Real Time Web Analytics

Midnight Monument Mayhem/Trump The Warhawk – Full Show 04/12/2017

BATTLE OF NEW ORLEANS RADIO

1st hour Battle of New Orleans discusses the current Syrian Issue with AlMasdarNews editor Paul Antonopoulos. The second hour the crew is joined by  David Risselada from IndefenseofourNation.blogspot.com and author of Not On My Watch Exposing the Marxist Agenda in the Education System. David discusses current Trump situation. In the 3rd hour the gang talks about New Orleans Mitch Landrieu attempting to take down 2 confederate monuments in the dead of night.

 

Please Tune into The Battle of New Orleans Radio live Wed. 7 to 9 pm cst. on 990 am wgso. Outside of the New Orleans area can stream live at Tunein.com, Tunein app or Wgso.com. Please subscribe to our youtube ch Battlenolaradio

 

Article V, Gun Control and A New Constitution for a Socialist Republic in North America

THEDAILYRESISTANCE.COM

David Risselada

 

The idea of an Article V convention seems to be gaining momentum across the country.  According to the constitution, an Article V convention is the process by which both houses of Congress propose amendments which then must be ratified by three fourths of the states legislatures in order for them to become adopted. It is believed by many in the conservative movement that this process is one of the only hopes remaining to save our country.
image 9-12-15
Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.
There are fears among many that this convention could turn into a runaway convention of sorts because they claim there is no way to limit the process to a single proposed amendment, such as the Balanced Budget Amendment. Given the Obama administrations blatant disregard for our current constitution, there is a justifiable fear that we could end up with a new constitution all together. Advocates of the convention however, argue that this is the time because Constitutional Conservatives have never been represented so strongly as they are now in the state legislatures. Republicans are currently in control of 31 states, giving many the confidence that they will prevent any changes to existing amendments.
While this may be the case, there is one little detail noone seems to be discussing. A new constitution already exists and it is called The Constitution for the New Socialists Republic in North America. This new Socialist Constitution was written by the Revolutionary Communist Party and describes in great detail the intent of the Communists to obtain absolute authority. Again, many people are comforted by the fact that Republicans are firmly in control of so many states. This gives a false sense of security, in this authors opinion, and lulls the masses into accepting something that could very well be designed to bring in this new constitution.
socialist constitution
Communists excel at enacting agendas through deception and mental manipulation. Their entire modus operandi is a push for social change and they will do anything to achieve their goal; even infiltrate the Republican Party and pose as conservatives. Consider the following stated goal form the 45 goals for the Communist takeover of America.
“Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.”
With the latest push for gun control it is clear there is a danger  our constitution could be fundamentally altered, or replaced altogether. According to a document entitled “Globalist Plan to Disarm America” Public Law 87-297- The Arms Control and Disarmament Act, there has been a plan, written into law, to strip away the Second Amendment for years. This plan first calls for the elimination of the U.S. Armed Forces, which has been steadily happening for the past four decades, and then the gradual disarming of the public. Little by little the public is being conditioned to see gun ownership as a problem that must be solved, and to not see the threat to gun ownership in a constitutional convention is to be blind. Consider the following statements by Bernadine Smith, author of the Globalist Plan to Disarm America.
ObamaUN
Every couple of years the House of Representatives votes to appropriate funds for this on-going program. Since P.L. 87-297 was first passed into law in 961, there have been 18 updates to it – all bad – with no deletions of these issues I lay before you now. The Congress knows that the plan includes the policing of the United States by foreign troops. (The world army they are forming in Europe.) The Congress is allowing our military bases to be closed down, except for those that will be used by the world army. You will find that plan in Publication 7277 and in “The Blueprint for the Peace Race.”
If the president and Congress can promote a “Constitutional Convention” you will find yourself with two new constitutions (communist in structure) which in one states in Article VIII, Section 12: “No person shall bear arms or possess lethal weapons except the police and members of the armed forces….”
The Congress has praised these documents and is on record in Senate hearings seeking ways to install these constitutions. Ask your librarian for “Revision of the United Nations Charter – Hearings Before a Subcommittee (Foreign Relations) Feb. 2-20, 1950 U.S.Government Printing Office.” Nothing has changed since. They are still viable. The ultimate goal to be reached in Stage III of the disarmament process is to “proceed to a point where no state [nation] would have the military power to challenge the progressively strengthened U.N. Peace Force….”
Not only have we seen the emergence of the new “Communist Constitution” in this article, we also know that through the Attorney Generals “Strong City Network”  that U.N. Troops will be policing certain American cities.
It is overwhelmingly obvious that our entire government has been infiltrated by communists.  Since 2014 we have watched a Republican controlled congress surrender on every major issue pushed by President Obama leaving us with no real representation. If members of the Republican establishment will sell us out why would’nt state legislatures and governors? The possibility that there are operatives posing as constitutional conservatives pushing for an Article V convention must be considered. It is highly unlikely that the power elite, after making as much progress as they have with Obama at the helm, would give it up through a procedure designed to save a constitution they have spent the past century destroying. As crazy as it sounds, the facts remain that the Republican congress has sold us out, and Democrats are pushing for absolute authority while the Socialist Constitution is waiting in the shadows. Perhaps this should be looked into a little bit before we allow ourselves to be rushed into something we obviously, don’t fully understand.

Pyschopolitics, Behavioral Manipulation and A Congress Scared to Act

THEDAILYRESISTANCE.COM

David Risselada

 

