Category Archives: Academics

Academics, Culture, Law, Media, mindset, Political philosophy, Schools and campuses, So Much Stupid!

Lifting the Veil on the Black Lives Matter Movement

September 14, 2020 Yitzhak Goldstein

I finally had an encounter with the Coronshevik Red Guard in a large grocery store. One of my kids graduated Medical School calling for a memorable celebration. I flew her in from one state and overnighted Maryland crab cakes and jumbo shrimp from the Chesapeake Bay. We had corn on the cob and Coleslaw but no hush puppies. This would not do for true Marylanders so grabbing my daughter it was off to the store. Wearing proper suffocation devices, we searched high and low for hush puppy mix to no avail. Crafty owners had remodeled the store. My daughter thought she spied the mix on shelves we had passed requiring backtracking. A stout middle-aged woman with dark hair, leading a conga line coming in the opposite direction said in a snarky tone, “You’re going the wrong way”. “It doesn’t really matter” I replied. “Yes it does”, she said snarling at me. “Mind your own business”, I said. Everyone in the aisle heard the exchange. I was so proud of myself. These Kool Aid drinkers are typical of the obedient goons once swelling the Bolsheviks Party’s ranks who later went on to become presidents of Home Owner’s Associations. Doom on them.

Indians, drums, tomahawk chops, Chiefs, and Redskins, oh my. These symbols represent the closest brush most Americans will ever have with an Indian. One is already gone and if cancel culture has its way, in order to purge their racism, gutless guilt-ridden whites will hurl the rest down into a deep dark basement along with George Washington and Christopher Columbus. White teens, angry and depressed over their skin color, toss and turn at night wishing they could pull a reverse Michael Jackson hiding the shame with which they were born. The BLMM (Black Lives Matter Movement as apart from the organization BLM) is telling white people that they are inherently racist and denial is proof of the crime. Each white person must engage in self-examination for any signs of racism, confess, and root it out. When people march under the BLM banner, utter its slogans, and wear its apparel they are saying; the United States is a terribly racist country, all white people are racists, police brutality is the norm, and those who say “all lives matter” are also racists. White people must engage in acts of contrition to prove they are not racist. Regrettably, this has spilled over into sports.

NASCAR originated from bootleggers “hopping” up stock cars to outrun

Treasury Department agents attempting to arrest them for the manufacture and distribution of untaxed liquor.¹ Mixed race (half white and half black) NASCAR driver Bubba “Smollett” Wallace’s race team found a noose hanging in the pit garage assigned them for the 25 June 2020 race at the Talladega, Alabama Superspeedway. Following the George Floyd tragedy,

millionaire Wallace bedecked his car with BLM logos, donned BLM apparel, and forced NASCAR to ban fans from wearing attire featuring the Confederacy’s Battle Flag. One man supplants the history and culture of an entire region. From Washington, D.C. the FBI dispatched fifteen agents to investigate this heinous hate crime. Fellow NASCAR drivers pushed Wallace’s car around the track together in solidarity against the racism suddenly plaguing America. FBI special agents left quietly. There was no hate crime. The “noose” was simply a looped rope used to raise and lower doors…in all the pit team garages.²

Formula 1 is a European oriented motorsport featuring single seat, open cockpit, and open wheel car racing. Drivers compete on tracks and courses winding through city streets. It has been my favorite sport since I was a child.

Lewis Hamilton was born and raised in England. His Caribbean father is black and his English mother white. Because of its origins, Formula 1 has always been essentially a “white” sport. Nevertheless, a white team and owner, white trainers, and white promoters gave a young Lewis his shot at making a team. They guided and assisted his training and development until he was ready for the big show. He has won six world championships (the record set by Michael Schumacher is seven). Hamilton owns mansions, a penthouse, and expensive apartments around the world. Mercedes pays him a tidy $52+ million a year. His legion of devoted fans are mostly white as well. Rich, successful, loved and adored, he has it all. Perhaps desiring to add meaning to his dilettante socialite bon vivant life jetting around the world with models and celebrities; one party after another, Lewis decided he was an aggrieved American black man. Maybe he channeled his inner “homey” fantasizing about being rousted by the racist Los Angeles PD. He compelled Mercedes to change its silver cars to a menacing and angry black in support of…Black Lives Matter. His car’s livery sports BLM slogans. Formula 1’s ruling body, apparently unaware of the paucity of black fans, forces drivers to wear “End Racism” T-shirts on the grid before each race. Countries hosting races had to paint BLM-like slogans on their trackside buildings. Not only does pink ball cap wearing Hamilton take a knee before each race, he raises an angry clenched fist, 60s black power style. He condemns drivers who do not kneel as racists. I know this because I was a Hamilton fan, T-Shirts and all. No longer. For his ignorance and betrayal of fans like me, I have binned my Hamilton memorabilia.

Among countries, hosting Formula 1 races are Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Red China, and Vietnam. In Bahrain and the U.A.E., government tightly controls the media, there is no freedom of speech, and all law must conform strictly to Islamic Sharia law. Women in the latter at best are second-class citizens. Red China and Vietnam are brutalitarian Communist dictatorships. The former is a nation of gulags, mass murder, and slavery. Is it not the height of hypocrisy for Formula 1 to take a stand against racism but host races in the above listed nations? Does Red China manufacture team fan apparel? Hamilton hails from one of the nations that brought slavery to North America and colonized Africa, Asia, India, and the Caribbean. How dare this beneficiary of Britain’s historic racism and slavery condemn the United States?

Following the Austrian Grand Prix (2020), retired English former world champion Jenson Button lamented the “bad optics” of not all drivers taking a knee with Hamilton. He said Formula 1 needed to catch up with other professional sports in support of BLM adding, people must discuss racism every day, at work, at home, wherever. Button is wrong. Most people are not racist nor do they need lectures from individuals who believe celebrity status confers on them superior moral superiority over others. Fans watch sports for entertainment not political indoctrination. Could it be Button is the one in need of self-examination? Worse, BLM T-shirts and kneeling validate the notion America is so horridly racist, every black man must look left and right before stepping out his front door because the police are waiting to gun him down. This is a monstrous lie perpetuated by those with a virulently anti-American political agenda. Aiding and abetting The Lie are brainwashed young white people. In addition to the pernicious influences of Hollywood, television, music, and absentee parents, am I going to point an accusatory finger at public education? You bet I am.

I spent 25 years in public education teaching courses in history and government until Leftwing Wokesheviks canceled me. Because I was under constant surveillance for evidence of conservative views by spies in the SocialIST studies department’s Ministry of Leftist Conformity, I was circumspect when speaking. Students repeat what teachers say. I knew everything I said can and would be distorted, twisted, and used against me. Nevertheless, eventually students recognized I did not sing from the same Red sheet music as my colleagues. Some realized what passed for teaching in many classes was, in reality, political indoctrination. What they found most offensive was the “Privilege Walk”.

In April of 2016, several students visited with me after school. These girls were visibly upset relating what happened in sociology class. Their liberal teacher took her class to the auxiliary gym, arranged them in a horizontal line across the middle of the floor, and, read a list of statements that for each student was either true or false. If true, they took a step forward, if false, they took a step back. Questions included; are you white? Do you live with both parents? Do you live in a single family home? Is either of your parents a white-collar professional? Do any of your family members play golf or tennis? Were you born in the U.S.? Has anyone mistreated you because of your ethnicity or race? Do you have all the food and clothes you want? Do you have your own car? Do you have blonde hair? Do you have blue eyes?

When the teacher completed the Privilege Walk, only a few kids had taken steps forward. They were all white, mostly female, and mostly blonde haired, blue eyed. This “white-shaming” had a profound and unpleasant impact on these teenagers. “Cancel Culture” designed this project to prove, by their more comfortable standard of living, white students are the recipients of race-based privileges. Instead of teachers pointing out because of the hard work, education, and sacrifice of parents some kids enjoy a higher standard of living than do peers, they insist racism is the cause for all social-economic discrepancies. College professors and high school teachers have employed the Privilege Walk for years. Their goal is to brainwash white middleclass students into believing any advantages they enjoy over minority students results from “white privilege”. This they claim is a system of institutionalized racism designed to maintain white cultural, economic, and political dominance over other races. The apex of society is a private club. One must be Caucasian to join. Whites do this because of their inherent racism. It is in their DNA. This is what liberal teachers are doing to your kids, people.³

The scheme behind the privilege walk is as insidious as it is ingenious. Once white kids buy in to the notion they are privileged and inherently racist, it neuters any future opposition on their part to the Left’s political agenda. Because the Left cloaks all it does in racial terms, it automatically triggers in young whites, feelings they are racist if they oppose them. For example, they have racialized every aspect of their socialist agenda from global warming, clean water, the criminal justice system, free college, to healthcare. To oppose any aspect of it demonstrates one’s “white privilege”. Hence, young whites shut up and go along with the program. In addition, they are deaf to people who point this out because opposition can only stem from inherent racism even if the one speaking out is black! Not every white middleclass student experiences the Privilege Walk. Nevertheless popular culture, racial grievance groups, and peers bombard them with messages they are the beneficiaries of white privilege. Disbelief or rejection of this notion proves they are racist. It is like the old Salem witch test. Bind and throw the girl into a pond. If she floats, she’s a witch. If she drowns, she was innocent. There is another serious problem with the Privilege Walk.

Minority students see they are the one’s stepping back and only white kids stepping forward. Teacher explanations are clear; those stepping forward are the recipients from society of unmerited privilege based solely on their race. This must engender jealously, resentment, anger, and hatred amongst minorities toward “privileged” whites. Is it possible this form of resentment fuels the rage and violence of recent “protests”? Prior indoctrination by liberal public school teachers sets the stage so that it requires little for leftist college professors to administer the coup de grace. Not only do they teach their captives about systemic white racism, they tell them the standard of living enjoyed by middle-class whites is the direct result of slavery. Professors teach America’s wealth is not the result of rugged individualism, hard work, the free market, entrepreneurs, and innovation supported by the principles of limited government and individual liberty. Rather Americans built wealth on the backs of slave labor. Slaves, who, last harvested crops almost 160 years ago, created the wealth expropriated by white businesses, banks, and government to create its comfortable society. White students seem to accept this Marxist fantasy history without animadversion. Does anyone ask, if this was true, why are former slave empires France, Portugal, and Spain economic wrecks? Why are American blacks richer across the board than blacks in any other country? Does anyone consider the successful struggle of Chinese and Mexicans to achieve success in America?

Proof this indoctrination has “taken” manifests itself in the way white talking heads exhaust the pages of Roget’s Thesaurus trying to paint thugs, rioters, and criminals as saints and the police as bad guys. So heavily has the liberal media bought into notions of inherent white racism, they cover the rare instances of white on black crime non-stop while completely ignoring the vastly more frequent cases of black on white crime. I will say what no one else will; it is because they believe white people, regardless of how innocent, collectively deserve it. Innocent whites are sacrificial lambs. Their beatings, robberies, rapes, and murders pay the substitutionary price for the guilt of the entire white race.

Black professor Derrick Bell, New York University of Law is the pioneer of “Critical Race Theory” (CRT). Bell argues, “Race plays the same role as class in the Marxist paradigm”. Marx argued wealth and the means of production determines economic class and those at the top suppress efforts by those beneath them to rise. Likewise, CRT contends race is also a system locking people into inferior social, economic, and political classes. Bell contends white support for civil rights and equality exists only in those areas in which it promotes “white self-interest and social status”. According to Bell, Professor Alan Freeman, and college professors who embrace CRT, “racial minorities” in America “are a permanently oppressed caste—and racism is a normal, permanent aspect of American life”. In addition, blacks regard “equality before the law” an insult and form of oppression because “their moral claims are superior to those of whites”.⁴ Critical Race Theory, dominant on most American campuses, asserts that the white race has constructed all institutions and the legal system to maintain its dominance and prevent change. Therefore, being outside the law, blacks have a right to determine for themselves which laws they will obey and respect and which they will not”.⁵

Professors have taught CRT in colleges for years. BLM spokesmen reflect its ideology through claims looting is not criminal but instead represents reparations owed to black people for slavery. Therefore, to label looters as criminals is racist.⁶ Could it also explain why white middle-class millennial news reporters excuse the ongoing riots and large scale looting, while liberal Democrat mayors stand by and do nothing? In their minds, the white race must atone for its sins. They wage war against whites who parents raised their children to protect the status quo at all costs. Proof they are racists is angry denial by whites that white privilege even exists.⁷

In his 1995 book, Lies My Teacher Told Me (praised by communist pseudo-historian Howard Zinn), Professor James W. Loewen writes, “Slavery’s twin legacies to the present are the social and economic inferiority it conferred on blacks and the cultural racism it instilled in whites”. The legacy of slavery and white racism “continue to haunt our society”.⁸ Loewen’s books, and what he teaches his students, are exemplars of Critical Race Theory. Whites building structural repression of blacks into all American institutions is a central tenet of both CRT and the BLM movement. Its proponents use it to explain all disparities between the races. They also posit a form of inherited generational PTSD to explain why black communities continue to suffer high rates of crime and poverty compared to other minority communities. In short, Slavery was such a horrific experience for blacks they continue to suffer deep psychological pain and emotional trauma to this day. Indeed, many marching under the umbrella of BLM, whether the organization or the general movement, believe “white society” is beyond salvation.⁹

There is a reason why the liberal Enforcers of Political Correctness become hysterical and “cancel” anyone who dares suggest perhaps the government and blacks are in some measure, to blame. Black economist Thomas Sowell, among others, notes prior to Democrat President Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society social welfare and affirmative action programs, (which favors blacks over whites in hiring and promotion) the black community was fine. It had equal or lower rates of crime, unwed mothers, and high school dropouts than whites. When government programs, enacted by liberals, negated the value of a father in the home, the black race, like any other, suffered the consequences. Fathers are an integral part of stable families. For liberals to acknowledge this truth, they would have to confess their programs destroyed the black family. They are responsible for the pathologies plaguing the black community.¹⁰

The Black Lives Matter Movement protests, apart from the eponymous organization, is both a political and religious movement. Religions have, to varying degrees, a set of basic tenets and doctrinal beliefs. BLMM’s core religious beliefs include; from its origins, the white race exhibited an overwhelming imperative to conquer, subjugate, colonize, and enslave other races. It is so much a part of its history this desire has entered Caucasian DNA, which they transmit, to all succeeding generations. Nothing can erase either the white race’s history of colonization and enslavement or its genetic proclivity toward racism. Nothing can correct or ameliorate this race’s injustices, past or present. Because of this, and the white race’s inability to excise racism from its DNA, Caucasians are irredeemable. The degree to which the majority of blacks believe the above will determine the future shape of America. If the majority hold to these tenets, the conclusion is inescapable; the black and brown races must separate from the white race. Rejection of these tenets means letting go of a past that cannot be undone and going forward, together, in search of true brotherhood.

1¹ Had the government received its “cut”, always in the form of a “Tax Stamp”, bootlegging would have been legal. Someone once told me the difference between the government and the Mafia is there are less Italians working for the government.

2² ESPN NEWS, “FBI Says Rope Had Been In Talladega Garage Since October; Bubba Wallace Not Victim Of Hate Crime”, at https://espn.com/racing/nascar/story/_/id/29354447/fbi-says-rope-had-talladega-garage-last-fall-bubba-not-victim-hate-crime.

3³ Meg Bolger, “Why I Don’t Facilitate Privilege Walks Anymore And What I Do Instead”, at http://medium.com/MegB/why-i-won’t-facilitate-privilege-walk-anymore-and-what-i-do-instead-380c95490c10. See also, https://edge.pus.edu/workshops/mc/power/privilegewalk.shtml, The Privilege Walk.

4⁴ David Horowitz, The 101 Most Dangerous Academics In America (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2006), 56.

5⁵ IBID. 56-57.

