accept their solutions out of the false notion that everything has become completely hopeless. To illustrate this point further consider the following quote. One I use quite often to make this point.

“Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future.”Fyodor Dostoevsky

That quote is found in Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” and is the best explanation available as to what we are witnessing in our country. The whole agenda revolves around creating a sense of helplessness and conditioning people to believe that something better (communism) waits right around the corner. When it comes to gun violence the more they can present the idea that it is the average guy who just goes nuts and kills a bunch of people, the better, especially if they had passed the back ground check. More and more you see this narrative developing. A shooter who had legally purchased his weapon because he passed the back ground check. They are not going to move the agenda by focusing on the real problems of too many unenforceable laws, and the number of people killed in cities with strict gun control.They are not going to acknowledge their failures unless it helps push the narrative further to the left.

The good news is that people are not as stupid as the left believes they are. Liberals assume that most people can be brainwashed and manipulated. (I suppose they feel that way because many of them have been.) As is usually the case, the efforts to create a wave of anti-gun hysteria have once again back fired. June saw the highest numbers of gun sales with a spike of 10.1% compared to last June. It isn’t uncommon at all for firearm sales to spike when a mass shooting occurs because everybody is smart enough to figure out that only a good guy with a gun will stop a bad guy with a gun. If that isn’t true than why do unarmed people call the police?

To learn more about the Marxist agenda and communist indoctrination check out my book “Not on my watch: Exposing the Marxist agenda in education.”

This article first appeared on

Slippery Slope From Gun Control To The Banning Of Knives


Mike Emery

Anti-gun advocates rarely use logic and reasoning to walk through until the end the idea of banning guns, ammunition, etc. Where does the absurdity end? Well, we must only look across the pond to our friends in the UK to see the eventual long-term result because it doesn’t end with guns. The picture below is called a Knife Surrender Bin. The government is encouraging people to surrender their knives by depositing their knives in them. This is no joke…look it up yourself. Additionally, it’s illegal for a store to sell kitchen knives and cutlery to anyone under 18 years of age.

Mike Emery's photo.
 Aston knife bin

The Government’s History Of False Flags Mind Control And Cover Up’s Shouldn’t The Gov. Be The First Suspect In The Charleston Shooting



When a married woman is murdered in her home the first suspect is usually the husband. If your child is caught with their hand in the cookie jar over and over, but tell you they didn’t eat the cookies you probably aren’t going to believe them when the cookies come up missing. With the Charleston shooting, and other events, shouldn’t the government be the first suspect? The government has been caught lying on a daily basis. The Vietnam War for the United States was started on a lie with the Gulf of Tonkin incident. This inconvenient truth killed more than 50,000 American soldiers. My point of all of this is the ruling elite will commit any atrocity to push their agenda. Fast and Furious was a gun walking operation that let weapons get into the hands of drug cartels so the second amendment could be blamed. Guess who ran this operation? If you guessed that Holder ran Department of Justice, you guessed correctly. This has been the direct and indirect cause of thousands of deaths.These are examples of false flags that have been used to push and steer an agenda.

Ted Kaczynski aka The Unabomber was a product of a CIA program called MK Ultra. James Holmes, the Aurora Batman shooter was a patient of  Air Force Pentagon trained psychiatrist Dr. Fenton. Timothy McVeigh was visited several times by Dr. Jolyon West who was part of a circle of psychiatrist’s that worked for the CIA in mind control for years. Aaron Alexis the Naval yard shooter contacted the police and a mind control support group stating he was being targeted by low frequencies that where putting voices into his head. He even carved ELF(Extra Low Frequencies) into his weapon.The Pentagon has been working for years to put voices into people’s heads through lasers and frequencies. If entities within our government have been involved with mind control projects  for years involving killers, we should look at this event as another possibility.

Even if Roof wasn’t under mind control or had some gov. handler, he was on psychotropic drugs. pyschiatric side affects could be anxiety, depression,abnormal thinking, depersonalization,irritability, hallucination, attempted suicide and more. All of the recent mass killers have had this in common that where all on one of these drugs that change your mental stability. The mass media will not concentrate on this because their biggest sponsors is big pharma.