It is the mission of pyschopolitics first to align the obedience and goals of the group, and then maintain their alignment by the eradication of the effectiveness of the persons and personalities which might swerve the group towards disaffection. (Beria, Textbook on Psychopolitics pp.10)
President Obama, before announcing his executive actions on gun control, was caught spying on congress and the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. This is certainly an impeachable offense as Richard Nixon was forced to resign for spying on his political opponents in the Watergate scandal. As usual, this scandalous act was met with little resistance as the Republican Party sits in what can best be described as a fear to act because they may be classified as racist. The fact that they refuse to fight Obama’s use of executive orders on gun control after a disgrace of this magnitude, is in and of itself, treasonous; however, there is little chance they will because they have been conditioned to simply go along to get along. (The only other explanation is that they are simply in on the plan to bring this country down.) While there are certain executive actions the president can lawfully take, the truth is Republicans have been caving to every agenda item pushed by the Democrat/Progressives from Obamacare all the way to the omnibus spending bill recently passed by the newly elected, but extremely unpopular Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan. This also includes agenda items like Obamatrade and the Iran nuclear deal. Slowly but surely, through the use of smear campaigns and other Alinsky style tactics, the Republicans have been effectively neutered to the point where there is virtually no way they could muster the necessary will to fight Obama on anything. I have long believed, and have told my congressman as much, that this conditioning process has one main goal; getting Republicans to cave on gun control. This is why President Obama has waited until his final year to make his final push. Make no mistake, President Obama is skilled in psychopolitics, and being a community organizer means he is surely taking notes on what was and wasn’t effective in getting Republicans to go along with his agenda. The coming year promises to keep all of us on the edge our seats as we anticipate the end of Obama’s reign.
In my last series of articles dealing with B.F. Skinner and his book Beyond Freedom and Dignity, I tried to make readers understand how behavioral scientists have learned to manipulate the environment in order to change the behavior of man. In order to comprehend the true nature of the left you have to understand that they simply do not view human behavior as something we are in control of. They do not believe in free will. Rather, they believe behavior is shaped by the environment, and that if the environment can be manipulated, human behavior can be changed to mimic the manipulation.  On page 18 of Beyond Freedom and Dignity Skinner comments on the relationship between an organism and its environment by saying that the interaction between the two can be better manipulated by learning how behavior is shaped and maintained by studying the way the environment around the organism responds to the behavior. Furthermore, on page 91 Skinner comments on the effectiveness of controlling individuals by giving the illusion that certain issues are either favored or opposed by others. This is where we are in America today. The mass media and our educational system have been hard at work conditioning the masses into approval of a left wing agenda while those that oppose it are made to appear irrational and even insane. This is obvious on many levels; however, this is directly related to communism and the Textbook on Psychopolitics.
What does this have to do with the President spying on congress and gun control? In the Textbook on Psychopolitics,  Laventia Beria writes about the need to manipulate public officials and public officials only in the pursuit of the communist agenda. In other words, there is little need to influence the opinion of the masses when it comes to formulating policy because we have no power. While the following quote revolves around influencing opinion against religion, a connection can be made if you consider the Republican’s inability to act against Obama’s agenda.
You need not care what effect you have upon the public. The effect you care about is the one upon officials. You must recruit every agency in the nation marked for slaughter into a foaming hatred of religious healing (Republicans) You must suborne district attorneys and judges into an intense belief as an ancient faith in God that Christian Science (Conservatives) or any other religious practice (anyone that disagrees with progressives) which might devote itself to mental healing (Constitutional governance) is vicious, bad, insanity- causing, publicly hated and intolerable. (Beria, pp. 59)
This tactic is directly related to Skinners comments on the effectiveness of the “approval/disapproval” strategy mentioned earlier. In essence, every effort is being made to portray the Conservatives as being hated and supportive of policies that are generally disapproved by everyone. It doesn’t matter what the masses really think because every aspect of this agenda is being implemented from the podium of “officialdom” so that twenty years from now, when history is rewritten, it will be the progressive narrative that tells the story with the backing of everything, and everyone, considered official.
This tactic, if employed effectively, can also have the effect of turning the chosen target against his previous loyalties because they have been so thoroughly discredited through the use of smear campaigns and racial identity politics. A Republican congressman for instance, can be brought to see the reasonableness of a liberal agenda item because of the efforts being made to portray it as a mainstream viewpoint while virtually destroying the Republican narrative. This is one of the reasons why the left has so successfully attached racial politics to nearly every issue on public display.  Consider the following from the Textbook on Psychopolitics.
“There is the creation of a state of mind in the individual, by actually placing him under duress, and then furnishing him with false evidence to demonstrate that the target of his previous loyalties is itself, the course of the duress. Another portion of this same method consists of defaming or degrading the individual whose loyalties are to be changed to the target of his loyalties, i.e. superiors or government, to such a degree that this target, at length, actually does hold the individual in disrepute, and so does rebuff him and serve to convince him that his loyalties have been misplaced.” (Beria, pp. 20)
This is what Skinner meant when he said that the approval/disapproval strategy can be more effective in controlling individuals than a police state. The stress associated with appearing as if you don’t care for the common man, (which is how Republicans are constantly presented,) is enough in many cases to make them abandon their principles and go along with an agenda that appears to be popular. This is how out of touch our representatives truly are. As far as Obama spying on congress goes, you have to consider the possibility that they are being blackmailed.
Recruitment into the ranks of mental healing can best be done by carefully bringing to it only those healing students, who are, to some slight degree, already depraved, or who have been treated by psychopolitical operatives. (Beria, pp. 96)
This means that members of congress could be selected because it is known that they are corruptible. The mass surveillance apparatus employed by the U.S. government does more than record conversations; it predicts behaviors and identifies potential threats. By spying on congress Obama potentially learns who will go along or who will not. Who is corruptible and who needs to be corrupted. By doing this they are manipulating the environment and changing the behavior of congressmen who may otherwise choose to remain true to their principles. At this point, it appears as if nearly all of our politicians are corruptible.