6⁶ Lee Brown, “Chicago Black Lives Matter Organizer Who Called Looting ‘Reparations” Dismisses Peaceful Protesting”, New York Post at https://www.foxnews.com/us/chicago-black-lives-matter-looting-reparations-peaceful-protests-dismissed/ As a high school teacher, liberal colleagues warned me not to use the terms “riot” and “looters” because it is racist. I responded, for them to say these terms are racist assumes the rioters and looters are black. Now, who is the racist here? Liberal hypocrisy is a bottomless pit.

7⁷ James W. Loewen, “Corrected [ED] How To Teach Slavery”? NEA Ed Justice at https://neaedjustice.org/social-justice-issues/racial.justice/corrected-teach-slavery/. See also, Matt Tefer, “White Fragility: Are White People Inherently Racist”? Financial Review 4 January 2019, at https://afr.com/life-and-luxury-/arts-and-culture/white-fragility-are-white-people-inherently-racist-20190201-hl9mn9/. Cleve R. Wootson Jr., Reporter, 21 October 2016, “To Be White Is To Be Racist, Period, ‘A High School Teacher Told His Class”, Norman Oklahoma, The Washington Post, at https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/education/wp/2016/10/19/to-be-white-is-to-be-racist-period-a-high-school=teacher-told-his-class/. Wayne Hoffman, 6 September 2019, “Boise State To Faculty And Staff: Come Learn How White People Are Racists”, Idaho Freedom Foundation, at https://idahofreedom.org/boise-state-to-faculty-and-staff-come-learn-how-white-people-are-racists/, Dustin Dwyer, “Why All White People Are Racist, But Can’t Handle Being Called Racist: The Theory of White Fragility”, State of Opportunity at https://www.stateofopportunity,michiganradio.org/post/why-all-white-people-are-racist-and-can’t-handle-being-called-racist-theory-white-fragility/, and George Yancy, New York Times, “Dear White America”, at https://www.opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/12/24/dear-white-america/. This endnote is of necessity somewhat extensive in order to demonstrate acceptance of Critical Race Theory, and notions of white privilege, is widespread among college professors and liberal whites in the media.

8⁸ James W. Loewen, Lies My Teacher Told Me (New York, N.Y., New Press, 1995), 136.

9⁹ Brandon Jones, M.A. Psychotherapist and Behavioral Health Consultant, “Legacy of Trauma: Context of the African American Existence” at https://beath.state.mn.us/communities/equailty/projects/infantmortality/session2.2.pdf.

10¹⁰ Thomas Sowell, The Vision of the Anointed (New York, N.Y. Basic Books, A Member of the Perseus Books Groups, 1995), 79-85.

"News Media", Academics, Culture, Law, Media, mindset, Politics, Schools and campuses, Sellouts and traitors, So Much Stupid!, Terrorism

Lifting the Veil On Black Lives Matter

August 11, 2020 Yitzhak Goldstein 3 Comments

Yitzhak Goldstein, Professor Errant

¹To understand Black Lives Matter, it is necessary to distinguish between the organization by that name and the general movement operating under the same banner. Three Marxist lesbians formed the Organization following the Trayvon Martin case in 2014. Their goal is abolition of Judeo-Christian based Western society and violent over throw of all its institutions. In addition, they contend the white race is attempting to exterminate the black race with police their instrument of execution. I plan a future expose on them but for now, my focus is on the broader Black Lives Matter Movement (BLMM).

Liberal media mouthpieces, aware of the revolutionary, violent, and communist nature of BLM, are quick to point out that most protesters marching under its name are not necessarily members of BLM or aware of its extreme goals. They worry connection between BLM and the protest movement will damage the latter’s cause. However, a close examination of the movement’s beliefs and ideology may prove equally problematic. What do they believe?

In general, to varying degrees, the Black Lives Matter Movement [BLMM] assert systemic white racism besets America. This means racism permeates America’s institutions from government, the family, church, education, its economic system, cultural norms, to its criminal justice system. So pervasive is this racism, it is intertwined with and inseparable from these institutions. The nature of white racism is structural meaning built automatically into each institution from the ground up. White privilege means Caucasians, by virtue of their skin color, have automatic societal acceptance and access to opportunities denied others. BLMM asserts this explains why whites achieve success and prosperity at higher rates than blacks do. White Supremacy means Caucasians construct culture and mechanisms to protect and preserve their dominance against challenges. This renders non-whites permanent second-class citizens unable to enjoy the Declaration of Independence’s promise of equality. For “proof”, BLMM points to the inordinately high percentage of blacks in poverty and prison claiming those behind bars are political prisoners, not criminals. Political for challenging the status quo. Because the police are the bodyguard for white supremacy, BLMM exhibits special hatred toward black officers.

Two inescapable questions come to mind. First, if the white race has so constructed America’s institutions to preserve its hegemonic dominance, how is it brown and black immigrants from East and Southwest Asia, the Middle East, the Indian Subcontinent, and Africa scale these barriers achieving economic success equivalent to whites? Second, considering that black mayors, city councils, police chiefs, and boards of education have controlled black dominant cities for decades, how are white people to blame? To ask such questions invites shrieks of outrage and accusations of racism. You will be “cancelled”. BLMM addresses these discrepancies by insisting pathologies afflicting black dominant cities; poverty, unemployment, high school dropout rates, children born out of wedlock, drug use, domestic violence, and violent crime are the direct legacy of slavery. Former conditions of servitude, Jim Crow, and structural racism, lock blacks into inescapable economic inferiority leaving them few avenues to survive other than crime. It is the white man’s fault. If this is so obvious and demonstrable, why then do Caucasians deny their culpability? BLMM says it is because white people are inherently racist. It is a part of white people’s nature as if a component of their DNA. Inherent racism blinds them not only to the plight of blacks, which they see as the norm, but also to their role in creating and perpetuating problems endemic to the black condition. This blindness renders any white observation or opinion on race illegitimate. The white race must accept and purge its collective guilt.

Black author Taleeb Starkes also notes what he calls the Racial Grievance Industry (RGI), blames black poverty, and crime on the legacy of racism in cities long ruled by blacks. This is for political reasons. If black leaders accept responsibility, no longer can they blame white society. Blame and accepted guilt allow them to extract from whites economic tribute and political advantage.² Starkes refers to the notion the legacy of slavery damns whites to eternal responsibility for problems plaguing black cities the “Theory of Exploitivity”. It promotes not only perpetual white guilt, but also argues all conflicts between the races stem from blacks attempting to confront white racism. It is a one-way street.³ Riots are a form of political expression their condemnation therefore racist. Since 1965, the federal government has spent trillions in black cities on poverty and education programs yet little has changed.⁴

For BLMM and its groveling self-flagellating white sycophants, “Racism is the end-all-be-all-explanation” for everything that is wrong in the black community. Therefore, “no fact finding mission is necessary”. Whites must accept total blame and responsibility for all problems in black communities without question or equivocation. Because whites are guilty, what is there to argue about? Any study or investigation into the root causes of black societal problems, whose starting point does not begin with presumption of white guilt and responsibility, is racist and invalid.⁵ Discussions of racial issues by whites must begin with their confession of guilt and blame. Pointing to studies revealing fatherless homes play a role in black crime, Baltimore’s riots for example, is a non-starter because it does not begin with the presumption white racism is always the cause.⁶ The white race must also purge its collective guilt. Part of that process is to dismantle all institutions, symbols, and vestiges of racism and slavery. Purging must include culture, holidays, language, historical documents, statues, and so forth.

For years, I have advocated a name change for the nation’s capital. Not to denigrate the man who was first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen (George Washington for those who went to public school), but to separate his name from the disgrace on the Potomac. The federal government’s functions today bear no resemblance to the Constitution. Heretofore, my voice has gone unheard, but now, from a new corner, comes a voice demanding this change. George Washington’s family owned slaves so his name must go. Supporters of BLMM, including white members of Congress attempting to exorcise their inner-slave master, bandy names about like a badminton shuttlecock. Leaks suggest in the running was domestic terrorist and murderer John Brown, who attacked the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry Virginia, (16-18 October 1859) to spark a slave rebellion and mass murder of whites. Then someone scrounged up a history book and discovered Brown was white. He is out of the running. Next the People’s Committee to Rename the Capital turned to Black Panther leaders Huey Newton, Bobby Seale, Eldridge Cleaver, and Angela Davis. Black and communists, would they not do? Newton, Seale, and Cleaver were male and Davis is heterosexual. Cross their names off the list. It seems this leaves only Maya Angelou.

In their Bolshevik-style redo of America, BLMM and its Communist ally, Pantifa⁷ want to replace the National Anthem as well. Rumor has it Soviet Russia’s anthem was proposed but once again the same problem reared its ugly head. White guys wrote it and pasty-skinned ones at that. Claims they are considering communist Zimbabwe’s national anthem remain unsubstantiated. BLMM has engaged in violence, riots, looting, and thuggery knowing that as long as they cloak it all in racial terms, cowed white liberals will do nothing. Worse, liberal professors, actors, actresses, and media personalities race to the airwaves to support these crimes as a way to purge their racism and white guilt. Like sharks tasting blood, BLMM asks, why stop now? To flex their political muscle, they need to make examples of people.

After committing the counterrevolutionary crime of expressing patriotism and pride in the flag of his country, New Orleans Saints quarterback Drew Brees became that example. Black teammates and professional jocks in other sports descended upon Brees in furious rage over his racist crime. Caving in and submitting to reeducation, Brees recanted and apologized for his insensitive crime of being proud of family members who fought against the Nazis in WWII. Not wanting to suffer the same fate, Hollywood and corporations quickly and cravenly rushed to throw their necks into BLMMs guillotine. Legos deemed its toys featuring police stations, officers, and patrol cars so vile and racist, corporate cowards quickly yanked them from their product line. A & E Channel immediately canceled its popular Live PD TV show as if, like Brees and Legos, they are all inherently guilty of George Floyd’s indefensible death. When the people Americans depend on for courage and leadership, men and women of character, surrender without a fight, what chance is there people of lesser spine will stand for the truth? The decisions we make, when those decisions are difficult, define who and what we are. Dominos continued to fall.

Quaker Oats could not expunge Aunt Jemima’s face from its pancake mix boxes fast enough. I, like so many others, grew up with Aunt Jemima never once imputing negative stereotypes to her happy face. The same goes for Uncle Ben. Mars Incorporated is scrubbing his friendly face from their boxes of parboiled rice as well. Introduced in 1943, Uncle Ben has been a staple in kitchens for decades. To fight racism, companies must airbrush the faces of two iconic black people from food boxes? It gets worse.

Unbeknownst to kids growing up years ago, Mary Poppins and chimney sweep Dick van Dyke were racists. In the 1964 children’s classic, Mary Poppins (Julie Andrews) uses her magic to ascend a chimney with the kids she is babysitting to a rooftop above. Covered with soot, Mary commits the unpardonable sin of powdering her face making it darker to look like a chimney sweep. Then she dances across the rooftops with equally be-sooted Dick van Dyke. According to gonadectomized New York Times hyphenated editorialist Daniel Pollack-Pelzner, this is pure racism. White people in “black face” is an unacceptable form of racist mockery. Shame shame.⁸ Perhaps Pollack-Pelzner has been in cryostasis for a long time but black face fell out of favor in the 1930s. It made a few cameo appearances in early 1950s Hollywood films and then disappeared. It has been gone for some seventy years. I never saw or heard of black face as child hence, watching Mary Poppins, I made no connection between her soot smeared face and black people. Poppins was about to dance with a chimney sweep who naturally would have a carbon blackened face. It was a skit, a musical. Like subliminal messages Hollywood purportedly embedded throughout drive-in movies, one would have to strain very hard to find secret coded racist messages in Mary Poppins. Pollack-Pelzner’s white-guilt ridden garment rending lament, and that of other BLMM mouthpieces, makes it sound as if slavery ended last week. Perhaps someone should examine Julie Andrew’s performance in The Sound of Music for other hidden messages. Better yet, Pollack-Pelzner could write an expose about racist Kentucky coal miners emerging from beneath the ground in black face. How does scrubbing the faces of friendly black people from product boxes, banishing police shows from television, and violent protests, looting, and rioting save one black life in Baltimore, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Oakland, Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., and other cities? Maybe for BLMM, not all black lives matter.

Over Father’s Day weekend (2020) in Chicago, killers shot 104 people. Fourteen died including five children, a 3-year old, and a 13-year old girl. Almost all the victims and their killers were black.⁸ Liberals, like Democrat Party strategist Jessica Tarlov, appeared on news programs arguing the sudden tidal wave of black inner city violence was the natural consequence of people cooped up too long from China virus stay at home orders. Tension between family members leads to conflict, fights, and ultimately someone grabs a gun.⁹ If this were true, violence would be uniform across America including in white neighborhoods. However, this is not the case. It was limited almost entirely to Democrat run cities with large black populations. Over the same weekend, Detroit experienced 25 shootings with four dead. Police Chief Craig noted most were drive-by and targeted shootings. The same proved true for Chicago.¹⁰ Minneapolis, where its ultra-liberal government is dismantling its police department, witnessed 12 people shot with one dead. Most of those the hoods shot were standing in a crowd on a public street. A drive-by. In Syracuse, New York, thugs shot nine people who were at a large outdoor gathering. None of these shootings was between people cooped up too long.¹¹ It is clear that blacks are gunning down other blacks, including children and infants, every week in major cities, but no one marches for them. Are whites killing blacks in large numbers? In one place they are.

The majority of feminists promoting abortion and owners of abortion mills are white. Keeping this in mind, the abortion rate among black women in America is four times that of white women. On average, doctors abort 900 black babies every day [328,500 each year]. Considering black women make up approximately 7% of the U.S. population, and have 35.6% of all abortions, it is clear it is not the police blacks should fear but the white doctor holding a scalpel and vacuum hose.¹²

Freakonomics, authored by liberal University of Chicago and Yale professors Steven Levitt and John Donahue, respectively, was a 2005 bestseller. They argued abortion is a significant factor in reducing crime. Unwanted babies are typically born to black unwed mothers. Black males, growing up poor and fatherless, are much more likely to become violent criminals than kids who grow up in two-parent families. The U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion on demand in 1973. According to Levitt, violent crime began dropping in 1991 because black kids, who would have turned eighteen that year, were never born.¹³ One would think a book arguing for the preemptive mass murder of unborn black babies as a crime-fighting tool would generate outrage leading to mass marches. It has not. Ultra-liberal MIT professor Jonathan Grueber, mover and shaker behind former President Obama’s socialized healthcare scheme, made the same argument as Levitt; abortion is an economic boon reducing welfare spending and the costs of America’s criminal justice system.¹⁴ Arguments that abortion of black children amounts to genocide are persuasive and our silence a form of complicity. Black and white people should be surrounding abortion mills not pulling down statues. Where is the outrage?

BLMM is a political movement. All black lives, especially those gunned down by other blacks and those killed by abortionists, do not matter to them, only those serving as expedient political props. BLMM’s insistence whites accept total blame and responsibility for all pathologies in the black community while refusing to acknowledge any responsibility on their part, sets up an impasse impossible to resolve. Whites cannot accept blame for racism and police brutality that is not occurring and nothing will ever change if those who are to blame for what is happening in black communities refuse to accept responsibility.

Do all black lives matter? Do black lives matter? Do family member’s lives matter to each other? Of course they do. Black folks have been part of America since the beginning. They are as much American as anyone. Yeah, but as slaves. Mechal Sobel, professor of history at the University of Haifa, Israel, argues regardless of condition of servitude, a natural result of blacks and whites interacting together was that blacks influenced and shaped white culture as much as the reverse. From architecture, food, lifestyles, and cultural values, blacks shaped what people perceive as “white” culture to the point they are inseparable.¹⁵ If so, that means, regardless of race, we are all family. A family that attends separate churches obviously has many problems to say the least. Nevertheless, being members of the same family is a much better starting point for understanding and reconciliation than the alternatives.

1¹ These are actually my boxes. I purchased them before the Left’s Committee of Public Safety could confiscate them from all store shelves.

2² Taleeb Starkes, Black Lies Matter: Why Lies Matter To The Racial Grievance Industry (Lexington, Kentucky, CreateSpace Independent Publishing, 2016), 1-3.