We should all question the timing of this latest event and is healthy for us to do so. The media has been trying to drum up  a race war since last year. Then the immediate roll out of  demonizing the 2nd amendment from the establishment of both parties. Karl Rove a republican strategist, fox news contributor and  “2nd amendment” supporter said that we should repeal the 2nd amendment.

Now the media is loosely trying to tie Rand Paul and other presidential candidates to Roof because they have received donations from the Council of Conservative Citizens. A white nationalist group that Roof wrote about in his memoirs. This is interesting considering Paul, Cruz and the rest of republican candidates have close ties to Aipac and Israel. White supremacy groups hate Jews more than any other groups, so this doesn’t pass the smell test either.

Roof is 21 years old and his face book page was just started a couple of months ago, which he had black friends on his list. If he was this giant racist why would he have black friends on his list.

Last Thursday Rev. Clenard Childress from  said he believed Roof had handlers or accomplices in the shooting. That there is no way a drugged out 21 yr old would figure out to do this right before June teenth and other events that where about to take place in the black community without help. The media rolled out his room mate who said he had been planning this for up to 6 months. If this is true wouldn’t his room mate be considered an accomplice.

This whole thing smelled bad from the beginning. If our government will kill buffalo to control the Indians all bets are off and will stop at nothing to ram through their agenda.  Anything goes. They need the masses divided because if the people are separated  they can rule over us, but if we can unite then we can take the world back. The ruling class needs us disarmed and they keep pecking away at the second amendment piece by piece. Remember the media was taken over in the late 40’s and 50’s with operation mockingbird when the CIA put editors and publishers in power at every major media outlet. Question everything and believe nothing.









Public law 87-297, the Arms Control and Disarmament Act signed by President Kennedy in 1961, calls for a ban on civilian firearm ownership and the United Nations taking control of the U.S. military.

“It is the purpose of this Act to provide impetus toward this goal by creating a new agency of peace to deal with the problem of reduction and control of armaments looking toward ultimate world disarmament,” the law states.


Section 2 states: “This organization must have the capacity to provide the essential scientific, economic, political, military, psychological, and technological information upon which realistic arms control and disarmament policy must be based.”  One of the primary functions it must be able to carry out is, “The dissemination and coordination of public information concerning arms control and disarmament.”

This sounds like an infowar waged against the American mindset as then U.S. Attorney Eric Holder in 1995 announcing a public campaign to “really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.

Section 3: “Arms” and Disarmaments” meaning, “the identification, verification, inspection, limitation, control, reduction, or elimination, of armed forces and armaments of all kinds under international agreement including the necessary steps taken under such an agreement to establish an effective sytem of inter-national control, or to create and strengthen international organizations for the maintenance of peace.” 

We are obviously talking about an all out hardcore global take over here. The director of this agency shall be appointed by the President and act as primary advisor to Secretary of State and the President in regards to arms disarmament matters and shall have supreme responsibility for overall functions of the agency having assistance from an entire organization of committees, advisors, deputy director, bureaus, divisions, offices, etc, whom shall have required meetings with the President, Secretary of State, and the Director of Arms and Disarmament Agency.

Now by The Arms Control and Disarmament Act, we are not just alluding to gun confiscations of individual citizens but entire disarmament of entire national military capabilities! According to Title III-Functions, section 31, the Act states,

The authority of the Director with respect to research, development,and other studies shall be limited to participation in the following in so far as they relate to arms control and disarmament:

(a) the detection, identification, inspection, monitoring, limitation, reduction, control, and elimination of armed forces and armaments, including thermonuclear, nuclear, missile, conventional, bacteriological, chemical, and radiological weapons;
(b) the techniques and systems of detecting, identifying, inspecting, and monitoring of tests of nuclear, thermonuclear, and other weapons;
(c) the analysis of national budgets, levels of industrial production, and economic indicators to determine the amounts spent by various countries for armaments;
(d) the control, reduction, and elimination of armed forces and armaments in space, in areas on and beneath the earth’s surface,and in underwater regions;
(e) the structure and operation of international control and other organizations useful for arms control and disarmament;
(f) the training of scientists, technicians, and other personnel for manning the control systems which may be created by international arms control and disarmament agreements……
(k) methods for the maintenance of peace and security during different stages of arms control and
(l) the scientific, economic, political, legal, social, psychological,military, and technological factors related to the prevention of war with a view to a better understanding of how the basic structure of a lasting peace may be established
Prevention of war huh? Good luck with that one! In the Patents section 31, the Act basically calls for complete and total transparency of all research within the U.S. “shall be provided for in such manner that all information as to uses,products, processes, patents, and other developments resulting from such research developed by Government expenditure will (with such exceptions and limitations, if any, as the Director may find to be necessary in the public interest) be available to the general public,…”  What a crock! We all know the pristine transparency reputation our federal government has earned right?! 
Policy Formation under section 33 seems to call for some Constitutional and affirmative Congressional legislative check and balance for powers made unto the President.  This is pretty laughable.
In the Negotiations and Related Functions section 34, the Act basically designates the Director as acting under the Secretary of State authority as U.S. representative to communicate with other nations and international organizations in matters relating to arms control and disarmament. Title IV-General Provisions, General Authority section 41 outlines the agency working with a number of other government agencies and compensation generalities.
CONTRACTS OR EXPENDITURES SEC. 43. states, “The President may, in advance, exempt actions of the Director from the provisions of law relating to contracts or expenditures of Government funds whenever he determines that such action is essential in the interest of United States arms control and disarmament and security policy.”  This sounds like government spending and corporate fascism gone wild.
Security Requirements, section 45 basically calls for background investigations into any persons, officers, employees, contractors acting with the agency to make sure loyalty to the World State (Brave New World) is not in question.  The Atomic Energy Commission must allow open door access of any restricted data to any said agent working for the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency for compliance control purposes.
Public Law 87-297 Arms Control and Disarmament Act is based on the Department of State Publication 7277 Dtd 1961

 Some primary points from this publication are as follows:
First, there must be immediate disarmament action….  Second, all disarmament obligations must be subject to effective international controls….Third, adequate peace-keeping machinery must be established….
The over-all goal of the United States is a free, secure, and peaceful world of independent states adhering to common standards of justice and international conduct and subjecting the use of force to the rule of law; a world which has achieved general and complete disarmament under effective international control;and a world in which adjustment to change takes place in accordance with the principles of the United Nations.
In order to make possible the achievement of that goal, the program sets forth the following specific objectives toward which nations should direct their efforts:
The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations Peace Force.
The elimination from national arsenals of all armaments, including all weapons of mass destruction and the means for their delivery, other than those required for a United Nations Peace Force and for maintaining internal order.
The institution of effective means for the enforcement of international agreements, for the settlement of disputes, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the principles of the United Nations.
The establishment and effective operation of an International Disarmament Organization within the framework of the United Nations to insure compliance at all times with all disarmament obligations.
As states relinquish their arms, the United Nations must be progressively strengthened in order to improve its capacity to assure international security and the peaceful settlement of disputes;
There would be a 3 stage disarmament.  In the first stage the nuclear threat, strategic delivery vehicles, arms and armed forces would all be reduced. Peaceful use of outer space would be promoted. U.N. peace-keeping powers would be strengthened. An International Disarmament Organization would be established for effective verification of the disarmament program. States would be committed to other measures to reduce international tension and to protect against the chance of war by accident,miscalculation, or surprise attack. 
The second stage simply calls for further development of steps already outlined in stage one.
During the third stage of the program, the states of the world,building on the experience and confidence gained in successfully implementing the measures of the first two stages, would take final steps toward the goal of a world in which:
States would retain only those forces, non-nuclear armaments, and establishments required for the purpose of maintaining internal order; they would also support and provide agreed manpower for a U.N. Peace Force.
The U.N. Peace Force, equipped with agreed types and quantities of armaments, would be fully functioning.
The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order. All other armaments would be destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes.
The peace-keeping capabilities of the United Nations would be sufficiently strong and the obligations of all states under such arrangements sufficiently far-reaching as to assure peace and the just settlement of differences in a disarmed world.
In Stage III progressive controlled disarmament and continuously developing principles and procedures of international law would proceed to a point where no state would have the military power to challenge the progressively strengthened U.N. Peace Force and all international disputes would be settled according to the agreed principles of international conduct. 

Since public law 87-297 was enacted, just about every president has worked to enact its provisions, including President Obama who signed a U.N. arms trade treaty which was rejected by the Senate.