Manipulating the Environment to Turn Patriots into Terrorists

THEDAILYRESISTANCE.COM

David Risselada

Americans, after recovering from the holidays, are anticipating another round of executive orders focusing on stricter gun control, after the President returns from his Hawaii vacation. At this point, as evidenced by the massive increase in gun sales, the American people understand that gun control is not about gun safety, it is about control, period. Honestly, the gun control debate can be used to sum up the exact differences between the left and right wing worldviews. Most of us understand that the left generally believes we are too stupid to govern our own affairs, and, an intellectual elite is needed to dictate how we live our lives. The right on the other hand, believes in principles like individual liberty and personal responsibility, and that people are best off when left to self govern. What most people fail to understand is that the left had been mastering the manipulation of human behavior for the past century, and most of our reactions, whether we like to admit it or not, are the result of purposefully fed stimulus designed to generate a reaction that either way, could push us towards the desired end of total control. As I wrote in Psychology: Silent Weapon of the Elites Pushing us all Toward the Same End, the social controllers have discovered that manipulating the environment around us can force us into predictable behavior patterns that can be studied and counted on to produce the same results. The environment, unbeknownst to most of us, is used in more ways than can be imagined to gain social control, especially when it comes to pushing, and gaining support for certain issues. So they like to believe.
The television media is playing a huge role assisting the Obama administration demonize certain people, promote or denigrate certain political issues and give the overall appearance that the Democrat agenda is widely accepted, and the Conservatives are downright hated. While it may be commonly known that the main stream media is extremely biasedthis will matter little in one hundred years after history has been rewritten by the progressive liberals. No matter the issue, whether it be guns, race, the economy, immigration or terrorism, the media is there to give the appearance that the majority of Americans disapprove of Conservative attempts to stop the democrat/communist agenda. This of course, is a method of social control. Most people can understand the concept of Republican politicians going along in an attempt to avoid being labeled as a racist, or uncompassionate towards people’s needs. This technique is very effective, perhaps so much so that Paul Ryan felt compelled to pass the recent omnibus spending bill out of fear the left would make another commercial portraying him throwing granny from a cliff over proposed Medicare cuts. While many people may be wondering what new information is being presented here, many have no idea just how refined this technique is, and how much of a science manipulating human behavior has become.
In this article, I am going to continue explaining our current political environment through B.F. Skinners “Beyond Freedom and Dignity,” in an attempt to make readers aware of just how “inhumane” the left wing world view really is, and the extent to which they are attempting to manipulate us.
As described in the first paragraph, there is a distinct difference between the left wing view of man, and the right wing view. While it is a sufficient comparison enabling readers to understand the difference on a fundamental level, it in no way does this difference in world views any justice. The difference is purely scientific, and once this is understood, everything else falls into place. For instance, on page 101 of “Beyond Freedom and Dignity” B.F. Skinner explains this difference from a psychological perspective and it is completely Darwinian/Marxist in nature. He refers to mans ability to freely choose his behavior as the “Pre-Scientific” view of mankind. Pre-Scientific man was responsible for his own successes and failures, he was able to decide for himself and act based on his own beliefs.
A political view that sought to make the most of man, and build upon his growth, would likely refer to these attributes as the “post-scientific” view of man; however, this is not the case. Science has learned to manipulate and control behavior, and this has drastically changed the way science views mankind. It is now believed that if individuals cannot be molded, and made to accept certain behaviors and beliefs, that the individual is defective.  This attitude is what led to the deaths of nearly 100,000,000 people in the twentieth century as communist dictators brutally murdered those that opposed communism because it was believed that only defective people could not be brought to see the reasonableness of social control.
Skinner writes that the more that is learned about the effects of the environment on human behavior, the less it can be attributable to any “autonomous” controlling agent. This simply means that man is not in control of his behavior, and through manipulating the environment, his behavior can be controlled. Consider Skinners thoughts on “post”-scientific man.
In the scientific view (and the word is not necessarily honorific) a person’s behavior is determined by a genetic endowment traceable to the evolutionary history of the species and by the environmental circumstances to which as an individual he has been exposed. Neither view can be proved, but it is in the nature of scientific inquiry that the evidence should shift in favor of the second. As we learn more about the effects of the environment, we have less reason to attribute any part of human behavior to an autonomous controlling agent. And the second view shows a marked advantage when we begin to do something about behavior. Autonomous man is not easily changed: in fact, to the extent that he is autonomous, he is by definition not changeable at all. But the environment can be changed, and we are learning how to change it. The measures we use are those of physical and biological technology, but we use them in special ways to affect behavior. (Skinner, 101)
This comparison to what Skinner describes as pre-scientific man and scientific man highlights perfectly what it is we are up against when considering the lefts agenda. This however, is not all. On page 91 Skinner describes how effective manipulating the environment to form public opinion truly is. This brings us back to our example with Paul Ryan and throwing granny from a cliff. The fear of disapproval, it has been found, is a powerful motivator when seeking conformity. Consider the following statement.
People who get along together well under the mild contingencies of approval and disapproval are controlled as effectively as (and in many ways more effectively than) the citizens of a police state. Orthodoxy controls through the establishment of rules, but the mystic is no freer because the contingencies which have shaped his behavior are more personal or idiosyncratic. Those who work productively because of the reinforcing value of what they produce are under the sensitive and powerful control of the products. Those who learn in the natural environment are under a form of control as powerful as any control exerted by a teacher. (Skinner, 91)
So, what does this have to do with our current political environment and the push for gun control? Well, the environment has been changed to give the impression that we live in an out of control, dangerous society where leaving your house means you risk getting shot in the head. Or at least, this is how they try to portray the environment in order to change your behavior. In America, liberty can only be lost when the people consent to it; and in a nation where liberty works and everybody is living peaceful, prosperous lives, there is little reason to give up freedom in order to feel secure. There is little doubt, after understanding the belief that human behavior can be manipulated through the environment, that social controllers are hard at work engineering environmental changes to bring about the type of behavioral controls they would wish to impose upon us. Consider Cass Sunstein for instance; he believes, and has stated so in his book “Nudge,” that human beings should be “nudged” into behaving certain ways that would be better for the planet, better for health and to help to bring about happiness. Again, the common theme here is that people do not know what is best for them and only with an enlightened, intellectual elite lording over us can we expect to live prosperous, healthy lives.
The only problem the left has is that people are not buying it. People do not want to be controlled because despite what the left believes, we were created, by our creator, to be free, plain and simple.  The left simply does not understand the “pre-scientific” view of man because everything for them has to be categorized and boxed away in easily controlled files. When Josh Earnest said the White House had no idea why Americans were buying so many guns, he wasn’t kidding. The left has no way of comprehending why Americans have not abandoned their outdated ideas of freedom and the rights to protect the ones we love in favor of more government control because for all of their efforts to manipulate and control our behavior through changing the environment, they have forgot to analyze what it is they are so afraid of. Their quest for total control represents little more than a fear of being unable to control themselves. We are just the guinea pigs. Given the fact however, that the current administration has demonstrated an unshakable resolve when it comes to creating chaos to gain more power, the possibility that Americans refusal to go along with the gun control agenda can be used against us is highly likely. They have already labeled most of us as terrorists and extremists, enacting gun control and playing on the fact that the majority of patriots will not go along will only aid in the efforts of creating a hostile environment which will be used to further “nudge” the people to change their behavior.  In effect, whether the majority of people buy it or not will matter little, they are successfully changing the environment, forcing us to respond in defense of our inalienable rights. They are using the environment and the issue of gun control to turn patriots into terrorists in the minds of the unwashed masses, and for some it is working.