3³ IBID. 3.

4⁴ Marvin Olasky, The Tragedy Of American Compassion (Washington, D.C. Regnery Publishing, Inc., 1992), xi-xvii, 3-5, 184-199.

5⁵ Starkes, 3.

6⁶ Thomas Sowell, “The Inconvenient Truth About Ghetto Communities ‘Social Breakdown”, May 15, 2015, National Review, at https://www.nationalreview.com/article/417899/inconvenient-truths-about-ghetto-communities-social-break-down-thomas-sowell.html. Thomas Sowell, who is black and an economics professor, posted his observations on YouTube. Having lived in and gone to a Baltimore inner city school, I gave Sowell’s video a like on Face Book. Subsequent to that “like”, white suburban high school, administrators investigated me for “racism”.

7⁷ They call themselves Antifa (Antifascist after Russian Communist dictator Josef Stalin’s practice of calling rivals, who were also communists, “fascists” in order to “cancel” them) and are themselves communists and revolutionaries with European origins. Several websites, forums, and Face Book groups mock them as “Pantifa” for their penchant of wearing masks over their heads that look like “panties” to hide their identities. They consist mostly of white youth. They form a Leftwing paramilitary militia, the shock troops of the radical left and Democrat Party. Many are self-loathing society hating rage-filled white females and white hermaphroditic hipster Millennials sporting “pot-knots” (man-buns) and white “males” with long braided blonde pred-dreads (their rope hair reminiscent of the monster in the Predator movies), who despise civilization almost as much as they hate themselves. They hate all forms of achievement because it reminds them of their own failure to grow up and be a man.

8⁸ Daniel Pollack-Pelzner, “Mary Poppins, and a Nanny’s Shameful Flirting with Blackface,” New York Times at http://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/28/movies/mary-poppins-returns-black-face.htm.

8⁸ Editors, “104 shot, 14 fatally, over Fathers’ Day Weekend in Chicago, Sun Times Wire, Chicago Sun Times, at https://www.chicago.suntimes.com/crime/2020/6/20/21297470/chicago-fathers-day-weekend-shootings-homicides-gun-violence-june-19-22-104-shot.

9⁹ Martha MacCallum Show, FOX News, 22 June 2020.

10¹⁰ Fox2 Detroit News, “25 shot, 4 killed in Violent Father’s Day Weekend in Detroit. Chief Craig says Violent Crime Up 7%”, at https://fox2detroit.com/news/25-shot-4-killed-in-violent-fathers-day-weekend-in-detroit-chief-craig-says-violent-crime-up-7%.

11¹¹ FOX8, “Gun Violence During Father’s Day Weekend” June 22, 2020, at https://fox8tv.com/newspost/gun-violence-during-fathers-day-weekend/

12¹² Black Abortion Statistics at http://www.righttolifeofmichigan.org

13¹³ The Economist, December 1, 2005, “Did Steven Levitt, Author of Freakonomics, ‘Get His Notorious Paper Wrong”? at https://www.bos.frb.org/economic/wp/wp2005/wp0515.pdf.

14¹⁴ Mona Charen, “Abortion-Distortion-and Crime, National Review January 2, 2015 at https://www.nationalreview.com/article/395585/abortion-distortion-and-crime.html.

15¹⁵ Mechal Sobel, The World They Made Together: Black and White Values in Eighteenth-Century Virginia (Princeton New Jersey Princeton University Press, 1987). Having lived in 7 states, north, south, east, and west, and the inner cities of Baltimore, Philadelphia, and San Jose, I agree with her.

"News Media", Academics, authoritarian swine, Junk Science, Media, mindset, Politics, Voting

The Plague of Lies

July 23, 2020 Sheila Stokes 3 Comments

I may have mentioned, just in passing from time to time, that I have serious doubts about much of what we’ve been told about the Wuhan Flu. I may have mentioned, just in passing from time to time that I have serious concerns about the amount of power the government is grabbing based on the latest glop falling out of the mouth of Anthony Fauci who enables and encourages this sort of tyrannical behavior. I may have mentioned, just in passing from time to time that I fear for our future as I see people who will probably never “feel safe” leaving home if they aren’t wearing a mask and everyone around them isn’t wearing one. I have grieved the catastrophic losses farmers have faced having to plow under crops and kill off livestock. I have watched in shock as the government has seized small businesses away from owners, sometimes families that have held on to a business through the depressions only to see it shut down in one swift pitiless swoop. You need government to get a car title, a driver’s license and other transactions. Those services are basically unavailable. You can call and leave messages, you will not be called back. You can make an appointment, however to do that someone has to answer the phone. Your questions will most likely be unanswered unless you might get lucky with a chat bot. Welcome to communism. Long lines for almost non-existent but required government services. Store shelves that are sometimes empty and sometimes stocked have become the norm. And prices? Well, what do people think will happen when a large part of the food crop has been disrupted and wasted, cause, you know, covid and safety. Meanwhile as prices go up, there is massive unemployment because you know, covid and safety. The MSM #FakeNews breathlessly announces “spike in covid cases” and unless it has to do with a Trump rally seems shocked or smugly satisfied depending on how they are spinning that story. Why is this a shock? Darn near every hospital has a “covid testing” program? They will test anyone and everyone. What is interesting to me is the callers to radio shows I’ve heard that said they made an appointment to be tested, went to be tested, waited as long as they could to be tested and left without being tested at all only to be notified later they tested positive. And it has now come out that some facilities are reporting 100% positives, because they haven’t reported any of their negative results. Florida’s COVID Positivity Rate is Skewed – Countless Labs Are Reporting 100% Positivity Rate – Medical Centers Admit REAL Rate is 9% Or Less!

Of course there is the reliability of the test kits as well. Flaw in Manufacturer’s Testing System For Coronavirus Used by Labs Across the US Causing False Positives.

What if, I told you that this whole pandemic is mostly a scamdemic meant to influence the election and seize power? I mean, it’s not like the radical leftists are above lying to try. Russian Collusion anyone? But when frightened with death, it seems people become quite compliant. And with tyrannical governors and mayors threatening people for going out without wearing a mask, or for going to religious services all the while doing the things they deprive their lowly subjects of doing one should really wonder, WTH? Is it just me or is anyone else wondering since the worst of it is suppose to be over, why is Walmart NOW requiring everyone to wear a mask? Cities in the midwest with low infection rates are deciding to force everyone to wear a mask. It’s like a demented game of Simon Says. Massachusetts is considering a permanent mask requirement according to a friend of mine held captive in the state.

Now the World Health Organization wants people to quit using nice anonymous cash, and use those nice traceable cards for all purchases. Not that probably half of the US will be upset at being traced. They willing loaded those tracing apps onto their phones. So they can be slapped into lockdown again and again if they were exposed to someone, possibly based on one of those faulty tests?

Deaths were counted as covid because they may have had covid with they finally succumbed to the battle with terminal cancer they had fought for the last 5 years. We will never know the actual death toll.

Remember how “Hands up don’t shoot” turned out to be a lie in the Michael Brown case that set the town of Ferguson Mo on fire? Well, in the rush to judgment in the George Floyd case, it seems a couple of things have been left out of the media narrative. Those things are called facts. Or Did George Floyd Die of a Drug Overdose? A word about this site, I’d never heard of it, a buddy of mine was trying to post some article from unz to facebook, facebook blocks it. At once. So I tried, yep, blocked. Definitely some anti-Semitic content on there, but there was this when I was checking out what kind of a website immediately violates facebook’s delicate sensibilities. Toxicology reports are interesting. So over yet another lie, cities have been burned, people have been murdered, all over a potentially false narrative.

This article is long, really long, but please read it. It’s by Angelo Codevilla who is a Senior Fellow of the Claremont Institute and professor emeritus of International Relations at Boston University. It details the amount of lies, the types of lies and a good reason for why we’ve been fed the lies about the Wuhan Flu. And most importantly, it gives some excellent suggestions for what the remedy could be. Because I don’t know about you, but I don’t want a “new normal”. Especially not when it has been forced down our throats for no good reason.

The COVID Coup

Snippet 1

The U.S. Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) modeled the authoritative predictions on which the U.S. lockdowns were based. Its model also predicted COVID deaths for un-locked-down Sweden. On May 3 it wrote that, as of May 14, Sweden would suffer up to 2800 daily deaths. The actual number was below 40. Whether magnifying this falsehood was reckless or willful, it amounted to shouting “fire!” in a crowded theater. What justifies listening to, and paying, people who do that kind of science?

Establishing any infectious disease’s true lethality is characteristically straightforward: test a large sample of the population proportionately representative of location, age, sex, race, socioeconomic categories. Follow up with the subjects a month later to add up the rate of infections and learn the results thereof. Period. Today, we still lack this definitive, direct knowledge of COVID’s true lethality because bureaucrats have prevented widespread testing for the purpose of firmly establishing the one figure that matters most. That is because that figure’s absence allows them to continue fearmongering.

In May the Centers for Disease Control, by then discredited professionally (though not, alas, in the mass media), was forced to conclude that the lethality rate, far from being circa 5% was 0.26%. Double a typical flu. The CDC was able to keep the estimate that high only by factoring in an unrealistically low figure for asymptomatic infections—never mind inflated figures for deaths. But the U.S. government, instead of amending its recommendations in the face of reality, tried to hide reality by playing a shell game with the definition and number of COVID “cases.”

Snippet 2, the solution

Senator Ron Johnson’s (R-WI) Committee on Government Affairs, with oversight over the Centers For Disease Control, can set the record straight about how its relationship with China’s laboratories, with the World Health Organization and with the Chinese government itself has shaped how the U.S. government has dealt COVID. The CDC having grasped enormous powers over American life, the Committee can inquire about the level of expertise it has brought to its task. What, if anything, justifies its claim to scientific management? The Committee can also audit how the CDC’s expenditure of funds and efforts among a variety of political, non-health topics affected its readiness to deal with the recurrence of viruses from exotic places.

Its subcommittee on Oversight and Emergency Management, under Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), himself a physician, is well placed to expose who knew what about the COVID-19 virus, when they knew it, who told the public what, and on what basis. The public has noted with dismay the discrepancy and contradictions about COVID-19 from supposedly medical experts, most prominently by Dr. Anthony Fauci.

And these are only the first two listed. There are more, and they make sense. This needs to happen, and it would be good if it happened this way so that the frightened people will have a chance to see they’ve been lied to by politicians using their fear to control them, and, I would say entrap them. There needs to be a clear message this will never happen again. Otherwise this is going to become the default reaction. They will use fear of health and private businesses will be seized again, unemployed will skyrocket, along with the suicides and cases of domestic violence. Hunger due to mismanagement still faces us. There needs to be criminal prosecution. For the murders committed by #KillerCuomo, and the other governors who shoved Wuhan Flu patients into nursing home.

As of 20^th July

The CDC recently revised its death rate estimate down to just 0.4 percent.
One percent of counties in the country account for nearly half of all Covid-19 deaths nationally.
Ten percent of counties account for nearly 90 percent of all deaths.
Roughly 30 percent of the counties in the country haven’t experienced a single coronavirus death.
Nearly half of all coronavirus deaths have come in nursing homes.
In many states, nursing homes and assisted living facilities account for far more than half of all deaths—around 80 percent in Minnesota and around 70 percent in Ohio.

I heard on a radio show this morning about an apartment building in Ventura county that locked down a 7 story apartment building containing mostly elderly and behavioral issue tenets. Mandatory testing, and no one allowed in or out, their card keys were instantly deactivated. Sort of like a red flag law of apartment buildings. No consideration was given to how these people were suppose to get food or other necessities of life. Just done with no process or warning. I suspect after the story started hitting national airwaves they reversed direction as the order as automagically been lifted.

I saw a meme on facebook: I asked my doctor when the Covid-19 pandemic would end. He said how should I know, I’m a doctor not a politician!

Yes, we’ve been living with a plague, but it’s a plague of lies and I’m sick of it.

Academics, Culture, duty, gun grabbers, guns, Law, mindset, Political philosophy, Politics, Rights

Freedom and the Role of the Militia Part III

July 16, 2020 Yitzhak Goldstein

“The American people, Lee wrote Samuel Adams, had not fought the British only to be ‘brought under despotic rule under the notion of strong government, or in the form of elective despotism; Chains still being chains, whether made of gold or iron’. The “Corrupting nature of power’ made it essential for public safety that ‘power not requisite should not be given’ to government and ‘that necessary powers should be carefully guarded”.¹

Richard Henry Lee

“America is a system of taxation to which a government is attached.”²

Part 1 covered an article by conservative journalist Daniel McCarthy wherein he rebutted liberal solutions to Public Mass Shootings (PMS). He hit the right chords at first but then notes turned sour. McCarthy tied private ownership of firearms to membership in a militia under strict State control. He contends the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776) “inspired” the Second Amendment. He adds a reason to keep arms is to maintain a well-regulated militia “under strict subordination to, and governed by the civil power” dismissing as “right-wing folklore” claims the Amendment’s authors in any way intended it to support citizen uprisings against a tyrannical government i.e. Shay’s Rebellion.³ Stephen King writes in Danse Macabre that Bram Stoker’s Dracula inspired his novel Salem’s Lot, an homage to Stoker. However, King’s novel is wholly his own and the narrative quite different.⁴ McCarthy’s problems are more serious than errant extrapolation.

Article III of the Virginia Declaration of Rights written by George Mason reads, “That a well regulated militia, composed of the Body of the People, trained to Arms, is the proper, natural, and safe Defence of a free State; that standing Armies, in Time of Peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty” [emphasis and spelling in the original].⁵ Regardless of inspiration, Virginia’s Declaration of Rights is not the Second Amendment. In addition, local autonomous militias pre-existed declarations and constitutions.

Colonial survival, especially in outlying villages and settlements, required individuals possess and be skilled with arms long before the Revolution. For the most part, Americans did not acquire skill at arms serving in militias or in standing armies.⁵ No army or police force existed to protect colonists from criminals or against attacks by the French and their Indian allies. When British Royal Governors began seizing the firearms and ammunition of colonials, Virginians George Washington, and George Mason formed the Fairfax County Militia Association. It was a ground up not top down unit. Enlistment was voluntary. Each member had to supply his own weapons and ammunition and they chose officers through election.⁶

Mason shed light in 1775 on the meaning of militia noting a “well regulated militia” was comprised of “Gentleman, Freeholders, and other Freeman”. Its purpose was to “protect ‘our ancient Laws & Liberty’ from a standing army” [emphasis and spelling in the original].⁷ For Mason and many of his contemporaries, a standing army, whether British or American, national or state, was a threat to liberty. Mason wrote, “All men are by nature born equally free and independent”. The greatest threat to liberty was government in all its forms. He defined a “well-regulated” militia as the whole of the people, possessed of arms, who formed and organized themselves into “independent companies” prepared to “resist the standing army of a despotic state”.⁸ Founding Father Richard Henry Lee observed a militia could only consist of the people as a whole. If it was organized and maintained in continual service, it would constitute a “select militia” no different from a standing army in peacetime a practice that the Founders, for the most part, abhorred.⁹

Americans and political leaders universally viewed the individual right to keep and bear arms, and the right of States to call up a militia, as two separate issues neither dependent on the other. Beyond the Founder’s hope that Americans would maintain their precision with arms, the right to keep and bear arms had/has nothing to do with membership in a militia. If states called on the people to form a militia, prior experience with arms would lessen the time to train them.¹⁰ Had the Founders known future Americans would manufacture confusion concerning the Second Amendment’s meaning, they might have bifurcated it into two separate amendments. Why didn’t they? At the time State delegates ratified and then amended the Constitution, there was no confusion with respect to the right to keep and bear arms. It was an individual G-d given right. Some delegates opposed adding a Bill of Rights to the Constitution as superfluous. States delegated specific authorities to the federal government enumerating them in Article I, Section 8. Government cannot regulate activities or rights over which it has no authority. The States delegated to the federal government no authority to regulate the right to keep and bear arms. For it to do so is unconstitutional. Various state delegates argued to declare that people have an individual right to keep and bear arms was akin to declaring people breath air.¹¹

Part 2 explained the so-called “Shay’s Rebellion” in Western Massachusetts was used by proponents of a strong national government, who wanted to jettison the Articles of Confederation, as a boogeyman to whip up fear among Americans that the nation was falling apart. Like public schools today, merchants of mendacious propaganda told Americans then that landless rabble, thieves, bandits, and poor hardscrabble farmers deeply in debt had formed a violent mob and marched on Boston to overthrow the state government. If successful, the rebels would have freed men in debtor’s prisons, erased public and private debts, and seized the land of the rich to divide among themselves. This story is problematic to say the least.