“The right to own, buy, sell, trade, or transfer all means of armed resistance, including handguns, is denied to civilians by [Article 2] of the Arms Trade Treaty,” wrote Joe Wolverton II of the New American. “Article 3 places the ‘ammunition/munitions fired, launched or delivered by the conventional arms covered under Article 2′ within the scope of the treaty’s prohibitions, as well.”

Arms Control and Disarmament Act

Arms Control and Disarmament Act









Washington Examiner-A top police representative on Tuesday said that there is no history of criminals using a round popular among AR-15 rifle shooters against officers, undermining the Obama administration’s argument for banning the 5.56 M855 “lightgreen tip.”

“Any ammunition is of concern to police in the wrong hands, but this specific round has historically not posed a law enforcement problem,” said James Pasco, executive director of the Washington office of the Fraternal Order of Police, the world’s largest organization of sworn law enforcement officers, with more than 325,000 members.

He told Secrets that the round used mostly for target practice “is not typically used against law enforcement.”

While he said that he is “not finding fault” with the surprise move last month by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to classify the round as “armor piercing” and then ban it, Pasco added, “While this round will penetrate soft body armor, it has not historically posed a threat to law enforcement.”
That view not only counters BATFE’s reason for proposing the ban, it also challenges the White House endorsement of the ban. Spokesman Josh Earnest said Monday, “we are looking at additional ways to protect our brave men and women in law enforcement and believe that this process is valuable for that reason alone. This seems to be an area where everyone should agree that if there are armor-piercing bullets available that can fit into easily concealed weapons, that it puts our law enforcement at considerably more risk.”

The administration’s effort is under fire on Capitol Hill where 55 percent of all House members have signed a letter challenging BATFE’s proposal.

Led by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte and the National Rifle Association, 235 members have signed the letter. The signatures came in at a record pace since Goodlatte’s team and the NRA have been circulating it for just three business days.

A similar effort is moving quickly through the Senate, led by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley.

As with most rounds used in rifles, the 5.56 M855 will shoot through soft body armor, but was granted an exemption to longstanding police protection legislation because it isn’t used by criminals who typically use smaller pistols.

BATFE said that with the popularity of AR-style pistols growing, the weapon poses a new threat to police. But foes of the bullet ban say that criminals are unlikely to spend the $1,000 or more to by one and also that at about 20 inches long, it isn’t considered a concealed weapon.

Many gun enthusiasts believe that the proposed bullet ban, up for public comment, is a backdoor bid to cut the popularity of the AR-15, the nation’s most popular gun, one critics call an “assault weapon” and a target of liberals and President Obama.




Constitutional Sheriff Richard Mack Challenges Sheriff Newell Normand


David Abadie



Sheriff Richard Mack, the head of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, has recently said he would gladly debate sheriff Normand on his interpretation of the Constitution and the role of the Sheriff.  Richard Mack, former sheriff of Graham County, Arizona, was the first in the country to file a lawsuit against the Clinton administration to stop the intrusiveness associated with the Brady Bill.  Mack’s case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court where he won a landmark decision on the issue of states’ rights and local sovereignty.

This challenge came about after I asked sheriff Normand what he thought of sheriff Mack’s book ‘County Sheriff: America’s Last Hope’.  First off, I recommend everyone read this book.  Sheriff Normand told me that Mack “Was all wet (on the Constitution)”. I proceeded to ask Normand what that meant and he said, “He’s got it all wrong. He’s all wrong on the Constitution”. Looking up the interpretation of the phrase “all wet”, I discovered it referred to being drunk.  Upon hearing these comments, Mack offered the opportunity to debate sheriff Normand on the meaning and interpretation of the Constitution.  Normand is a lawyer, I would think this would be well within his comfort zone.  Mack would love to fly in anytime and debate these issues.  So, the challenge stands. Sheriff Normand, shoot me an email and let me know when we can set this up.

Jefferson Parish Sheriff Newell Normand Doesn’t Respect 2nd Or 4th Amendment


David Abadie




While attending the JPSO Citizen’s Academy, I realized that Sheriff Newell Normand was sounding a lot like the Department of Homeland security.  What seems to be a predetermined narrative pushed onto us by various government agencies, has now trickled down to our local sheriff.  Newell Normand told us that the dismantling of Al-Qaeda is no longer “Core AQ”,our primary terrorist threat, and that now “we” are looking at more homegrown levels of terrorism.