Destroying Utopia

THEDAILYRESISTANCE.COM

David Risselada

 

In my book, “Not on my Watch: Exposing the Marxist Agenda in Education,” I discussed my college experience where I was educated by left wing zealots who taught the concepts of white privilege and social justice. The book is a combination of personal stories and research which describes many of the indoctrination methods being used in our universities and public schools today. One of the concepts that were continually discussed was the idea of creating “Utopia;” a world of total equality where everyone is free from want and the desire to compete with one another because everyone is provided the same basic necessities. In the minds of the left, people’s behavior is driven by the environment and they believe that capitalism, being competitive in nature, is one of the biggest contributing factors of inequality and poverty. They simply do not believe that some people achieve success based on their own hard work and merit; rather, it is a result of the environment in which they are surrounded by. Therefore, when it comes to creating “Utopia,” the idea is to change the environment to one where people’s behavior adapts with it, and they are no longer motivated by the need to survive and prosper because the environment is one where everything is provided to everyone equally.  This is a basic precept of the social and behavioral sciences. It is the argument of man being free and autonomous or an instinct driven creature whose behavior can be controlled and manipulated.
notonmywatch
In “Beyond Freedom and Dignity” B.F. Skinner argues that human behavior is not only shaped by environment, but through conditioning. The reward/punishment model of molding human behavior is widely used in our education system and it is argued by many that support the “free, autonomous man” argument that this is greatly hampering people’s ability to think and act because they will only do so when promised a reward. The fear of punishment also influences people’s ability to act out of fear that they may say or do the wrong thing. This is obvious on some levels as the threat of jail or loss of certain privileges will certainly influence the choices some people make. While conservatives would argue that man is freely making these behavioral choices, the behaviorists argue that these choices are dictated to us based on our surroundings. This is true on some levels, our surroundings may certainly limit our behavior choices; however, man is still very much in control of the choice he makes, to argue otherwise is to say man is no different than any other beast that roams the earth, and has no inherent qualities that makes him significant in anyway. This is why the left continually makes excuses for the behavior of criminals and terrorists. Islamic radicals are justified in their actions because they are oppressed, and our culture is intolerant of them. Black Lives Matter activists arejustified in burning down cities because they live in an environment where they are allegedly hunted down by white cops and murdered in cold blood. We all know these are invalid arguments and that to treat man like an animal unable to take any responsibility for his actions is to completely dehumanize him.

B.F. Skinner Founder of Operant Conditioning

As mentioned earlier, one of the goals of the social controllers is to create “Utopia” and a world of total equality. In order to do this however, people’s ideas of freedom and control need to be changed as well as the environment around them. Skinner argues that the social environment needs to be redesigned in order to limit the aversive (negative) consequences of behavior and that once this is accomplished, the way people view social control can be changed. In other words, people can be conditioned to accept social control in a world where negative consequences of their behavior are eliminated and behavioral choices which lead to positive consequences are made for them.  Consider the following statement from B.F. Skinners “Beyond Freedom and Dignity.”
Physical technology has reduced the number of occasions upon which people arenaturally punished, and social environments have been changed to reduce the likelihood of punishment at the hands of others. Punishable behavior can be minimized by creating circumstances in which it is not likely to occur. The archetypal pattern is the cloister. In a world in which only simple foods are available, and in moderate supply, no one is subject to the natural punishment of overeating, or the social punishment of disapproval, or the religious punishment of gluttony as a venial sin. (Skinner “Beyond Freedom and Dignity” pp.64)
That is quite a telling statement. It highlights the belief held by the left that man’s behavior needs to be controlled for his own good because his choices only lead to personal harm and destruction of the world around him. It also highlights the belief mentioned in the previous paragraph. The social controllers believe that the creation of Utopia is possible by manipulating mans surroundings in a manner in which the choices he makes are the result of a controlled environment in which he is positively rewarded for making such choices. It is the belief of the left that man would rather sit back and have the peaceful, stress free life fostered upon him as opposed to having to take risk and work hard to achieve a state of autonomy. They would like to create a world where people accept that their control is necessary for people to behave. In fact, it is the belief of Skinner that the creation of a perfect world, where people are conditioned to accept social control, would eliminate the need for people to be good because the conditions created where there is no aversive stimulus to react to, and no natural punishments for negative behavior would be absent. People would therefore simply go along with the stimulus provided by the social controllers in much the same way Julia is portrayed in Barrack Obama’s “The Life of Julia.” Here, Julia, a fictional character, is being led down the path of having everything provided to her by the government, a cradle to grave form of control if you will. The left believes that this type of system creates an “automatic goodness” in people because the environment would be one where there is no need to compete, no need to be driven by selfishness and no need to be without. In essence, society would be free from want and need.
If all of this were true to any degree then we would have achieved this Utopia long ago because the social controllers have been manipulating our environment for many, many decades in its pursuit. The biggest mistake made by these behavioral scientists is believing that man is not a divine being created with free will and an ability to choose. They view everything from scientific terms, and man, in essence, is a spiritual being whether they wish to accept it or not. If man wished to be free from want and the stress of providing for himself, then all of us would simply abandon our jobs, and other responsibilities, and show up at the welfare office Monday morning.  Some people may wish to live this way because of the conditioning they have thus far received. There are people in our country that believe they are entitled to life at another’s expense because certain elements of society are privileged while others are allegedly oppressed. To convince man that he need not take responsibility for his own actions, and that he is entitled, does not create a better society; rather, it creates one of disincentive and true selfishness as man becomes focused more and more on his needs and his needs alone. When the resources are redistributed by government people rarely feel they have enough, and the fact that work is now being done for the greater good of society, and not for the pursuit of one’s individual needs, the motivation to excel is destroyed. On the other hand, when an individual is left to his own devises, and his work is based on the need to survive, and he reaps the benefits of his own labor, we all benefit because the motivation to keep succeeding leads to growing business’ and more wealth creation. The left knows this. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t devote so much time and energy to learning how to manipulate human behavior to accept otherwise. If they were truly compassionate, and not in search of total control, they would leave well enough alone and let people be free.
When my professor in “Understanding the Social Environment” proclaimed that we could create a Utopia and make a world where everyone was completely equal, I argued that America was as Utopian a country that one could ask for because we are (allegedly) free.  It was in this argument that I began to understand the mindset of the left as I heard the words of this professor and leftist students in the class. They argued that freedom failed, and that unless government took control of the economy we would continue to see increasing poverty and gaps in income equality. They argued that the system in which we live is an unfair system because some people are more successful not based on merit, but on the circumstances that surrounded them in their upbringing. They simply do not acknowledge that people are capable of rising above their circumstances through dedication and hard work, and in the event that they are forced to acknowledge such a thing; they will still claim that it is unfair that some people have to work harder than others. I argued that it was government manipulation of the economy and the massive spending that was creating the ills they were seeking to fix. In other words, it was my opinion that they were not creating a Utopia, but destroying one.