Shay’s was actually several rebellions led for the most part by leading men in their communities. They were patriots, Revolutionary War veterans, political and religious leaders, landowners, and men of means.¹² They called themselves “Regulators” organized into militias to halt depredations committed against them by the corrupt government in Boston controlled by a coastal banking and commercial aristocracy.¹³ Only three years prior (1783), Americans had concluded a war against Great Britain based on similar offenses. It is incongruous that leading Founding Fathers then and textbook authors today, fail to see the parallels and similarities.

Daniel McCarthy is a credentialed well-established journalist writing for conservative and Libertarian publications. It is unfortunate he dismisses as “right-wing folklore” the notion the Founders intended the Second Amendment support a Shay’s-like rebellion. They certainly did. If the federal and or State governments commit crimes against the people’s rights, they have but two choices, submit or resist. The Left employs the labels “right-wing” and “far-right” equally to the former Nazi Party, Ku Klux Klan, and their modern iterations. They also apply it to patriots from Ronald Reagan to Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives, the antithesis of such groups. Although their motive should be obvious, regrettably such a malicious and deceitful practice works in post-literate America. How disappointing a learned man like McCarthy would follow suit. Was Shays’ Rebellion emblematic of anarchy, lawlessness, and chaos verging on destroying America or, were their actions an embodiment of the spirit that sparked and guided the Revolution of 1776? Is it possible to find support for the rebellion in the Founder’s writings?

The Federalist Papers are not part of the Constitution nor do they necessarily reflect majority opinion among America’s Founders. They are a collection of polemics in support of ratification of the proposed Constitution (1787). Its author’s opinions represent a spectrum spanning desires for a strong national government with states as appendages, Hamilton and to a lesser extent, Madison, to true Federalists like John Jay.¹⁴ Nevertheless, with respect to resisting government tyranny, they represent commonly held views among Americans.

Hamilton and his allies adopted the name Federalists but they were actually nationalists. They sought to extinguish state autonomy and sovereignty in favor of a central unitary government much like that in England. Hamilton believed the English system was the best of all. Others, like James Wilson of Pennsylvania, were Federalists but recognized Hamilton’s plan to destroy state sovereignty would also destroy the Constitution hence supported creation of a federal system of government. The central government would have authority over international relations, trade, war, and functions only a central government could execute. States would retain all other functions and authorities, sovereign in their own sphere. Both nationalists and true Federalists supported the right of the people to overthrow their own government should it become oppressive, tyrannical, and destructive to their liberties.

In Federalist 28, Hamilton writes there exist circumstances in which the “national” (sic) government may “resort to force”. They would include “seditions and insurrections” that are “maladies as inseparable from the body politic as tumors and eruptions from the natural body…” He also refers to uprisings in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.¹⁵ However, Hamilton addresses circumstances in which the people have a legitimate right to rise up against their rulers. He observes, “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government…” Hamilton adds that self-defense (armed resistance) against a “national” (sic) government offered greater “prospects” for success than against an “individual state”.¹⁶ Whether resistance to a federal or state government would likely be more successful, Hamilton affirms the right of the people to rise up against a tyrannical government. Only an armed people could execute such an undertaking.

Hamilton condemns those who betray the people’s liberties as “usurpers”. Although people might organize for armed resistance, “usurpers, clothed with the forms of legal authority, can too often crush the opposition in embryo”. Hamilton argues states should be in charge of organizing and executing the resistance not local militias raised by the people. This is because the states would have more arms and larger forces to resist a federal army.¹⁷ However, suppose States, not the federal government, commit usurpation against the people’s liberties. Did Hamilton forget that the people of their respective states raised their own local militias to oppose the State Militias controlled by Royal Governors? He explains the methods by which states can organize in cooperation with each other to resist “invasions of the public liberty” by the central government. Even if a federal army quelled resistance in one state, others states would respond “with fresh forces”.¹⁸ Strategies and methods aside, Hamilton establishes that States have the right to raise an army to resist usurpation of their powers by the federal government. The people possess the same right against their respective states. Is Shays’ Rebellion a great departure from this principle? Hamilton, nor anyone else, argues people have a right to arm and rise up against government over pet peeves or perceived injustices. The standard justifying resistance is gross violations of the Bill of Rights and suppression of the people’s liberties by government with no possibility of redress.

Critics of the proposed Constitution warned the federal government might turn its power to call up, organize, and equip state militias against the states turning militias into a federal army. Hamilton addressed this possibility in Federalist 28.¹⁹ He conceded in times of extreme emergency (invasion by a foreign power, insurrection) the federal government would need to call up and train state militias because such training allows them to act in concert. However, it would not be the same as raising, organizing, equipping, and disciplining a federal standing army. To do so would be futile requiring too much time in the face of an immediate threat. It was not feasible to take the “yeomanry” far from their towns and farms long enough to transform them into professional soldiers. If the federal government called up State militias, the latter would be responsible for arming, equipping, and choosing their officers. The federal government would train and subject them to military discipline. The point is militias come from the people. If harnessed for a national purpose in times of extreme emergency, their loyalty remains to their respective states. Once the crisis had passed, the federal government returns militias to their states. This would create a trained body of armed people large enough to oppose a standing federal army should one attempt to suppress the states. Hamilton wrote that militias were the “best possible security” against a standing army. For any of this to be remotely feasible, the people would have to retain their own arms.²⁰

In Federalist 46, James Madison noted, “Ultimate authority wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone” and not in the federal or state governments.²¹ If the federal government attempted to expand its “power beyond due limits” at the expense of states, the “latter would still have the advantage in the means of defeating such encroachments”. The States would resist the federal government by force. Even if the latter had the resources to raise powerful standing armies, states would always possess a greater resource in the number of citizens within their boundaries. State militias would outnumber a federal army.²² He added that Americans possessed a great advantage over all others in the world; whether the threat came from federal or state governments, the people are armed. In America, all government is “subordinate to the people” and the people are ultimately the masters of the militia because they are the militia.²³

The Founders are clear. People have an individual right to keep and bear arms independent of membership in any form of militia or military unit. States have a right to resist, by force, federal usurpation of State rights and Constitutional liberties. The people retain the same rights with respect to both. Why do some attempt to tie firearms ownership to service in a quasi-professional militia or “national” (sic), State guard? Perhaps they do not trust the common man to be the master of his affairs including responsibility for his safety. People buying, building, and selling arms sans government oversight frightens them. What you smell is the aroma of elitism that permeates all aristocracies, economic, political, or professional. They have never trusted the Great Unwashed with freedom. To the elite, for anyone to claim people have the right to keep and bear arms, as a defense against the federal and state governments is unthinkable. Nevertheless, that is how this nation was born.

1¹ Pauline Maier, Ratification: The People Debate The Constitution, 1787-1788 (New York N.Y., Simon & Schuster, 2010), 67.

2² Author, 12 March 2020.

3³ Daniel McCarthy, “Liberalism Cannot Stop The Shootings” American Spectator at https://spectator.us/liberalism-cannot-stop-shootings/

4⁴ Stephen King, Danse Macabre (New York, N.Y. Berkley Books, 1982), 25, 26, 62, 63, 79, 80.

5⁵ Stephen P. Halbrook, The Founders Second Amendment: Origins of the Right to Bear Arms (Chicago, Illinois, Ivan R. Dee, 2008), 129.

5⁵ Stephen P. Halbrook, That Every Man Be Armed: The Evolution Of A Constitutional Right (Oakland, California, The Independent Institute, 1984), 58.

6⁶ IBID. 60.

7⁷ IBID. 61.

8⁸ IBID. 61.

9⁹ IBID. 71-72.

10¹⁰ Forrest McDonald, Novus Ordo Seclorum: The Intellectual Origins of the Constitution (Lawrence, Kansas, University Press of Kansas, 1985), ix, 60-63. See also, Gary T. Amos, Defending The Declaration (Brentwood, Tennessee, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, Inc., 1989), 35-74, 117-118. Sheldon Richman, “Properly Interpreting the 2^nd Amendment”, Human Events (June 16 1995), Halbrook’s The Founder’s Second Amendment, 221, and Gary A. Shade, “The Right to Keep and Bear Arms: The Legacy of Republicanism vs. Absolutism”, at https://www-firarmsandliberty.com/papers-shade/TheRightToKeepAndBearArms.Pdf

11¹¹ Maier, 56.

12¹² Leonard L. Richards, Shays’s Rebellion: The American Revolution’s Final Battle (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002), 43-62.

13¹³ IBID. 89-116.

14¹⁴ Kevin R. C. Gutzman, J.D., Ph.D. The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution (Washington, D.C. Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2007), 15-28.

15¹⁵ Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison, The Federalist (Birmingham, Alabama, Library of American Freedoms, Palladium Press, 2000), 170-171.

16¹⁶ IBID. 173.

17¹⁷ IBID. 173.

18¹⁸ IBID. 174.

19¹⁹ IBID. 175.

20²⁰ IBID. 175-176, 178, 179.

21²¹ IBID. 305.

22²² IBID. 309-310.

23²³ IBID. 310-311.

"News Media", Academics, authoritarian swine, Culture, gun control, gun grabbers, hatred of Jews, Law, mindset, Political philosophy, Politics, Rights, Sellouts and traitors, So Much Stupid!, Terrorism, Violence-Enabling Victim Disarmers

American Intifada

June 30, 2020 Sheila Stokes

In my last column I discussed how Communist Russia planned to take over America, via information revealed by Yuri Bezmenov, KGB defector. But this Marxism has many tentacles, so much evil has come together that the pot has more than boiled over.

I listened to a podcast recently from Avi Abelow, Avi was a compatriot of Ari Fuld’s HY”D. In this episode he had Barry Shaw, Senior Associate for Public Diplomacy at the Israeli Institute for Strategic Studies as his guest. Barry was discussing the threat BLM poses to the America of the past. It’s a show well worth listening to.

I personally don’t know anyone that supports racism, thinks it’s a good idea or wants more of it. But since the election of Barry Sotero which was supposed to show that racism in America was being healed it’s gotten worse. Barry took the chance to foment racial division, the war on Police and the take over of large parts of the economy ie the cellphone industry and healthcare to name a couple. I support an end to racism, going all directions.

Of course, some forms are acceptable. From January 2020

I do think some are unaware of what Black Lives Matter really stands for, and what their goals are. Yes, black lives matter, ALL lives matter. Apparently that is now a rraaaccciiisst statement. But one of the things Barry Shaw brought out was the founding and founders of BLM.

In this column there is embedded a video of one of the founders, Patrisse Cullors, stating they are trained Marxists. There is more about who trained the founders, and who the are working with. Helpful hint, if your Dad and your brother repeatedly wind up in jail, perhaps the problem isn’t the police? And a bit more from another source, Black Lives Matter co-founder describes herself as ‘trained Marxist’

“We actually do have an ideological frame,” Cullors said. “Myself and Alicia are particularly trained organizers — we are trained Marxists. We are super versed on ideological theories…”

Apparently ideological theories also include “Give us what we want or we burn it down”. No matter who it hurts, black owned business or black employees.

You know, if statures of Lincoln and George Washington, Ulysses Grant and an abolitionist are being torn down, it’s a pretty good clue this has nothing to do with slavery. Remember just a few short years ago when people opined that the attacks on statues would soon extend past those of the Confederacy and the Confederate flag to others and they were told to take off their tin foil hats? Maybe they should get an apology, huh? It was never about that, it was about boiling frogs.

But Black Lives Matter web site still repeats the tired old lies, I guess they think everyone watches #FakeNews so they don’t know any better. From their about us page, I’m not linking to it.

BlackLivesMatter was founded in 2013 in response to the acquittal of Trayvon Martin’s murderer

Trayvon was beating a guy’s head against a sidewalk, most folks don’t take kindly to that.

From their what we believe page

We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.

Huh? What exactly does destroying the family unit do to promote “social justice” or help improve the lives of blacks?

Walter Williams thinks the break down is part of the problem, and it has nothing to do with that kind of slavery. The Black Family Is Struggling, and It’s Not Because of Slavery

LBJ’s “War on Poverty” Hurt Black Americans LBJ-Demoncrat by the way.

Russian Collusion

June 19, 2020 Sheila Stokes 2 Comments

No, not that Russian Collusion. But there certainly has been some Russian collusion going on for a while, a good long while. As horse trainer Pat Parelli says “Prior proper preparation prevent pee poor performance.” And the KGB (because this goes back to then) has done a good job of it.

Back in another lifetime, back before the government forgot about the 1^st Amendment, specifically the part that says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I used to go to Beit Knesset on Shabbat. It was wonderful, I learned things, prayed with the others and there was reading from the Torah and then Rabbi would give a talk. Afterwards we usually had Kiddush (meaning the light meal after morning prayers). We would visit and eat, and I would learn, I loved that. One of the people that was very interesting to visit with was a gentleman from Russia. He is a good person, you can tell this because he is a good parent to his fur children, and, he is a rock solid second amendment supporter, he is also a strong conservative. Come to think of it, one of my favorite ladies from Hebrew school is from the Ukraine, and she is a solid conservative, and another lady I know from Russia is a solid conservative, and my cousin’s brother-in-law is from Russia and he is a strong Second Amendment supporter and a conservative. Wait, I think I’m starting to see a pattern here!! All these people that have lived under actual Communism want nothing to do with it, and don’t seem to believe the pablum the left spews out! Huh, funny that eh?

So sometime last year, when life was what life used to be like, we were sitting around eating and he was telling me about this video, from Yuri Bezmenov, a former KGB propaganda agent that had defected to the US. The interview was from the 1984. Quite awhile ago, but what he said has come to pass. My buddy sent me the link to a video, I watched it. After I picked my jaw up, I knew there was a column there, and now is the time for that column. I will tell you the link to the video he originally sent me is gone. YouTube has taken it down, it violated the community standards. I think that means it told the truth. Because they are now shutting down anyone who says anything they don’t like, with an iron fist so to speak. CNN and Now NBC Are Colluding with Tech Giants to Cut Out Conservative Competition This is a shorter snippet from the original video interview on the “useful idiots” his term, not mine. But I agree with him.

If you want to watch the whole video my friend sent, I think this is the same one.

But, in the event those are gone by the time you see this column, I’ll hit the points that Yuri makes.

There were two type of people, those that would play ball with the communists and those that wouldn’t. Those that would were promoted into positions of power and influence. Those that wouldn’t were character assassinated and sometimes just assassinated.

The communists had a large army of contact tracers, data collectors spies. And they had information on everyone, who they hung out with, where they could be found, if they were favorable to the USA, their political beliefs. It’s how the communists were able to wipe out certain people in villages in Viet Nam within hours of coming into the village. Their spies had done their homework for them. But come revolution time, those are the people that will be executed. Why? Because they know too much. And when the useful idiots see that communism doesn’t play out as advertised, they become bitter enemies of it. If they live.

His KGB instructors told him to never bother with leftists. To avoid those political prostitutes, to aim higher: mainstream media, filthy rich movie producers, academic circles, people who can look you in the eye and lie. People who have no moral principles. He then makes the point that our leftists, the professors, civil rights people that believe in the lies of socialism and communism are instrumental in the process of subversion, only to destabilize the nation. They are then offended when they don’t come to power. Thus, useful idiots.