Below is a transcript of my address to the Citizen’s Academy and the Sheriff’s response:



Sheriff, I could not imagine a more professional organization associated with law enforcement than yours.  Your staff, equipment and facilities are extremely impressive and something the residents of this parish should be proud of.  I also believe that your department is made up of good men and women who do their job with empathy and common sense.

With that said, my concerns are not with your department but with the government source that is providing our parish with millions of dollars.  There is a funny saying that you may have heard “There is always free cheese in a mouse trap”.  I ask that you be wary not of the equipment that the parish is given but of the vernacular that this agency and or branch of government is using and now you, yourself are repeating.  You have mentioned that the war on terror is now focused inward here, “on the homeland”.

A Fox News affiliate reported that Sgt. Dan Downing of the Morgan County Sheriff’s Department in Indiana admits that the increasing militarization of domestic police departments is intended partially to deal with returning veterans who are now being seen as homegrown terror threats.  He went on to say that returning veterans have the ability and knowledge to build IED’s and defeat law enforcement techniques. 

In April 2009, the DHS intelligence assessment listed returning veterans as likely domestic terrorists.  Just a month later, the New York Times reported on how Boy Scout Explorers were being trained by the DHS to kill “disgruntled Iraq war veterans” in terrorist drills.  The FBI has also repeatedly characterized returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan as a major domestic terror threat.  We shouldn’t be treating our veterans this way.

Keep in mind, while making these inflammatory statements the federal government is also doing the following:

–funding Al-Qaeda in Syria with anti-tank weaponry, small arms, and telecommunications (Washington Times);

–releasing over 36,000 illegal immigrants who had nearly 88,000 convictions – including 193 homicides, 423 sexual assaults, 300 kidnappings, and 1,100 aggravated assaults (Breitbart),

–spying on every American’s emails, text messages, credit card statements, and phone calls.

–Arming the United States Postal service, department of Agriculture, IRS, Social security administration and many other agencies.

Sheriff, the list goes on and on.

I hope that we can all ask ourselves what is happening.  The hypocrisy and dangerous rhetoric of the federal government is at an all-time high, Obama and George Bush are both to blame for these policies.

We have participated in this citizen’s academy because we care about our community and our families.  I wish we had the luxury to sit back and say nothing, but for myself I have three children and cannot afford that luxury.  So when President Obama said he wanted to build a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded as our military, he meant it.  This is the Department of Homeland Security which has purchased over 2.5 billion of rounds of ammunition and has supplied law enforcement agencies across this country with millions of dollars’ worth of equipment.


The Vietnam War was based on the Gulf of Tonkin false flag lie and the Iraq war was based on the lie of weapons of mass destruction.  Now the federal government appears to be preparing for hostility with the American people.  I want you and everyone else to know what a false flag is so that when something terrible does happen the American people won’t fall for another lie and be herded into another fear fueled war with each other.

Last time we met you told me that if a man pulled out a gun and robbed me, he could be considered a terrorist.  I don’t believe we need to live in a manufactured state of fear created by our federal government so that we stand by and watch our bill of rights destroyed.  I ask that you uphold your oath to the constitution and protect our individual rights.  In addition, I ask that you stand with the American people of this parish and help us not to be divided by issues or racism or intolerance.  In order to protect the community, we must uphold the rights of the smallest minority – which is the individual — and not sacrifice those rights for the collective or what is deemed as the benefit of the group.

War is a racket fought for special interests and corporations and THIS ONE THE FEDS ARE PREPARING IS NO DIFFERENT.  If you don’t believe me, look up the most decorated Military veteran in History, General Smedly Butler.

Another citizen:  What’s your point?

ME: My point was… Uh… It was not a question.  It was me just asking you to uphold your oath to the constitution. 

Sheriff Normand response:  “Well I don’t think that there is any risk of me not doing so.  I mean the fact of the matter is this: we have constitutional rights, constitutional protections, those are all worked out in the balance of interest. And you know the fact that we are dealing with domestic terrorism, and the fact that the dismantling of Al-Qaeda is no longer “Core AQ” our primary terrorist threat and that now we are looking at more homegrown levels of terrorism, we can continue to get into a philosophical debate as to who is right and who is wrong, in the interim people are dying.  And the fact of the matter the law is being violated

Me:” people are dying here?”