A World Upside Down, The Devil Running Loose, and Life in Liberal America

THE DAILY RESISTANCE

David Risselada

Liberals insist we disarm ourselves and rely upon government to keep us safe; while simultaneously advocating for and enacting policies which make the world a more dangerous place to live.

My reaction to the latest shooting was probably similar to many people’s; a tense anticipation to Obama’s call for more gun control, and the fear that it could have been retaliation against Planned Parenthood and their brutal practice of selling baby body parts. That would have been a liberal’s dream come true. An actual right wing conservative going on a murder spree would have provided the needed justification for why conservative Christians are labeled as potential extremists. It turns out however, that our “Dear” shooter was just another in a long line of liberal whackos taking out their frustrations with society and feelings of self hatred on everybody else. You see, Mr. Dear self identifies as a woman and is not registered with any political party, so the leftwing narrative of a disgruntled Republican nut job going off has once again, been proven false. It must be real frustrating for the left to know that real right wing Christians are not committing acts of terror that they can blame on us. Liberals would love to say that that the so called hateful speech concerning the exposed practices at planned parenthood are responsible for the shooting.  If this is the case then wouldn’t the same be true for Obama’s rhetoric concerning Islam and Black Lives Matter? I’m sorry, but the left can’t have it both ways.
President Barack Hussein Obama is an apologist for radical Islam who has stated on several occasions that the west’s offensive language and intolerance is responsible for the violent behavior and hate fueled attacks committed by the Islamic State. If the shooter had attacked Planned Parenthood in retaliation for selling baby body parts, would it not, according to this logic, be somewhat excusable as well? John Kerry even justified the Charlie Hebdo attacks using this reasoning.  He said that there was at least a rationale for the shooting based on the idea that the cartoon was offensive toward the Prophet Mohammed.  Hillary Clinton blamed an alleged anti-Islamic video for the Benghazi attacks because it too was offensive. Well, what if the shooter had found Planned Parenthoods indifference towards the life of innocent baby’s offensive? What if white America is offended by being called racist continually by Democrats, when we all know that it was the Democrat party that is responsible for this country’s tainted past when it comes to racism? Would we then be justified in the type of violence committed by ISIS? If you follow this line of thinking to its logical conclusion the answer would obviously be yes. Apparently, violence is justified when people take offense to things that hurt their little feelings, or else it is when being governed by leftist radicals anyway. They use the pretense of offense to launch their social activism in their efforts to transform America from a nation of rugged individualism to collectivism. This is what is occurring in our universities today. Black Lives Matter activists are begging for segregation on the pretense that they are oppressed, and in fact, in danger because of white privilege. It does not get any more absurd than that, and yet, here we are.
President Obama, along with Al Sharpton and Eric Holder also took the same approach to the violence we witnessed in Ferguson Mo. and Baltimore in response to the deaths of Freddie Gray and Michael Brown. Barack Obama would have us believe that police are systematically targeting black people for extermination and that Jim Crow type segregation laws are still alive and well. It even came to light that George Soros funded the racially motivated protests in order to stir up civil unrest.  Private property was damaged and local businesses were burned to the ground in these protests, and instead of holding these people accountable, President Obama once again blamed American society for being too racist. What if we took offense to these lies and the fact that we are called terrorists even though we don’t burn cities to the ground? What if we found it offensive that George Soros is funding these events in an attempt to transform our nation? We all know that more white people are killed by police than blacks, so do we get to go on a rampage and burn down a city because we are being oppressed by lies and dehumanized in the process? Of course not, nor would we even want to. Our universities are justifying black on white racism under the guise of “white privilege” and truthfully, this contributes to the unruly behavior and misguided narrative that all whites are racist. It is in fact, quite offensive. Please show me where racist, bigoted white people are targeting blacks in response to being treated like a bunch of racists?
Looking at the facts at hand I would argue that it is Barack Obama’s failure to hold people accountable for their behavior and his justification of violence based on “offensive and intolerable language” that is the most responsible for the atrocities we have been witnessing, even if it had been a right wing conservative that had shot up Planned Parenthood. Barack Obama has taught the world, through his divisive tongue, that violence is justified when offense is taken to intolerance. That is how he has handled radical Islam by blaming it on free speech and videos, and justifying the burning of cities, and murder of police officers, because black people allegedly still live in a racist America.  You see, Obama and other followers of the radical community organizer, Saul Alinsky, believe that the ends justify the means and that there isn’t any true moral principles which exist in the world. In fact when it came to morality and principles Alinsky said this in Rules for Radicals-
To say that corrupt means corrupt the ends is to believe in the immaculate conception of ends and principles. The real arena is corrupt and bloody. Life is a corrupting process from the time a child learns to play his mother off against his father in the politics of when to go to bed; he who fears corruption fears life.
It doesn’t matter to them what damage they cause or who gets hurt, or who loses loved ones. All they care about is their desired ends, even if they can’t exactly describe what they are. Like I wrote in my last article, they simply want to destroy the existing society and obtain mass amounts of power. They operate on the premise that corrupting themselves somehow proves they have a superior morality, yet their superior morality prevents them from gaining a little hindsight and looking at the damage they are causing. To believe that a better, more perfect world can emerge from corruption and telling lies is to believe in a system run by Satan and not by God.  This of course is why Saul Alinsky wrote the following dedication in Rules for Radicals-
Lest we forget an over the shoulder acknowledgement to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins-or which is which) the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom-Lucifer.