There are no grassroots revolutions, every revolution is the result of a highly organized professionals.

Ideological subversion. You can see it with your own eyes, nothing to do with espionage. The main emphasis on the KGB is slow process of ideological subversion or active measures, psychological warfare. It involves changing the perception of reality. No one is able, despite an abundance of information to come to a sensible conclusion about defending themselves, their families and their community and their country.

Stage 1: Demoralization, educate one generation of students in the country that you want to influence. So for the US, it’s educate one generation of students in Marxist ideology. And I don’t mean Groucho. He says it’s been pumped into the soft heads of American students for 3 generations without any counter-balancing education in American values and patriotism. Dropouts and half baked intellectuals from the 60s are now politicians and teachers influencing others, you can not change their minds despite plenty of information. You can not get rid of them and it will take 20-50 years to educate a group of pro-American students, common sense people. And when those people see what Marxist ideology looks like in real life, they won’t be allowed to speak out. Because with communism, no dissent is allowed. Sort of like the current cancel culture and the increasing attempts to shut down conservative voices on YouTube, the internet and TV. No opposing voices allowed. They will be squashed. The demoralization process in the US is completed (and this was in 1984). They don’t believe facts they are shown.

Stage 2: Destabilization, the subverter doesn’t care about your ideas anymore. It only takes 2-5 years to destabilize a nation. What matters is economy, foreign relations and defense systems.

Stage 3: Crisis, it can take only six weeks to bring a country to crisis.

Stage 4: Normalization, this is after a violent change in power structure and economy. This is a cynical Soviet expression, like when the tanks rolled into Czechoslovakia. The commander said now the situation in brotherly Czechoslovakia is normalized. This is what will happen in the US if we allow the schmucks to bring the US and us, to crisis. To promise people all kind of goodies and the paradise on earth. It will destabilize our economy, and eliminate our free market and put a big glob of government in Washington D.C. with benevolent dictators; he gave the example of Walter Mondale. Told you it was old. He says the United States is in a war, a war against the foundations of this Leninist/Marxist system. The world communist system. There will be nowhere for Americans to defect as he did. This is the last country of freedom. Like some people’s idea of what is acceptable in the new Covid world’s “new normal” in communism “normalization” stinks.

His solution? To make a real national effort to educate people in the real spirit of patriotism. To explain the real danger of the socialist/communist welfare state. If we fail to do that, nothing can help the United States. We have to stop aiding communism.

Again, that was from 1984. How is this playing out now, today? We see what he was talking about. And it’s been going on a long time, since the early 1900s. Former Representative Curtis Bowers did a documentary called Agenda: Grinding America Down that gives you the tentacles of it.

I ran across a couple of interesting posts from ex-pats living in different parts of the world. I’ll just give the last bit of the first one.

Because the truth is so utterly dispiriting. Most of us who have actually worked there, who have seen the world, seen Man in all his squabbling, raping, squandering, polluting, destructive, ROUTINE-GENOCIDAL abomination, quietly despair. We have a heart. We are sad for those people. For the G*d AWFUL conditions they live in. We have seen things. Burned and tortured bodies. Hideously staring faces, frozen in death. Their eyes, yet, communicating soul chilling terror.
Years later, we still have the dreams.
But you know something? We are also sad for YOU.
Because YOU are wildly misled by your Media, misled by your shallow, self serving, Jackass politicians, misled by your own intrinsic goodness. Your naivety.
Your good intentions and sense of charity, fair play, will haunt your descendants for generations. Or, worse. For-ever. It makes us despair that we cannot find the proper words to communicate to you that you must, you MUST, jealously, fiercely, without respite, GUARD your country, your ancestral homelands, your culture and your people. Against the invaders, and those who ceaselessly conspire for Open Borders, Diversity, and a laughable, fictitious, non-existent, poppycock, Multi-cultural Nirvana.

The other is from Michael Yon (he’s EXPAT in Thailand). This one I’m giving you the whole thing, then think about what Yuri said.

Possible Insurgency Starting in United States: I have to be there myself to judge, but watching 24/7 from afar this looks like it might be more than protests
There is a significant difference between protests, civil unrest, general civil unrest, insurgency, and civil war.
I’ve been watching, reading and talking with people almost every waking our since this began.
This began as protests.
Some differences:

Protests are normal background noise in any healthy society. Something is always wrong and needs attention. Often the best way to get attention is protest. Loads of open and non-violent protests can be a sign of a HEALTHY country.
Protests generally (but not always) are small in relation to the number of people in the population. For instance, if only school teachers come out about pay in Arkansas, that is very local to Arkansas with very specific demographic. Fix the problem they go home happy, or at least reasonably satisfied. Normal. Healthy. Lots of protests, again, can be a good thing, if sometimes annoying. (Which they need to be sometimes.)
Vital: in protests — the vast majority of people still see the government as legitimate. They do not want to overthrow the government, or at least are not trying to.
Occasionally there are massive protests but, again, they will be about something specific and usually die or peter out quickly.
Civil Unrest — most media just toss this term around, but among a tiny number of people it actually means something beyond looting. In civil unrest, a relatively large number of people protest in some way, violent or not. There may even be lethal terrorism as with from the terrorist groups Black Lives Matter and Antifa. (Both are communist, by the way, and communists normally use terrorism).
In Civil Unrest — the motivations are far deeper than something simple like teacher pay. Could be anger over high crime, poor economy, police abuse. In Civil Unrest, most of those involved still see the government as legitimate. (I would underline that last sentence if I could.)
In Civil Unrest, the restive people still might be limited to one or a few groups. More than something simple like teachers, but something greater like poor people. Or a million people being tossed off their land. Or a racial group that feels downtrodden or senses weakness in a wealthy other group and wants to take that wealth. Civil unrest comes in endless variations. No two are the same.
But again, relatively speaking, the people who are taking action are not a huge portion of the population. For argument sake, say 10%. Not a huge part of the population but plenty to make a big fight.
In Civil Unrest, they still are NOT trying to overthrow the government.
General Civil Unrest (GCU) normally brings a large portion AND cross-section of the population. GENERAL meaning a large cross-section who might also have many grievances. Economy. Crime. Police abuse. Pollution. Name it. Basically, if you reach this point…you got serious problems.
BUT, in GCU, they still are not necessarily trying to overthrow the government, or change the entire system. GCU can be peaceful, or massively deadly.
Insurgency — at this point, someone is making an honest go at either overthrowing the government but keeping the system, or completely swapping out the operating system, and the former operators. Basically, leaders in exile or swinging from lampposts.
I am greatly simplifying. This could go for hours. Bottom line: with Insurgency, there is a credible threat beyond mere terrorism. (There can be terrorism without insurgency, and there are peaceful insurgencies, too. In USA, highly doubt it would be peaceful.)
Today, there clearly are many Americans protesting who see the government as legitimate and just want limited but important changes.
There are others, however, who clearly are staking turf such as the terrorist group BLM who is right now painting roads and so forth in DC, and doing a lot more than occupy. They have politicians on their side who, for instance, just evicted Utah National Guard and let the terrorists move in.
They are making a power play and this is very delicate.
Some military officers appear to be siding with BLM. They should be fired on the spot. Any US military officer who openly sides with a terrorist organization during such a critical time must be fired. On the spot. No matter the consequences. Consequences of not firing are far worse.
The risk of course includes race war within the ranks, or rebellion (which clearly has happened already) by officers.
Must. Fire. Benedict. Arnold.
With his public video, General Charles ‘CQ’ Brown just publicly challenged the President. That was a power play. An, “I dare you to fire me I am a black General.”
Fire Brown now. If not, cancer within the ranks can explode.
Insurgencies are far, far different than protests. Protests are like a headache. Two to aspirin, make an agreement, call me in the morning.
Insurgency…those typically include elements of civil war. IF we enter into a profound insurgency, chances of various civil wars unfolding immediately are very high. Like 99%. Chance of profound insurgency starting from here? Coin flip. But if we get there, it’s game on.
Likely, at some point, if we enter into profound insurgency and then into civil wars, I would expect that some journalists and politicians would start being assassinated as per banana republic revolutionary style.
There is still ample opportunity to head this off. You know…like the pandemic.
For starters, fire everyone military officer who openly rebels. Immediately. We are right on the edge but not on fire yet.
Hey, do you remember all those warnings I gave in Iraq, then Afghanistan, and other countries, and then warned about this pandemic and economic difficulties back in January, and was saying clearly in January to stop incoming flights?
I am saying it here, loud and clear. Appears that we are moving into a sponsored insurgency. BLM and ANTIFA are two of the gloves and must be vigorously targeted.
Touchy, right? I get it. Trust me…spent years in many conflicts. I know exactly how touchy this is. This is like bomb squad working on a giant ticking bomb while under sniper fire.
Fire those officers right now. Anyone who sides with BLM or ANFITA out the door.
If this continues for one more week, invoke the Insurrection Act.
Remember, only a relatively small percentage of the population is fighting now. If you start getting millions of whites, hispanics, and asians fighting…this will be Iraq 10x and could result in a huge slaughter of blacks.
STOP IT NOW.
Be prepared to defend yourself. The police and government cannot even defend themselves. You are on your own. Remember — this pandemic is real. Stock up on food and all other essentials.

These are not peaceful protests, I don’t care what Fredo Cuomo says. Antifa is training to hurt people.

We are at a defining moment in America’s history. The covid scam (IMHO) shut down and destabilized the economy, and now the riots over a man who held a gun to a pregnant woman’s belly. No, I am not standing up for the police officer that knelt on George Floyd’s neck, but I don’t believe police departments are filled with racists either as the mainstream media would have you believe. I actually don’t even really think this is about police that much at all. I think it’s about removing the thin blue line that is holding back stage 4. Do I believe there are bad cops? Of course! There are bad doctors and bad plumbers as well. There is a bad Fex-Ex driver that delivered someone else’s package to me today. But I think by and large, they are good decent people. Without the thin blue line we descend into the stage 4 that Yuri talked about. Not to mention what the police will be replaced with. If you are curious I’ve got a interesting radio show for you. It’s Barry Shaw on the Tamar Yonah show.

The hypocrisy of the left is amazing. While they are free to shout threats most vile, to attack elderly people, set buildings on fire, loot vandalize and destroy people lives and livelihoods has there been one word, just one from the global warming alarmists? No? No Greta Thunberg rising up to stop the arsonists waving a little shovel to put out the fires, her tiny nostrils flaring screaming “How DARE you”! No AOC screaming at the rioters “You’ve just cost us a year off our remaining 10 years with these carbon emissions? This is why you don’t make laws according to the whims of spoiled immature children. Then there is communist Comrade de Blasio Bill de Blasio Responds to Massive ‘Black Trans Lives Matter’ Protest in Brooklyn by Welding Gates Shut at Biggest Park in Jewish Community That’ll fix it! And his consistent policy on Wuhan flu? COVID-19 Tracers In NYC Ordered Not Ask Those Who Test Positive If They Attended Protests

In addition to getting participation trophies, you have parents that don’t, well, don’t parent. “I Honor Her. She is Such a Good Human Being” – Mayor De Blasio Responds to His Daughter’s Arrest at Weekend Protests

It has become so customary to appease the out of control bullies on the left. If anyone dares to say anything in favor of the police that when Egard Watches put out a pro-law enforcement video, YouTube restricted it. In fact the left is in full on pack mentality mode. Two college professors are under attack, one for stating a fact the left didn’t like. And now they are trying to get him fired. This is the result of years of “participation trophies”. Kids didn’t have to do anything to achieve, they got a trophy anyway. No reason to try to be the best, everyone is equal because we don’t want to damage anyone’s self esteem so no winners and losers. They are the result of teachers that didn’t teach but rather indoctrinated them to be the useful idiots. Man arrested for vandalizing Christopher Columbus statue — He is a social studies teacher These mobs are violent, and vicious. Far left mayors who have been so supportive of both groups rioting have had a very different response when it was their house that was vandalized and their neighborhood that saw marchers. Far Left WA Mayor Who ‘Took a Knee’ with Black Lives Matter Thugs Gets Home Vandalized During George Floyd Riots, Calls it “Domestic Terrorism” and New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell Cheers Black Lives Matter… Except When They’re Outside Her House. Don’t worry Mayor LaToya, I’m kind of thinking the way things are going New Orleans may not be seeing a whole lot of tourism. I mean who would want to take a chance on going to your city and spending money there right now? Not that there will be much in the way of goods available anyway.

You know the saying “Play stupid games, win stupid prizes”? Well, in the real world, not the alternate universe of the left which they think revolves around them, there are consequences. There are consequences to elections. If your business has burned and you are under siege by the mob and you voted Democrat, I’m sorry, but what did you expect? Democrats never side with the law abiding citizen just trying to make a living and take care of their family. That’s not who they are and not what they stand for.

If you are really wishing you had a firearm or could get one to defend your family and you voted for Democrats, I’m sorry, but what did you expect? Even if your local Democrat said “Oh I duck hunt every year” you should know that is not what the Second Amendment is about. You should also know that if that politician is a Democrat he will have to go with the party platform, which is civilian disarmament. Have you noticed, the party that has been trying to render citizens defenseless for years is now the party trying to defund the police? The party that stands with rioters and looters is the one that wants to remove the impediment to destruction. Yes, elections have consequences. As do the actions by those elected officials in the real world. Truck Drivers Say They Won’t Deliver To Cities with Defunded Police Departments Guess it’s a good thing people horded all that toilet paper, huh?

So back to the good Egard watch company video. Unless YouTube has removed it, I’ll close with this thought, if we don’t stand up for the decent people in law enforcement, all we will be left with are those that want the job for the power it provides or as Barry Shaw talked about in Tamar’s show, the new version of the brown shirts. Barry Sotero’s national police force. And we aren’t going to like it. Communists have their play book down and have been putting their plan into action for years, decision time.

"News Media", Academics, authoritarian swine, Culture, Junk Science, Law, Media, mindset, Politics, Sellouts and traitors

At What Price? Liberty?

April 13, 2020 Sheila Stokes 3 Comments

The Wuhan Flu madness continues. But I’m seeing additional deterioration of our society I think. You might want to grab a cup of coffee for this one.

We are in the middle days of Pesach, the festival we celebrate and re-live being taken out of slavery and bondage by the strong arm of G-d. We didn’t know the land we were going to live in, we didn’t know how we were going to get there and we had been living as slaves for a few hundred years so living as a free and just society was all new. Self-governance? What’s that? But we had G-d and his appointed leaders, so we had the courage and faith to leave Egypt מצרים . The word narrow is צרים see how similar they look? And if you put a Mem מ in front of it that means “from”. So I guess you could say we left “from narrows”, slavery.

Plagues, and seclusion, sounding familiar?

But what I am seeing that is totally new, to me at least, is the astonishing amount of fear and blatant attempts of people to seize power. The power-crazed Governor of Michigan Gretchen Whitmer has banned the sale of baby car seats, vegetable seeds, certain things in Home Depot are ok, others aren’t. Travel between residences is no longer allowed, so forget taking food to elderly neighbors or family that can’t get out. She has a whole host of other demands while the sale of pot and alcohol are still essential and fine. All at Queen Gretchen’s whim. Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear ordered license plate numbers to be collected on christians who attended church in their cars, parked a distance apart and the service was over a loud speaker. Each would be getting a $500 fine, as would the pastor. Unbelievable. Oh wait, they are both Demoncrats, so I guess not.

Boston Suburb Threatens $100 Fines to Anyone Walking in Wrong Direction Amid Coronavirus Panic

Former police officer arrested in park for throwing ball with daughter due to coronavirus social distancing rules My hunch is they got miffed when they demanded his papers. They told him the park was “closed”. There were obviously other people there, he told them he was at least 15 feet away, and they said if he didn’t give them his papers, they would handcuff him in front of his 6 year old daughter. Which they did.

Police Drag Passenger Off Bus for Not Wearing Coronavirus Mask in Philadelphia

Wow, they could have just arrested him! New York Woman Arrested for Not Socially Distancing — Then Thrown into Jail Holding Cell with Two Dozen Women Oh.