Sheriff: “ We are charged with, making sure we seek those individuals out, and we charge them and they go to jail in order to have a structured and ordered society.

When I get money from the federal government, there is really not any strings attached.  It’s a request by me, its not a gift by them.  I can dictate in whatever program I desire and the ones I don’t desire I don’t participate in.  It doesn’t mean that they are wrong or they are right, in those programs, its just I choose as to what best fits the challenges that I have and the community that I serve.  So I think you are under a misunderstanding of that there is significant strings tied to a lot of this money, there is not.  In Fact, More often than not we have to prove that we are not going to violate constitutional protections by receiving this money and using it for technology that would be overbearing and over burdensome as related to those constitutional protections.


There is a lot of political rhetoric that is talked about in Washington, I for one don’t really care for Washington politics, I don’t like the divisive nature of it, never have.  I don’t like the fact that the party controls national politics.  I say this all the time, the two party system is the best and the worst thing about this country. (8:30). It’s a good this because we don’t have  plurality, Its easier to reach compromise when we so desire, it’s the worst thing because its all about control.  We elect somebody today with a party label, he was a pretty good guy this morning, by this evening about ten o’clock or eight o’clock when the polls close and the results come in he’s a no good rotten bastard.  Just because he’s got a different party label than the one we may adhere to.  I’m not one that believes that, You know and I’m a Republican, I’m not one that believes that an idea that starts on the democratic side of the isle is a bad idea just because it started on that side of the isle.  I’m one that believes we need to look at the (imperical) data (9:23) and determine whether or not, you know, there is any validity to the program, what is it going to accomplish? does it violate the balance of interest as it relates to the constitutional protections?  Ah, you know so, I don’t think that there is any risk that I’m going to be one you know to to violate uh uh as it relates to any federal money that’s coming down.  In fact to the contrary my experience has been, much different.

You know I tell this little anecdotal story, we work with ATF all the time, and you know how you fill out the FFL form? The Yellow form? A lot of people don’t believe this, but ATF cannot go check the data base of those forms.  Unless they have probable cause to determine that there is a violation of some federal statute can they even go run somebody’s name to see what guns they’ve purchased.  Neither can I.  And they (inaudible won’t/ will) do it at our request.  It wasn’t until my career 18, 19 years that I found that out.  In fact I thought it was a little disingenuous.  Why are we collecting these forms if we can’t go and check what the hell is going on as it relates to that?  We can go check about everything else that we have purchased that’s movable.  Why all of a sudden, just because there is a second amendment right to keep and bear arms?  That’s fine you can the second amendment right to keep and bear arms.  It doesn’t mean that there is an onerous impact to that particular right to go and see what arms.  In my view that’s not a constitutional protection and I don’t think it’s a significant intrusion.

Ah, when we deal with the mental health issues and primarily what you are talking about and I think you are slanting it a little bit ah we even have a military court here now in Jefferson parish for veterans and dealing with the PTSD issues that they have when they violate…  We have set up a whole different structure in criminal violations to help get counseling and everything else that they need if they violate the law, because of their duty, their service, their honor, their loyalty to this country we have put them in a position where they could be mentally incapacitated to some extent and that we have to deal with that.  And we recognize that very service by doing so.  That’s funded by the federal government.  That’s funded by the Obama administration.  The fact of the matter is they I mean they stand up and recognize the honor and the duty and the loyalty.

So I mean you know, sometimes we get into this political rhetoric that’s a lot to do about nothing.  Ah in my view, ah in an operational sense I don’t see that we are overreaching.  Do we make mistakes? Yeah.  Do we misspeak? Yeah, but guess what we are human, we’re imperfect.  Ah the fact of the matter is, is it fair to take those statement or those happenstances and exploit them? Yeah its unfair, we make mistakes, people make mistakes. Um ya know, we’ve gotten to a point in our society where the impact of the spoken word, because of the internet can permeate across this country and we not only hold, try to hold people to a literal understanding of what they say, we actually take it out of context.  And they try to rip one sentence out of a twenty minute speech and try and make something out of it, that its really not.  Uh and that’s probably as significant, more significant intrusion on the rights and the liberties of a citizen than most other stuff than we are talking about.  Any other questions?  (APPLAUSE)