Psychiatry and Psychotropic Meds: A Nation Under Conquest

THE DAILY RESISTANCE

David Risselada

Today in America, it seems that almost everyone is prescribed some type of mood altering drug to deal with their problems. The use of psychotropic drugs has become as commonplace as taking an aspirin to relieve a headache. Over the past couple of decades there has been an enormous push to advertise these drugs on television. It’s almost as if the entire nation is mentally ill because there is a psychiatric drug for almost anything, and people seem to believe they need them. In fact, the DSM IV (Diagnostic Statistical Manual) lists a total of 297 different mental health disorders for which of course, there is a drug that can be prescribed. The latest edition of the DSM, (Diagnostic Statistical Manual) the DSM V, has an additional 15 new disorders added to it. Many of these disorders are no different than normal, everyday emotions we feel on a day to day basis. For instance, “somatic symptom disorder” is a label used to describe an individual who worries too much about their own medical conditions. [1]  There is even a disorder for those who use the internet too much with a drug ready to prescribe as well. “Internet use disorder” [2]is characterized by many of the same symptoms as any other addiction. Just as it is with other alleged disorders, labeling this a mental illness will make the prescribing of a drug billable to insurance companies, thus increasing profit margins for pharmaceutical companies.  Americans make up 66% percent of the world’s population that consume psychotropic medications; this earns the pharmaceutical industry a whopping sixteen billion a year.[3] This offers huge incentives to create new needs for medications to treat illnesses that don’t really exist, as well as new, inventive ways to market them.

psychiatry 7 nov #1
Who is defining what the term “mental health” means, and how do they suddenly come up with new disorders? The thing that people need to understand is that mental health, and in particular psychiatric disorders, are tools of the pyschopolitician being employed against the United States in order to further their aim of transforming us into a communist state.
Transfer some of the powers of arrest from police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand. Communist goal number 38 26
Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose communist goals. Communist goal number 39[4]
A report issued in 2011 by Medco Health Solutions[5] shows that one out of every five adults are using at least one psychiatric drug to treat some type of mood disorder. The drugs taken are being used to treat anxiety disorders, depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and many other types of alleged mental illnesses. The ratio in women is a little higher with one out of every four taking these drugs. These numbers show a significant increase in the number of people being prescribed psychiatric medications since 2001, a twenty two percent increase to be exact. While women make up the largest population of adults taking drugs, it was young men between the ages of 20 and 44 that saw the highest percentage of usage increase, 43 percent since 2001. The use of these drugs among children has varied as there was a drop in use among kids after it has reached its highest point in 2004. This was due to an increase in warnings from the Food and Drug Administration highlighting the potential of the drugs to cause suicidal and violent behavior in children. Since 2010 however, there has once again, been an increase in the usage among children. Alarmingly, there is also increasing evidence that suggests the use of psychiatry is actually contributing to an increase in suicide rates among those seeking treatment. For instance, according to a study conducted in the UK, there was a direct correlation between the increased funding of mental health services and suicide rates.[6] Though, the biggest finding is that this was mostly related to nations where the increase in funding was done legislatively. Another study, published in the Journal, Social Psychiatry[7] by Matthew M. Large and Christopher J. Ryan further demonstrate a relation between psychiatric care and suicide rates.  This study found that patients receiving in patient services in psychiatric hospitals were 44 times more likely to committ suicide.
7 nov #2
“It must be carefully hidden that the incidence of insanity has only increased since these scientific practices have been applied.”[8] Laventia Beria
There is also evidence to suggest that the use of mental health medication is contributing to the increase in mental health diagnosis. Psychotropic drugs interfere with your brains ability to process normal, biological functioning by upsetting the way the neurotransmitters operate.
“After several weeks on psychoactive drugs, the brain’s compensatory efforts begin to fail, and side effects emerge that reflect the mechanism of action of the drugs. For example, the SSRIs may cause episodes of mania, because of the excess of serotonin. Antipsychotics cause side effects that resemble Parkinson’s disease, because of the depletion of dopamine (which is also depleted in Parkinson’s disease).
As side effects emerge, they are often treated by other drugs, and many patients end up on a cocktail of psychoactive drugs prescribed for a cocktail of diagnoses.The episodes of mania caused by antidepressants may lead to a new diagnosis of “bipolar disorder” and treatment with a “mood stabilizer,” such as Depokote (an anticonvulsant) plus one of the newer antipsychotic drugs. And so on.[9]
The question arises, looking at the increase in the number of drugs being prescribed, if there is actually an increase in the number of actual mental health cases or is there something else going on? Some doctors may have you believe that there is more sophisticated methods of detecting and diagnosing these illnesses; however, many prominent psychiatrists interviewed in the film “Making a Killing: The Untold Story of Psychotropic Drugging[10] also admit that what they do is purely trial and error and that there is no sound scientific method in which they use to diagnose mental health conditions. This also pertains to the dosage being prescribed. Take the words of Dr. Russell Barkley, professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University Of Massachusetts Medical Center when being interviewed on the criteria of diagnosing mental illness.
“A disorder doesn’t have to have a blood test to be valid. If that were the case, all mental disorders would be invalid…There is no lab test for any mental disorder right now in our science.” [11]
What Dr. Barkley just admitted is that psychiatry is not a science at all because medical science and disease research has traditionally been backed up by the notion that results can be proven with lab tests.[12] This is the scientific method, and what Dr. Barkley is admitting is that there is no scientific method being employed to diagnose mental illness. In fact, he admits that this is true with all 297 disorders listed in the DSM. This is also true with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, which millions of our school aged children are being prescribed Ritalin for. This is alarming because Ritalin is classified as a schedule II narcotic by the Drug Enforcement Administration. Having this classification puts the drug in the same category as cocaine and amphetamines. [13] It is admitted by the drug’s manufacturer that it may create dependency and it carries severe side effects including nervousness, insomnia, anorexia, loss of appetite, pulse changes, heart problems and weight loss.[14] If this isn’t alarming enough, the drug is actually linked to a 500% increase in sudden death among children.[15] If this is the case why do psychiatrists continue to insist on its use? Why are psychiatrists prescribing our children a drug that has the same effects on the brain as cocaine? Sadly, there only appears to be one answer and that is to dumb down the population to the point where they are compliant enough to accept their own servitude.  In 1967 some of the world’s most prominent psychiatrists met in Puerto Rico to discuss the latest advancements, mostly in the use of mind altering, psychotropic drugs. During this conference Dr. Wayne O Evans was quoted as saying, “We see a developing potential for nearly a total control of human emotional status, mental functioning and will to act.”[16] Dr. Evans is of course referring to the use of psychotropic drugs and their ability to subdue a population of once thinking people into acceptance of things they normally wouldn’t accept.
7 nov #3
What is potentially the most alarming aspect of this is the attitude of schools towards children taking Ritalin. In many cases public school administrators will argue that Ritalin will help improve children’s performance because it will calm them down and help them focus.[17] This however, has never been proven.[18] In trends that are becoming increasingly concerning, schools are looking for quick fix solutions to children’s problems, and because disadvantaged schools often have state funded social workers and psychologists on hand, it is all too easy to go down the ADHD route and have these children prescribed Ritalin.[19]  Studies have also shown that children receiving state aid, or who are in foster care are up to 39% more likely to be prescribed a psychotropic drug as opposed to those who receive no state welfare.[20]  There is also little incentive to help these children off of these drugs as foster parents caring for children on psychotropic medications are paid a considerably larger amount of money for taking these children into their care.[21]It isn’t uncommon for parents who question the use of psychotropic drugs to be harassed by schools and child protective agencies for refusing to drug their children. In some cases, parents even lose their children after being charged with child abuse and neglect for refusing to go along with the so-called authorities. [22]
It is disturbing to think that the first solution to solving a child’s problems would be the use of psychiatric drugs. While the use of Ritalin was at one time the most commonly used drug prescribed to children, more and more we are seeing kids prescribed powerful anti-psychotics and anti-depressants for conditions like Bi-Polar disorder. A report published by the National Institute of Mental Health[23] in 2007 claimed that among people ages 19 and younger, there was a forty percent increase in the diagnosis of Bi-Polar disorder. This is comparable to the adult rate. The question arises; how was there suddenly such a massive increase in diagnoses? One of the most common drugs used to treat children diagnosed with Bi-Polar disorder is Depakote. According to the drugs own website[24] one of the side effects of Depakote is suicidal thoughts and behaviors, among others that the website lists as very serious. These others include serious liver damage that can cause death within the first six months of use, serious damage to unborn children and inflammation of the pancreas that may cause death.  All in all, when it comes to the use of psychotropic drugs among children there is a twenty percent increase in suicides that can be directly attributed to their usage.[25]  Alarmingly this ratio also applies to children under the age of five as this makes up the fastest growing segment of the population being prescribed psychiatric medications.[26] Children as young as four years old have attempted suicide due to the devastating effects of prescription drugs.[27]
Bi-polar disorder is among the most controversial and is considered by many in the field to be a fake diagnosis. Characterized by prolonged periods of either euphoric happiness or sadness[28], Bi-polar is a perfect example of a mental disorder being diagnosed on the premise of presenting normal, everyday emotions.  The same is true of ADHD.[29] This isn’t to suggest that the symptoms or behaviors exhibited by these so called illnesses may not be real, but that the causes of the behaviors are not biological in nature, which what would be required to classify it as an actual illness in any other practice of medicine. Rather, as mentioned before, these behaviors are most likely caused by traumatizing life events of some sort and prescribing brain altering drugs disguised as medicine only further harms the individual.
Again, the question as to why so called “doctors” in the field of mental health wish to drug up the population with drugs that appear to do harm than good, arises. The answer is simple. Psychiatry and psychology are not real sciences at all. Rather, they are tools of the psychopolitical operator being used to subdue an unsuspecting population by convincing everyone they are “mentally imbalanced” or “mentally ill” and in need of treatment. The treatment (psychiatric drugs) is designed to strip people of their individualism and will to act. Remember the quote from Wayne O Evans?
This is exactly what they set out to do, and they have been very successful.  The effects of these drugs on the population have been devastating; not only when it comes to suicides and violent behavior, but in terms of general intelligence as well. We have an entire generation of people in the United States who view communism as a legitimate form of government and they appear to advocating for it. Essentially, the goal of psychiatry is to condition people into the acceptance of a “one world government.”
“To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family traditions, national patriotism and religious dogmas…”
Dr. G. Brock Chisholm, psychiatrist and co-founder of the World Federation of Mental Health[31]
Drugging the individual produces an artificial exhaustion, and if he is drugged, or shocked, or beaten and given a string of commands, his loyalties themselves can definitely be re-arranged”[32]
[6] Shah, Ajit ; Bhandarkar, Ritesh ; Bhatia, Gurleen The Relationship Between General Population Suicide Rates And Mental Health Funding, Service Provision And National Policy: A Cross-National Study International Journal Of Social Psychiatry  Volume: 56   Issue: 4   Pages: 448-453   Doi: 10.1177/0020764009342384   Published: Jul 2010