Woman Fined $200 For ‘Going For A Drive’ Amid Pandemic

I’m also increasingly disturbed by some of the messages I see on facebook. One friend posted a article that the Gov of Texas is considering reopening the state, and she asked for thoughts. Two people responded how foolish, and another it was a big mistake. Everyone just needed to stay home. Anyone that didn’t was selfish and wanted people to die. Another friend re-posted and excellent opinion piece about what this Wuhan Flu is doing to our liberty. Someone commented under it as a doctor he should know better about viruses. Huh, I think he does, but I wonder about her medical training /snark. Yet another friend shared a photo that a friend of hers had put on a page. It was a handwritten note someone had left on her Mother’s door. Apparently family had dropped off some food for the woman for Easter. The nasty-gram read something about no family, no visitors, no people were allowed due to the coronavirus quarantine orders, and that next time they would call the police. Wow. Well, some places make it very easy. I used to hear people say “Oh we would never had called the police and informed on the Jews during the holocaust”. Got news, there are those that would that are alive and well and still dialing. Yep, you too can easily be a socialist.

Hartford is Promoting SeeClickFix App on Local Stations for Citizens to Snitch on Their Neighbors for Violating Social Distancing

Medicine since obamacare is politics

New Jersey Democrat Lawmaker Fantasizes About Withholding Disinfectants From Kentuckians Amid COVID-19 Crisis to Stick it to McConnell

Buffalo Hospital Fires Executive for Suggesting Trump Supporters Should ‘Give Up Their Ventilators’

Governors Ban Drugs For COVID-19 Treatment After President Trump Mentions Them

So, I guess if you’re a conservative living in one of those states, you know your governor (all Demoncrats of course) would rather see you dead.

Licensed Physician in Utah Unable to Prescribe Hydroxychloroquine Because ‘State Has Taken Over Distribution of Drug’

So a bit more about that Hydroxychloroquine, Azythromyacin, Zinc combination.

Dr. Zelenko’s success rate is now up to 699 patients successfully treated, almost 100%, one patient refused to follow protocol and died. None have needed ventilators.

And from the left coast Doctor Prescribing Hydroxychloroquine Says All of His “Very, Very Ill” Patients with Coronavirus Became Symptom Free within 8-12 Hours

New research study reveals that COVID-19 attacks hemoglobin in red blood cells, rendering it incapable of transporting oxygen. Are we using a false medical paradigm to treat a new disease?

Oh, so a million ventilators aren’t the right answer? They make it worse.

Dr Fauci is still slow to accept the drug cocktail being hailed as a successful treatment, for this coronavirus. However in 2013 he hailed it’s successful use in SARS coronavirus with no successful human outcomes.

That is interesting.

So Dr. Fauci thought a 2013 test in a “lab dish” was particularly encouraging.

But in 2020 after several successful studies of hydroxychloroquine’s effectiveness in treating coronavirus patients he was suspect.

But Dr. Fauci has kind of a bad habit of creating panic and spreading misinformation.

We can get into the why in a bit. Because “why” and “motives” matter.

Let’s look at the number of Wuhan Flu deaths, and how they are calculated and how they are presented. You like charts? I like charts especially when they are easy to understand and make a good points.

Only 150 Americans to Date With No Pre-Existing Conditions Have Died From the Coronavirus or 0.9%

CDC Tells Hospitals To List COVID as Cause of Death Even if You’re Just Assuming or It Only Contributed

And in Dr. Birx’s own words

Then there is Minnesota state senator and Doctor Scott Jensen

MN Senator and Dr. Reveals HHS Document Coached Him on How to Overcount COVID-19 Cases — WITH COPY OF DOCUMENT

But according to comments I read, if we don’t stay shut down as a country and everyone stay sequestered in their homes we are selfish fools exposing the rest of the world to our death wish. I did see a interesting graphic on facebook, it read “Quarantine is when you lock sick people away. When you lock healthy people away it’s tyranny”.

Coronavirus Model Used to Crash US Economy MASSIVELY OVERSTATED Hospitalizations in 40 States

The entire government is taking it very seriously. 400,000 People Traveled To US From China Since COVID-19 Outbreak — Including 40,000 After Trump Imposed Travel Ban

But we must all stay locked in our homes, away from our families and sources of income. People coming from China? Meh, whatever.

I heard Wuhan flu described as a flu that is more contagious than some of the other strains of coronavirus, but less lethal.

So the whole world is on lockdown? Not quite.

Sweden and Brazil Kept Their Economies Open and Their COVID-19 Numbers Are No Worse than US

Data indicates there no material differences in fatalities between the three countries leading the casual observer to question why is the US killing its economy?

The US continues to prevent nearly all commerce from occurring to combat the China coronavirus. Many other countries are following suit. But some countries like Sweden and Brazil are keeping their countries open for business.

Data shows that the fatalities related to the coronavirus in these countries are very similar to those in the US.

In fact there is a twitter thread #FilmYourHospital going. It’s people driving by their local hospitals showing empty parking lots, some with those tent cities outside for the overflow of sick people, they too are empty. Some of the people filming the empty tents were told they had to leave and weren’t allowed to film. There are stories of healthcare workers being sent home, laid off and told not to report to work, they are just “on-call”. Yep, in the midst of this healthcare crisis healthcare workers are going without hours, which means without pay.

I heard a guest on the Ben Shapiro show saying how if/when we ever had another pandemic again we needed to have one policy across the US, none of this patchwork stuff of each state doing what they want. That there needs to be one policy and the CDC needs to be in charge. I’m thinking “OH HELL NO”. But then I’d already been gathering sources for this column.

Then there is Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, who was involved in the creation of Obamacare, who says this needs to go on another 18 months.

UNLESS there is a vaccine. Did you catch that? The MUST be a vaccine. Remember when I talked about the “why” of things matter? The motive matters. And here we go.

This is from a Canadian publication

In concert with the ramp-up in death statistics, the government-steered vaccination industry has run an elaborate bureaucracy designed to hype vaccine use, as seen in a slide show presentation last April by Glen Nowak, the CDC’s spokesman for the National Immunization Program, to the American Medical Association. Here is the “Recipe that fosters influenza vaccine interest and demand,” in the truncated language that appears on his slides: “Medical experts and public health authorities [should] publicly (e.g. via media) state concern and alarm (and predict dire outcomes) – and urge influenza vaccination.” This “recipe,” the slide show indicated, would result in “A. Significant media interest and attention [and] B. Framing of the flu season in terms that motivate behaviour (e.g. as ‘very severe,’ ‘more severe than last or past years,’ ‘deadly’).” Other aspects of the CDC’s “Seven-Step Recipe for Generating Interest in, and Demand for, Flu (or any other) Vaccination” includes “Continued reports (e.g., from health officials and media) that influenza is causing severe illness and/or affecting lots of people – helping foster the perception that many people are susceptible to a bad case of influenza.” and “Visible/tangible examples of the seriousness of the illness (e.g., pictures of children, families of those affected coming forward) and people getting vaccinated (the first to motivate, the latter to reinforce).”

That is from 2004, the CDC has been at this for awhile. The whole thing is worth reading.

And 10 years later, in 2014. Don’t Believe Everything You Read About Flu Deaths

Flu results in “about 250,000 to 500,000 yearly deaths” worldwide, Wikipedia tells us. “The typical estimate is 36,000 [deaths] a year in the United States,” reports NBC, citing the Centers for Disease Control. “Somewhere between 4,000 and 8,000 Canadians a year die of influenza and its related complications, according to the Public Health Agency of Canada,” the Globe and Mail says, adding that “Those numbers are controversial because they are estimates.”

snippety snip snip

According to the National Vital Statistics System in the U.S., for example, annual flu deaths in 2010 amounted to just 500 per year — fewer than deaths from ulcers (2,977), hernias (1,832) and pregnancy and childbirth (825), and a far cry from the big killers such as heart disease (597,689) and cancers (574,743). The story is similar in Canada, where unlikely killers likewise dwarf Statistics Canada’s count of flu deaths.

Even that 500 figure for the U.S. could be too high, according to analyses in authoritative journals such as the American Journal of Public Health and the British Medical Journal. Only about 15-20 per cent of people who come down with flu-like symptoms have the influenza virus — the other 80-85 per cent actually caught rhinovirus or other germs that are indistinguishable from the true flu without laboratory tests, which are rarely done. In 2001, a year in which death certificates listed 257 Americans as having died of flu, only 18 were positively identified as true flus. The other 239 were simply assumed to be flus and most likely had few true flus among them.

So why?

The CDC’s decision to play up flu deaths dates back a decade, when it realized the public wasn’t following its advice on the flu vaccine. During the 2003 flu season “the manufacturers were telling us that they weren’t receiving a lot of orders for vaccine,”Dr. Glen Nowak, associate director for communications at CDC’s National Immunization Program, told National Public Radio. “It really did look like we needed to do something to encourage people to get a flu shot.”

Ahh.

Well lucky for us all, Bill Gates has been working on that very thing. Bill Gates thinks vaccines are very important. Extremely important. Worldwide.

The implication is this: when a new vaccine is invented then mass produced, it will not necessarily be mandatory, but everything else in your life, such as work, school, community, and sociality, will all become privileges granted by the state under the condition that you take the new vaccine.

However, his vaccines don’t have a very good, good, acceptable track record. Believe it or not Robert F Kennedy Jr. has been keeping track of all this.

Promising to eradicate Polio with $1.2 billion, Gates took control of India’s National Advisory Board (NAB) and mandated 50 polio vaccines (up from 5) to every child before age 5. Indian doctors blame the Gates campaign for a devastating vaccine-strain polio epidemic that paralyzed 496,000 children between 2000 and 2017. In 2017, the Indian Government dialed back Gates’ vaccine regimen and evicted Gates and his cronies from the NAB. Polio paralysis rates dropped precipitously. In 2017, the World Health Organization reluctantly admitted that the global polio explosion is predominantly vaccine strain, meaning it is coming from Gates’ Vaccine Program. The most frightening epidemics in Congo, the Philippines, and Afghanistan are all linked to Gates’ vaccines. By 2018, ¾ of global polio cases were from Gates’ vaccines.

In 2014, the #GatesFoundation funded tests of experimental HPV vaccines, developed by GSK and Merck, on 23,000 young girls in remote Indian provinces. Approximately 1,200 suffered severe side effects, including autoimmune and fertility disorders. Seven died. Indian government investigations charged that Gates funded researchers committed pervasive ethical violations: pressuring vulnerable village girls into the trial, bullying parents, forging consent forms, and refusing medical care to the injured girls. The case is now in the country’s Supreme Court.

In 2010, the Gates Foundation funded a trial of a GSK’s experimental malaria vaccine, killing 151 African infants and causing serious adverse effects including paralysis, seizure, and febrile convulsions to 1,048 of the 5,049 children.

During Gates 2002 MenAfriVac Campaign in Sub-Saharan Africa, Gates operatives forcibly vaccinated thousands of African children against meningitis. Between 50-500 children developed paralysis. South African newspapers complained, “We are guinea pigs for drug makers”

Nelson Mandela’s former Senior Economist, Professor Patrick Bond, describes Gates’ philantropic practices as “ruthless” and “immoral”.

In 2010, Gates committed $10 billion to the WHO promising to reduce population, in part, through new vaccines. A month later Gates told a Ted Talk that new vaccines “could reduce population”. In 2014, Kenya’s Catholic Doctors Association accused the WHO of chemically sterilizing millions of unwilling Kenyan women with a phony “tetanus” vaccine campaign.

Independent labs found the sterility formula in every vaccine tested.

After denying the charges, WHO finally admitted it had been developing the sterility vaccines for over a decade.

Similar accusations came from Tanzania, Nicaragua, Mexico and the Philippines.

A 2017 study (Morgensen et.Al.2017) showed that WHO’s popular DTP is killing more African than the disease it pretends to prevent. Vaccinated girls suffered 10x the death rate of unvaccinated children.

Gates and the WHO refused to recall the lethal vaccine which WHO forces upon millions of African children annually.

Some might even say his track record is criminal. Go back to the first link on Gates thinking vaccines are extremely important and look at the financial conflicts of interest. The stock he owns in pharmaceutical companies. Also interesting is

And there are those in government that relish the potential for power St. Louis Federal Reserve Head Says Americans Should Be Tested for COVID-19 Daily And Forced To Display a Badge on Their Clothing with the Result

Perhaps a gold star? We can’t travel, work, see a doctor or shop without it?

But hey, Bill Gates has that covered too, no need for a gold star. That’s so 1940s. Nope, digital implants.

“Eventually we will have some digital certificates to show who has recovered or been tested recently or when we have a vaccine who has received it,” the Microsoft founder had speculated.

Snippty snip snip

However, as outlined in a December 2019 Scientific American article, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funded Massachusetts Institute of Technology research that suggested embedding vaccine records “directly into the skin” of children: “Along with the vaccine, a child would be injected with a bit of dye that is invisible to the naked eye but easily seen with a special cell-phone filter, combined with an app that shines near-infrared light onto the skin. The dye would be expected to last up to five years, according to tests on pig and rat skin and human skin in a dish.”

Through his foundation, Gates has invested billions of dollars in vaccines.

While the Trump administration is against the tracking system,

Attorney General Bill Barr is skeptical of Gates’ idea to tag people with these mark-of-the-beast implants. He said he is concerned about “the tracking of people and so forth, generally, especially going forward over a long period of time.” Barr also said that he is “very concerned about the slippery slope in terms of continuing encroachments on personal liberty.”

However, Barr said he did feel like “appropriate, reasonable steps are fine.” This leaves the door open for some sort of government action in order to enforce vaccine compliance.

If you want to know even more about this, there is a doctor, Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai who is running for the Senate in Massachusetts and he has been weighing in on the Wuhan flu debacle. He’s a very bright man, 4 degrees from MIT. Here’s a youtube, he talks about Wuhan Flu, your immune system and the massive fraud being foisted upon us.

So, who or W.H.O. gets to decide what is reasonable and appropriate? The government? The panicked people on facebook, the crazed neighbors, the media, vaccine despot Gates? There are those that would clamor for a vaccine to be stuck in everything that moves right now. They have no idea of Gates record of “successful” vaccines. Remember, he wants to reduce the population. They would say the same things about being vaccinated as they do the lock down. If you don’t you’re selfish and want people to die. They will “demand” the government take action.

Look, I am not saying I’m against vaccines. That’s not what this is about. If you want to get a vaccination I’m all for it, you can take every vaccination out there. I won’t say a word. This is about forced vaccinations. And since some employers already do this I’m pretty sure this could go that route as well. With the added bit about governmental control and the vaccine despot’s lousy record added in. This is about being able to make free choices of what goes in your body, not what is forced in your body by the government or fear crazed people deceived by a willing media. I guess with all those people out of work due to the lock down, or those that will be looking for work because their business went under it will be easy. Potential employers will just say something along the lines of “I’m sorry, but governmental regulations state a certain percentage of our staff have to be vaccinated, so you must have the new Gates/Fauci vaccine for us to hire you”.

10 Pharaoh drew near, and the children of Israel lifted up their eyes, and behold! the Egyptians were advancing after them. They were very frightened, and the children of Israel cried out to the Lord.

11 They said to Moses, Is it because there are no graves in Egypt that you have taken us to die in the desert? What is this that you have done to us to take us out of Egypt?

12 Isn’t this the thing [about] which we spoke to you in Egypt, saying, Leave us alone, and we will serve the Egyptians, because we would rather serve the Egyptians than die in the desert

13 Moses said to the people, Don’t be afraid! Stand firm and see the Lord’s salvation that He will wreak for you today, for the way you have seen the Egyptians is [only] today, [but] you shall no longer continue to see them for eternity.

~~Exodus/Shemot 14:10-13

The opening of The Ten Commandments,

I do not want to be one of those clamoring to go back into the slavery of governmental control over my life. Choose freedom, there is Moshe on the right, see him? He’s holding the reins of a camel for you, choose freedom.