Dear Mr. Government

David Risselada

 

Dear Mr. Government,

Americans understand that you think you’re clever, as you systematically usurp our constitutional form of government. The truth is, most Americans despise you and resent the way you feverishly work to keep us divided as you line your pockets, and attempt to blind us from your crimes against humanity. You try to dumb us down with psychological propaganda because you believe the vast majority of us are too stupid to understand what’s at stake as you go about the work of selling out our country to the highest bidder.  It makes perfect sense that you would think we’re stupid; after all, you have been in control of public education for several decades. Rest assured, we are not as stupid as you think we are. For instance, we know that the average Republican was paid a sum of over $17,000 to pass the Trans Pacific Partnership Treaty while the average Democrat received over $9,000. Did you take bribes to pass the Iran nuclear deal as well? Will you completely sell out the U.S. Constitution for a few thousand dollars? Most of us wonder how you live with yourselves despite the fact that you think you’re fooling us.

The debt you have incurred against our children’s future is reckless, and certainly guarantees a future of serfdom, yet, the work you do, paid by the fruits of our labor mind you, ensures that you will not suffer the consequences of your own treachery.  You mock us and make us despise one another as you suck this system dry like a fat tick refusing to let go of a dogs hide.  You create wealth envy, dropping human kind to the lowest common denominator while you redistribute our hard earned wealth to fund your own political aspirations. In the mean time, your careless policies create real suffering as our standard of living drops. Families weekly pay checks are stretched to the max as you tell us inflation is at three percent but our weekly grocery bill is rapidly increasing. Yet somehow, you have the audacity to tell us increasing the debt ceiling will fix it. Have you no shame?