"News Media", Academics, Courts, gun control, Law, Media, Politics, Rights, Schools and campuses, Sellouts and traitors

Freedom and the Role of the Militia Part II

March 29, 2020 Yitzhak Goldstein

What I find most galling are not Republican allegations former Democrat Vice President Joe “Boss Tweed” Biden leveraged his position to benefit his son Hunter in Ukraine.¹ Nor do I find Democrat accusations President Trump withheld military aid from Ukraine pressuring President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate potential Biden influence peddling most galling. Democrats want Americans to believe Trump withheld aid while Ukraine was at war with Russia. However, Putin invaded Ukrainian Crimea on 20 February 2014 and later sent military units across Russia’s western border into Ukraine to assist “separatists” in May of the same year. Trump did not place his party line call to Zelensky until July of 2019, five years later.² Can we be frank? Notions Ukraine would survive let alone prevail in a war with Russia are preposterous. Therefore, American military and economic aid would be pointless. Why then do Democrat and Republican administrations send it? Are Americans willing to offer their sons to die for Ukrainians fighting Russia? Is the U.S. willing to risk nuclear war with Russia over Ukraine? We must address yet another reality.

Since Tsar Nicholas I, Russia has pursued a policy of “Russification” in conquered nations and territories. Imperial Russia took control of the education system, mass media, and popular culture in subjugated countries. They replaced native tongues, customs, history, literature, art, music, and holidays with those of Mother Russia. Whether the Baltics (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania for those who attended public schools) the Caucasus, Poland, or Ukraine, conquered people were forced to grow up as Russians.³

Soviets added a new dynamic to Russification by transplanting hundreds of thousands of Russians to the Baltics and especially Ukraine. The Communist’s goal was to displace natives and breed them into a minority population or, at least have a forward base of Russian immigrants embedded in targeted nations. Under Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviets uprooted entire Russian villages and moved them to Ukraine. In 1926, only 8.2% of Ukrainians were ethnic Russian. That figure rose to 16.9% in 1959 and 22.1% in 1989. In addition, by 1985, the Soviets had relocated by force, over 185,000 Ukrainians to faraway places in Russia and to the Baltics. So successful was Russification (America’s open-borders crowd pay attention), that native Ukrainians living along their eastern border with Russia dropped from 33.4% in 1926 to 2.3% by 1970. In a conflict with Russia, where will their loyalties lie? With whom will ethnic-Russian “Ukrainians” side?⁴ The idea that America can simply show up with her military and straighten this all out is ludicrous but still, this is not what is most galling. Instead, it is the profound degree of self-inflicted constitutional ignorance afflicting so many Americans. Who asks; what part of the Constitution authorizes Congress to seize the wages and property of American citizens and hand it over to foreigners in other countries? Go ahead and look. I’ll wait. You will be the subject of an archeological dig before you find it because no such authority exists. What the Constitution does not authorize it forbids.

The Constitution’s Framers and State Ratifying Conventions were clear in 1787-1788; powers they delegated to the new federal government were finite and few. The Framers enumerated (listed) them in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. These powers are explicit. They rejected notions that, through novel interpretations later on, anyone could create implied from explicit powers. Scottish immigrant James Wilson became a prominent Philadelphia attorney and patriot. He signed the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and was a “Federalist” delegate to the Pennsylvania Ratifying Convention. Wilson described the new form of government that would replace the Articles of Confederation as a “confederate republic”. It was not a “single centralized state” because that would lead to “despotism” and tyranny. The federal government had only those powers delegated to it by the States. It could not exercise powers it did not have nor could the government imply powers into existence.⁵ No one is asking why the U.S. government, under Democrats and Republicans, is stealing the money and property of its citizens in order to buy and reward “friends” around the world.

I suspect to some degree America’s ruling class elite have always hamstrung the cause of liberty. They do not quite trust Americans, even their political followers, with liberty. A condemnation of liberals and Democrats? On the contrary. Republican Presidents, including Richard Nixon, George H W and George W Bush, and candidates John McCain and Mitt Romney ran as conservatives who would defend the Constitution. Once in office, as Presidents, Governors, or Senators, they shed conservative principles like snakes squirming from old skin. It is as if they believe the job of supporters is to get them elected and then shut up and go away until the next election. They talk a good game and then make one compromise after another always moving in the direction of opponents. One can find unease and mistrust of social “inferiors” even in the writing of some conservatives.

Writing for conservative The American Spectator, Daniel McCarthy notes liberals believe the mere existence of firearms, in conjunction with the election of Donald Trump, whose words have radicalized the young, is the cause of public mass shootings (PMS). For liberals the only remedy is to remove Trump from office, ban and seize all firearms in private hands, and double down on suppression of “hate speech”. This in spite of the fact police investigations reveal those guilty of PMS are typically creatures of the Left, not Trump supporters. McCarthy notes the Second Amendment’s intent was to protect the firearms liberals want to seize. He adds that a “well-regulated militia” means a citizenry well practiced with arms as opposed to a standing army. To be effective, the militia must have the same firearms as a federal standing army. So far so good. Then McCarthy runs off the rails. He asserts notions the Second Amendment supports citizen rebellion, like Shays’ Rebellion, is “right-wing folklore”. McCarthy offers as proof the Virginia Declaration of Rights, authored by George Mason that “inspired” the Second Amendment. Its stated reason for arms is to maintain a well-regulated militia “under strict subordination to, and governed by the civil power”.⁶ Where to start? Part one covered the meaning of “militia”. Here we turn to a story of mistrust by the people’s “betters”.

Typical high school government textbooks allege the Articles of Confederation had failed. This led to unpaid State and private debt, violence, and economic chaos verging on tearing the union apart. “Shays’ Rebellion in Western Massachusetts (31 August 1786-June 1787) was only the most spectacular of several incidents”.⁷ They assert “By 1786, people in many states were on the verge of rebellion…Led by Daniel Shays, a veteran of the Revolution, hundreds of angry farmers and laborers banded together, marched on court houses, and freed imprisoned debtors from jail”. Richard Hardy, like other government textbook authors, uses Shays’ Rebellion (a name invented by enemies of the farmer’s protest) as an argument for abolishing the Articles and replacing it with a strong national government of centralized powers.⁸ This interpretation was strongly echoed by liberal teachers (is there a distinction?) with whom I taught and the jock-coaches principals assign to teach government. Ill-versed in the subject, the latter deviated not from the script. Little, if any, of what they teach, including the book’s representation, of Shays’ Rebellion is accurate. The same holds true at the University. For example, a typical college text explains “hard times, tight money, and heavy taxes” sent Massachusetts farmers to debtors’ prison while others “lost their land”. The farmers’ rebellion was “put down” by “state troops”.⁹ Liberal John Garraty’s text asserts Shays’ Rebellion was the result of Massachusetts attempting to pay off its war debt with the tax bite “falling most heavily on those of moderate income”. He describes mobs shutting down courts to prevent foreclosures and Daniel Shays leading an army to seize the federal arsenal in Springfield, a battle they lost.¹⁰ Liberal historian Samuel Eliot Morison, despised by Communist Howard Zinn, author of the most popular fictionalized history passing as truth in public schools and universities,¹¹ writes that Shay’s Rebellion consisted of poor farmers facing harsh economic conditions who demanded relief from their State government. They seized control of courts in Western Massachusetts preventing them from opening until the legislature amended the Constitution. Their demands included ending requirements debts be paid in specie and ending legal favoritism of coastal commercial interests at the expense of farmers. Morison labels Massachusetts’ Governor James Bowdoin a “staunch conservative” who called out the militia to put down these illegal protests.¹² Postwar economic conditions were indeed harsh in several colonies but were not the cause of the so-called Shays’ Rebellion. Liberal teachers wield the story in classrooms as a “cautionary tale” to convince students the United States must have a strong national government of consolidated powers. Moreover, at the expense of State and individual rights.

Scare stories are part and parcel of the weapons used by those pushing an agenda to effect a desired outcome. Their creators spin and spoon-feed them to gullible Americans all too willing to embrace lies over truth. It works because Americans are too intellectually lazy to think beyond the accepted wisdom of the herd. Manipulators fuel preexistent worry and fear already planted by mass media and government schools (global warming, Putin under every bed) to create panic and alarm. Their goal is to cause rash imprudent reaction. The nation’s “Father” was the target of such an effort.

With no desire to leave Mount Vernon again, George Washington was enjoying retirement from public life. In 1786, he received visitors and letters from friends and veterans reporting on a “rebellion” in Massachusetts. Their shared goal was abolition of the Articles of Confederation and replacing it with a strong national government of consolidated powers. They wanted to reduce or eliminate State sovereignty. They weaved scare stories ranging from exaggeration to outright lies. Washington was already discomfited by hysterical scare stories he read in newspapers written by editors who also shared a strong desire to scrap the Articles. Political leaders, former army officers, bankers, merchants, and large landowners added their voices to claims the nation was falling apart and about to disintegrate into revolution or civil war.¹³

General Henry Knox, Washington’s former artillery commander, along with others, knew Washington was a large landowner constantly dealing with squatters. Therefore, they painted Massachusetts’ rebels in the most lurid and false terms. They told him rebels wanted to close courts to stop foreclosure on land for unpaid debt, seize land belonging to the rich, and that Massachusetts’ militias were too weak to oppose them. Knox claimed a “licentious spirit” was widespread among the rebels and they were “malcontents” and “levellers” who, through violence, would abolish all social, economic, and class distinctions. In addition, they would erase all private debt and redistribute amongst themselves the land they seized.¹⁴ Knox used the term “levellers” to spark alarm in Washington and others. It sprang from the English Civil War of 1642 between Charles I and Parliament. Near the end of that war, common soldiers discussed what improvements they desired for postwar England. Levellers wanted to abolish the tax-supported state church, establish basic natural rights belonging to all men, declared sovereignty was in the people not kings, and that government was a social-compact with the people.¹⁵

Through malice or ignorance, Knox was conflating Levellers with English “Diggers”. The latter were essentially proto-communists. Basing their doctrine on the New Testament, Diggers wanted all unenclosed land seized and made communal, farmed, and its produce distributed by the commune to the poor. England would abolish private property along with “unequal wealth”.¹⁶ Knox’s misrepresentation of Shay’s Rebellion, and use of the term “Levellers”, had the desired effect. He conjured images of rogue uneducated, poor, and debt- ridden rabble rising up to burn the homes and farms of the rich, looting businesses and banks, and overthrowing the government in Boston. None of this was true.

The men in Western Massachusetts who marched on and closed courts in several towns were comprised of farmers, large landowners, merchants, Revolutionary War heroes and veterans, and political leaders. They were typically middle class, from leading long established families, and were neither poor nor debtors. They rebelled because land and note speculators, led by Governor James Bowdoin, had taken over the government in Boston. Like other states during the war, Massachusetts issued paper notes to pay its soldiers, farmers, and merchants from whom it requisitioned supplies. Not backed by specie, inflation ensued and soon, like the famous Continentals, they were worthless. People had to eat and pay bills so, when speculators offered to buy these notes for a fraction of their face value, their holders sold them. After the war, Bowdoin and his cronies bought up as many notes as they could. Once in power, they passed a law requiring the State redeem them at full face value, with interest, and much of it paid in specie. To finance redemption, Bowdoin’s government passed a head tax on families for every male 16 and older and farm families tended to be large. In addition, the state would tax their land. Those unable to pay faced losing family farms and going to prison. The State had forced soldiers, farmers, and small merchants to accept worthless notes during the war. From them speculators bought these notes for next to nothing. Now the state was taxing those who lost an enormous sum selling the notes to speculators to pay an even greater amount to redeem them on their behalf.¹⁷ Public school texts seem to leave out this part of the story.

Is it any wonder farmers in Western Massachusetts reacted in anger and protest? They demanded a change in the law. Specie was scarce and farmers knew the government in Boston was robbing them to benefit Bowdoin and his wealthy cronies. Boston was deaf to farmers’ complaints. Their protests became larger and eventually they closed local courts to force change. They were not attempting to overthrow the government. Bowdoin reacted with force. The State Legislature granted him authority to arrest, torture, and even hang rebels. He could also seize their land and sell it. To his benefactors, naturally. He suspended habeas corpus meaning he could arrest and keep rebels, even political enemies, in jail until they rotted. This he did. Massachusetts’ militia was more than large enough to suppress the rebellion but, when Bowdoin called it out, they refused. They would not march against men they knew to be honorable, patriots, and war veterans. Bowdoin and his rich speculator friends passed the hat amongst themselves and raised enough money to hire a mercenary army of 4,400 led by war veteran General Benjamin Lincoln to suppress the “rebellion”. Following several skirmishes, the rebellion ended when Lincoln’s State army seized the federal arsenal at Springfield before the farmers did.¹⁸ Proponents of a new “national” government did not tell George Washington this side of the story.

Although a war hero, Daniel Shays was a newcomer to Western Massachusetts. He was leader of one of many groups who protested what Boston was doing. Those comprising “rebel” groups never called themselves “rebels, insurgents”, or “Shayites”. The press and allies of Bowdoin invented these labels. The same way the left uses “right-wing” for conservatives implying the latter are Nazis. Shame on you Daniel McCarthy. Instead, they referred to themselves as “Regulators” a term originating in England during the 1680s. Britons who took this name opposed corruption, cronyism, and tyranny in government. Americans knew this history. The term Regulator gained usage In Britain’s North American colonies in the 1760s, first in North and then in South Carolina. Lawyers and land speculators gained control of Carolina County Courts and used their position to levy heavy taxes, fees, and fines on farmers. They jailed delinquent taxpayers, seized, and sold their land. When the governments in each colony refused to reply to the farmer’s pleas for relief, they took matters into their own hands forming organizations of Regulators who drove corrupt lawyers, judges, and officials from office. Like Massachusetts, the aristocracy consolidated political power into its hands rewarding themselves and cronies at the expense of farmers, exactly what Britain’s appointed Royal Governors had done in the colonies. Each state in turn suppressed rebellion. Following in the footsteps of those who came before, Massachusetts’ Regulators vowed to end tyrannical government in Boston based on cronyism and corruption. Their goal was to rewrite the hated State Constitution of 1780.¹⁹

Men who favored creating a European style strong national government with centralized powers used Shay’s Rebellion to argue the government under the Articles was too weak to survive. They stoked fear and panic. “Nationalizers” created and disseminated false narratives through the media they controlled. They pressured Madison and Washington to support abandoning the Articles in favor of a yet, unwritten new form of government.²⁰ It is remarkable that American patriots did not realize that, in beholding the rebels of 1786, they were seeing themselves in the mirror of 1776. There can be but one explanation. These men evinced a trait shared from time immemorial among those who would rule. They do not trust “lesser” citizens to rule themselves sharing the same amount of freedom as their “betters”. It is why they target the Second Amendment, freedom of speech, and challenge the outcomes of elections. Even some Republicans, conservative pundits, opinion makers, and movers and shakers believe in government for, not of the people. They want their base to vote and then shut up. Do not accommodate them. Read and learn the truth.

1¹ Peter Schweizer, Secret Empires (New York, N.Y., HarperCollins Publishers, 2018), 55-73. Spoiler alert, Republicans have their hands in the till as well.

2² Natalyia Vasilyeva, The Associated Press, “Russia’s Conflict With Ukraine: An Explainer,” 26 November 2018, The Military Times at https://www.military-times.com/news/yar-military/2018/11/26/russias-conflict-with-ukraine-an-explainer/

3³ Nicholas V. Riasanovsky, A History of Russia, Sixth Edition (Oxford, England, Oxford University Press, 2000), 332, 333, 380, 394, 397, 575-576.

4⁴ Encyclopedia of Ukraine, at http://encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CR%5CU%5CRussification.htm

5⁵ Pauline Maier, Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788 (New York, N.Y. Simon & Schuster, 2010), 104, 108.