Today, roughly a million young men and women suffer needlessly from physical and mental injuries incurred from a war that you sent them to fight. These young Americans put their faith in your words, as your lies convinced them they were being sent to fight for freedom and the American way. You sent them to commit murder in your name and now you sell out the country you told them they should be proud to fight for? You told them they needed to go over there and fight so we wouldn’t have to fight them here; yet, they are now demanding we change our culture to suit them because of your lack of a spine. Where is your willingness to stand and fight for something you sent others to die for? You are cowards. You allow a radical president and his administration to label the troops you sent to fight as “right wing extremists.”  You allow them to call patriots and Christian’s threats to national security as you fail to call out the actions of real radicals who murder police and incite racial tension.  May I remind you that silence is consent? May I remind you that all evil needs to gain a foothold is for good men to do nothing? The biggest problem we face is a lack of good men.

President Obama recently vetoed a defense spending bill and then had the audacity to put troops on the ground in Iraq and Syria. You have remained silent while President Obama has been deliberately arming terrorists in order to topple Bashar al-Asaad in Syria. You sit back while he floods our nation with people who are hostile to our way of life while committing crimes against our citizens. You sit silently as Obama promises to release tens of thousands of criminals into the streets while at the same time seeking to disarm law abiding, taxpaying American citizens. This makes you complicit in the act of treason.

You may think that we are not paying attention. You may believe that we are too stupid to understand the complexities of what happens in Washington D.C. I am here however; to tell you this, there are none so stupid as those who believe they can commit these crimes and get away with it. God will not be mocked, and whether you believe or not, you will be held accountable for your treachery. Your actions are in direct conflict with the promises you made earning you contempt from voters, not loyalty or respect. The consequences of your actions and your failure to stand will be yours and yours alone.

This article originally appeared in ForTruthsSake.com and was published with author’s permission.

image 9-12-15

Destroying God in the Minds of Men By David Risselada

THEDAILYRESISTANCE.COM

David Risselada

 

15 july article #1

One of the long, sought after goals of Marxism is to break man of his belief in a higher power; to separate his soul from God if you will. This is admitted by Karl Marx in the Communist Manifesto, and later by Vladimir Lenin when he said that Catholicism was the greatest threat to world Communism. Communism depends on the idea that people will accept subservience to the state, and that government should be in control of all aspects of society. When man places his faith in God this type of social control becomes impossible because God is looked to for guidance, and it is understood that man exists for the purpose of serving God.  Along with this comes the idea that man is born with inherent rights and responsibilities that are given to us by our creator, and that these rights are inalienable, meaning they cannot be taken by man. For these reasons, any man seeking to impose his will onto others must first separate them from their faith. Throughout the past century, man has slowly been conditioned to believe in science as opposed to God, and religion itself has been slowly but surely removed from the public square. The further our society drifts from God, the more chaotic our society and uncertain our future; thus opening the doors for the type of social control dictators seek to impose on us.

Marx-quote-dialectics

Science is going to great lengths to disprove the existence of God. As a college student, I was given an assignment in Intro to Psychology in which I was asked to write a paper on how the so called “God gene” could prove that God doesn’t exist. The God Gene, according to Dean Hamer, author of the book “The God Gene: How Faith is Hard Wired into our Genes,” is what is responsible for driving people’s religious faith. Hamer is a molecular geneticist, who believes that when people have feelings they relate to faith or spirituality, it is actually the gene VMAT2 that is responsible, and not a connection with God. He came to this conclusion by finding the gene to be more prevalent among people who were likely to feel some sort of religious or spiritual enlightenment.  He also claims that the presence of this gene is like intelligence, and that it can skip generations; meaning that growing up in a strong religious family will have little to do with whether one is a believer or not.  In response to the assignment given me, I argued that it made perfect sense that there would be a hard wired mechanism in our brains that drove our belief in God because God would have put it there to ensure that we could be aware of his presence; seemed simple enough at the time. Intro to Psychology is also the class where students are likely to be introduced to concepts like moral relativism, along with operant and classical conditioning. Psychology itself is an anti God profession as it rests on premise that all human behavior can be categorized and predicted, and, that people can be conditioned to behave in predictable ways.

Conspiracy-Theories-of-2012-Top-10

There have been tremendous advancements made in neuroscience, (the study of the brain and behavior) and the more progress that is made in this field, the more that is learned about controlling human behavior, based on the understanding of the brains functioning. Recently, scientists from Britain’s University of York sought to use a technique that is gaining popularity in the treating of depression to see how they could alter a person’s belief system. The technique, known as transcranial magnetic stimulation, was used to target the posterior medial frontal cortex (PMFC) of thirty nine college students to measure changes in belief systems when faced with threats. It is generally accepted that the threat of death or other physical harm will cause the brain to respond with religious beliefs in order to bring comfort. Students who were given a high dose of the magnetic stimulation that temporarily shut down the PMFC, were then given questions pertaining to their own deaths, and according to those conducting the study, more than thirty percent fewer people expressed a belief in God. These researchers deliberately set out to research how this magnetic stimulation could affect the way people view God, and that is a scary thought considering that Communists wish to destroy religion. Perhaps they are closer to destroying God in the minds of men than many realize.

In my article, “The role of media in conditioning the masses,” I discussed the effects that watching long hours of television can have on the brain. For example; television can actually shut down parts of our brain that are responsible for critical thought processes and activate the region that is more responsible for the primitive, reactionary processes. The left side of the brain is responsible for cognitive processes, and while watching television, this portion of the brain shuts down, leading to the production of opiates, (the same type of chemicals that produce the sensation of being high found in heroin) while at the same time, the part of the brain responsible for emotional response is absorbing the information from the television; thus making it impossible to discern reality from what is being watched.  With all of today’s high tech gadgetry, and the number of hours typically spent consumed by it, is it possible that the use of transcranial magnetic stimulation techniques could be applied through our cell phones, computers and televisions? I would argue, given the sophistication, and rapid advancement of neuroscience, along with science’s never ending quest to disprove God, that if it isn’t happening now, the revelations discovered by the University of York scientists will soon find their way into our living rooms.

This article first appeared in ForTruthsSake.com and was used with author’s permission

 

Here comes the Small Arms treaty Again

RadicalConservativeRisso.blogspot.com

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.
ObamaUN
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
DISARMAMENT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES
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!