6⁶ Daniel McCarthy, “Liberalism Cannot Stop The Shootings”, American Spectator at https://spectatorus/liberalism-cannot-stop-shootings/

7⁷ William A. McClenaghan, Magruders’ American Government, 2000 Edition (Needham, Massachusetts, Prentice Hall, 2000), 37.

8⁸ Richard J. Hardy, Government In America (Boston, Massachusetts, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1992), 45.

9⁹ Rebecca Brooks Gruever, An American History, Second Edition, Volume 1 to 1877 (Reading, Massachusetts, Addison Wesley Publishing Company, 1976), 175.

10¹⁰ John A. Garraty and Robert A. McCaughey, The American Nation: A History Of The United States, Sixth Edition (New York, N.Y., Harper & Row, Publishers, 1987), 151.

11¹¹ Mary Grabar, Debunking Howard Zinn: Exposing the Fake History That Turned a Generation against America (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, 2019), 6, 12, 14, 23-28, 251, 257.

12¹² Samuel Eliot Morison, The Oxford History Of The American People, Prehistory to 1789 (New York, N.Y., A Mentor Book from New American Library, 1972), 390-394, 395.

13¹³ Leonard L. Richards, Shays’s Rebellion: The American Revolution’s Final Battle (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002), 1-3.

14¹⁴ IBID. 3-4.

15¹⁵ Goldwin Smith, A History of England (New York, N.Y., Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1974), 305-334.

16¹⁶ IBID. 334.

17¹⁷ Richards, 1-10, 15-16.

18¹⁸ IBID. 23-61.

19¹⁹ IBID. 64-74, 61-63.

20²⁰ IBID. 89-116, 129-138.

Academics, authoritarian swine, gun control, SCOTUS, You can't fix stupid

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms Is an UNenumerated Right?

March 7, 2020 Carl Bussjaeger 1 Comment

Trigger Warning: The referenced column is written by a left-wing whacko acting professor at the People’s Republic of Kommiefornia’s UC-Davis, and is published in The Atlantic.

I don’t know what constitution Aaron Tang — who purports to be a “Constitutional law & education law prof” — teaches, but he should bone up on the United States Constitution. If he taught anywhere but the University of California – Davis, I’d call that fraud. But he’s par for the anti-rights course there.

What If the Court Saw Other Rights as Generously as Gun Rights?
Both gun-rights advocates and educational equity activists use similar legal strategies. Why does the Supreme Court treat them so differently?

Probably because the right to keep and bear arms is specifically mentioned in the Second Amendment to the Constitution, and education is not. check for yourself; no mention of education, learn, teach, school, university, college, or anything else education-related. (While we do speak of an Electoral College, that term doesn’t actually appear in the Constitution; only “electors.”)

If the courts treated education the same “generous” way they do Second Amendment rights, you might need a license to go to school, minors wouldn’t be allowed to go to school, you’d need to pass a background check before every class, you might be allowed one class per month, and you’d be limited to a low-capacity tenth grade education. The Department of Education could arbitrarily ban knowledge of algebra and imprison you for knowing it. You might be allowed to go to college, but only after paying $200 for the permission slip that would come eight or nine months later, and local law enforcement would be informed. Depending on your major, even with the permission slip you would not be allowed to attend a college or university established after 1986.

Spearheaded by new leadership at the NRA in the late 1970s, gun-rights activists engaged for decades in an effort to persuade the Supreme Court to recognize an individual Second Amendment right to bear arms for self-defense at home. The Court ultimately enshrined that right 12 years ago in D.C. v. Heller, displacing a long-standing consensus to the contrary.

Tang clearly didn’t read Heller, or he’d have seen Scalia’s many, many citations of Supreme Court cases, law, and history supporting the individual right. The Supreme Court has been recognizing an individual right of the people since at least 1857.

At first glance, the gun-rights movement and the pursuit of educational equity seem to have little in common. But they in fact share an approach: Both promote arguments that rely on what are called “implied” or “unenumerated” constitutional rights.

Oh, really?

Article II: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Article II, Two, 2. Numeral. Enumerated.

The argument for a constitutional right to train at any shooting range is far from obvious. The Second Amendment speaks of a right to “keep” and “bear” arms, but says nothing about a right to train or practice.

I’ll grant that the words “train” and “practice” don’t appear, but please note that “well regulated Militia.” What did “regulate” mean when that was written?

regulate: 1. to adjust by rule or method 2. to direct

What the heck kind of well regulated, ordered, prepared, methodical militia is untrained, unpracticed? Certainly not the sort specified by the Second Militia Act of 1792 which required militia members (each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective states, resident therein, who is or shall be of the age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years) to arm themselves with militarily suitable firearms and equipment.

That every citizen so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter,How to be armed and accoutred. provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch with a box therein to contain not less than twenty-four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball: or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear, so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise, or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.

Further note that government officials and employees were not included in the militia; dispensing with the common violence-enabling victim-disarmer argument that the militia is the army and national guard (a point the Supreme Court noted in 1990, which for numerically-challenged people like Tang is many years before Heller).

But see that “exercise”? That isn’t talking about jumping jacks and sit-ups. A /militia/military exercise is training and practice.

And just in case Tang is as hazy on law as he is the Constitution, the militia is still codified in 10 U.S. Code § 246. Militia: composition and classe. And yes, government officials and employees are still exempted.

Aaron Tang is clearly at UC-Davis because the heads of every other law school in the country were smart enough not to hire the ignoramus.

[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited, and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP bills. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Academics, authoritarian swine, Culture, gun control, gun grabbers, guns, Law, Politics, Sellouts and traitors, spirit of rebellion

Is the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Dependent On Militia Membership? Part 1

January 20, 2020 Yitzhak Goldstein 2 Comments

My opposition to Red-Flag laws has been steadfast countenancing no exceptions. Until now. Liberal Time Magazine’s Girl, er um “Person”¹ of the Year’s trembling quivering rage-filled Greta Thunberg, who should be starring in H. P. Lovecraft inspired movies, could be that one exception. Ghostwriters and Handlers, please, do not allow Greta near sharp objects or anything that goes bang. Perhaps parents should be scheduling counseling sessions rather than enabling Greta’s delusions of imminent human extinction. Scandinavia once gave the world Vikings. What happened?²

From the Great Depression, mass starvation, to man-created global warming, the Left needs crises with which to menace people. Only through scare tactics terrifying the masses can they evoke reaction based on emotion rather than reason. People who have lost their minds seldom make good decisions. Since the Second World War, the Left, either through ideological compatibility or supreme naïveté, has promoted notions the way to deal with adversarial nations (Communist dictatorships) and people is through non-violent appeasement. Leftists are moral relativists rejecting concepts of good and evil. Therefore global and personal conflicts result from misunderstandings not malevolent intentions. Because people have “issues”, not problems, conflicts can be resolved without anyone having to accept blame or facing consequences. All Stalin needed was a couch, a good listener, and a hug. Today, if the puny underweight wretched victim of bullying stands up to his tormentors, school administrators suspend him along with the thugs. Through its evangelists teaching in public schools, the Left has indoctrinated Americans to reject notions of self-reliance and taking responsibility for their own safety. Lockdowns, shelter-in-place, hide under your desk or in your home…Hence, they grow up to despise the Second Amendment. They are aghast at the idea citizens can own guns and decide when and where to use them in self-defense. Appearing on Fox’s Martha MacCallum Show in response to the Fort Worth Texas church shooting, Democrat strategist Doug Schoen argued people are not competent to carry guns for personal defense. This he added, should be left to the police who, coincidentally, were not there.³ The Left hates the Second Amendment for two reasons; first, it exposes their unwillingness to stand up to bullies and criminals whether on American streets or as heads of State. Think, Justin Trudeau. Second, it is an obstacle to the Great Project.

Whether taking the name Liberal, Socialist, Progressive, Central Planner, Democratic-Socialist, and so forth, Statists are determined to dismantle the Second Amendment either through abolition or redefining it out of existence. Until accomplished, it remains the single greatest impediment to The Project begun by 19^th century American Progressives and European Socialists. Its central imperative is to bend the will of the individual completely to the volition of the State to plan, control, and regulate every aspect of human existence. And, the Left is the State. Because altering the Constitution has proven un-doable, the Left has chosen to redefine the Second Amendment as they did the Commerce, General Welfare, Necessary and Proper, and Supremacy clauses until they mean the opposite of their intent. For example they claim owning firearms is dependent upon membership in a federal (Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines) or State (“National” sic Guard) standing army. This claim could not be more wrong.⁴

Proponents and enemies of the Bill of Rights have debated the Founders’ meaning of “militia” ad nauseam. Rehashing it here would seem superfluous. That is, if its enemies were not using mass media, popular culture, and public dis-education to peddle lies conjoined with an American public too intellectually lazy to read and think for itself. As a recovering public school teacher, I can attest to the pervasiveness of this mental lassitude.

Mises Institute’s Ryan McMaken writes that the Founders’ idea of a militia was not one comprised of “unorganized amateurs”, called up by local authorities, to address insurrection or invasion. Instead, it was to consist of men between a certain age range, proficient in arms, possessing some degree of training in military discipline and tactics, a system of choosing officers, subject to call up by State or local authorities, and under civilian control.⁵ McMaken’s conclusion is problematic. In the 1740s, the French, perennially at war with England, established a large fort at Louisbourg near Cape Breton, Nova Scotia. From there the French threatened New England with invasion and provided safe haven for pirates and “cruisers” who raided its fishing villages and naval commerce. Finding the British unwilling to act, in 1744 New England raised an army of unorganized amateurs including commoners, farmers, merchants, fishermen, and so forth. With little or no experience, these New England boys executed a successful amphibious landing under difficult conditions, besieged the fort for three months, and forced the French to surrender.⁶ During the French and Indian War, the British could not have defeated the French without the assistance of colonial militia troops, amateur soldiers who fought as local units under American command.⁷

On 1 October 1768, in a lead up to what became the War of Independence, Britain dispatched 700 troops led by General Thomas Gage from Halifax, Nova Scotia to Boston. His orders were to suppress resistance to British commerce, trading, and tax laws.⁸ A month later (8 November 1768), King George III declared Bostonians to be in rebellion against English law and government. British political and military leaders drew up plans to subdue the insurrection.⁹ They employed their standard method of subjugation; round up, jail, and execute the rebellion’s leaders and door-to-door searches for arms and munitions in private hands. Colonials often stored gunpowder in storehouses outside of town due to its volatility. In order to prevent the Red Coats from seizing it, locals formed militias to guard them. In Virginia, Patrick Henry led the Hanover Independent Militia Company comprised of armed locals independent of the Governor’s control. They comprised the nucleus of resistance against British forces. Other colonies replicated this strategy.¹⁰

In 1774, British soldiers marched from Boston into the countryside to seize colonial supplies of gunpowder and weapons in Charlestown, Cambridge, Medford, and Salem. Forty thousand militiamen met the British, called “Bloody Lobsterbacks”, by locals, at Charlestown. These amateurs drove them back to Boston without firing a shot.¹¹ British confiscation of private arms led to the “shot heard round the world”, the British march on Concord and Lexington, Massachusetts, to seize arms.¹² Among the militiamen awaiting the British attack were farmers, craftsmen, mechanics, gentlemen, laborers, slaves, dairy farmers, and veterans of the French Indian War. Americans gave as good as they got forcing the British back to Boston.¹³

McMaken contends, “Gun Rights advocates fixate” on the latter part of the Second Amendment, “The people having a right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” as the rationale for private ownership of arms separate from militia membership. He asserts the Second Amendment’s purpose was to guarantee that States “would be free to raise and train their own militias as a defense against federal power and as a means of keeping defensive military force available to Americans while remaining outside the direct control of the federal government”.¹⁴ He is correct state militias are supposed to be outside federal control but his assertion the militia is the primary focus of the Second Amendment is incorrect. The Second Amendment clearly contains two independent parts that framers could have fashioned into separate amendments. In fairness to McMaken, his purpose was to demonstrate State Militias are to be independent of federal control and that the so-called “National” (sic) Guard is a standing army and a gross violation of the Constitution.

Drafters wrote definitions of a militia into State Declarations of Rights and later into the federal and State Constitutions from 1791 on. They typically refer to “the mass of ordinary citizens, trained to arms” who would be available for call-up by State or local authorities, and to which was often appended an age range for those subject to service. Founding Fathers from Patrick Henry, George Mason, John Adams to Thomas Jefferson made clear the purpose of the Second Amendment was “that every man” be armed.¹⁵ Was this not so that the people would be equipped for militia service if needed? True but only in part. The Founders clearly saw that as an auxiliary advantage. However, the stress was that all men possess the right to keep and bear arms and government in no way have the power to infringe on this right or disarm the people. During debates over ratification of the proposed Constitution (1788) at the Virginia Convention, Patrick Henry declared, “The great object is that every man be armed…Everyone who is able may have a gun”. Zachariah Johnson added, “The new Constitution could never result in religious or other oppression because ‘the people are not to be disarmed of their weapons”. Not militias, people. At the Massachusetts’ ratifying convention, Samuel Adams stated, “That the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience, or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms”.¹⁶ Again, these rights, freedom of speech, religion, and arms belong to individuals, not states or any other form of organized political entity including militias.

Many States, including Arkansas, Colorado, Missouri, and others specifically state people have an individual right to keep and bear arms and it is not tied to membership in a militia, military, or any form of security force.¹⁷ The Founders knew Americans opposed standing peacetime armies (as we have today) and that States were reluctant to cede any of their sovereignty to this new untried federal system of government. They also knew government, like an irresistible force of nature, attracts to it men of ambition, those craving power, and men with no moral scruples. Therefore, they added the militia phrase. States would retain the means to resist federal usurpations of their power and infringement against the liberties of people. Under the proposed Constitution, the federal government, facing a national emergency such as invasion or insurrection, could request the states call up their militias. Governors would send them to federal authorities who in turn would arm, equip, and organize them into a standing army. The States would retain the right to choose officers commanding their militia units. Once the crisis was resolved, militiamen would return to their respective states and mustered out of service. Constitution or not, efforts to “federalize” (actually, “nationalize”) State militias placing them under presidential control began almost at once just as so-called Anti-Federalists had warned.¹⁸ The individual right to possess arms was always a separate issue.

English philosopher John Locke’s Treatises On Government were widely read (1689) in the colonies. He argued man had a “natural” (G-D given) right to life, liberty, and property. Inherent in each is the right to the means of defending it.¹⁹ Under the supervision of Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Robert Livingston, and Roger Sherman, Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence.²⁰ Drawing on many widely held philosophical and theological roots; Jefferson wrote that all rights are individual and a gift from G-D. Among them are the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (property, wages, and the fruits of one’s labor). Rights imputed by Divinity are inherent in the nature of each individual’s humanity. People are born already possessing these rights. A right to life presupposes a right to the means of defending it.²¹

The Second Amendment employs the words “right” and “shall not be infringed demonstrating it refers to “a right that is already assumed to exist” (which comports with the Declaration). It does not say, “The people shall have a right to keep and bear arms.” The amendment recognizes but does not grant the right” [emphasis in the original].²² Requirements to join the military, a militia, or engage in a government specified activity in order exercise a right would negate that right. Any regulation, red tape, or hoops one must jump through before accessing a right is a gross infringement and, again, negates it as a right. Governments can in no way qualify a right. No vote by a majority of one’s neighbors to limit a right in any way is legitimate. In addition, people cannot through constitutions or laws, “agree to an infringement on their rights”.²³ This is because of the inherency of rights. Only Divinity can alter or abolish rights divinely created. So why does the Second Amendment continue to confound people?

George Mason’s proposed draft of the amendment read, “That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state”.²⁴ Madison’s version read, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well-regulated militia being the best security to a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person”.²⁵ Madison, like Mason and other Founders, wanted it understood that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right separate from membership in any form of militia. For example, those objecting to military service on religious grounds, still possessed the right to keep and bear arms. This would not be true had the right been dependent on being in a militia. Madison’s intent “is clear not only from his wording, but also from his notes for his speech proposing the amendment”. He states it pertains to an individual right which his “colleagues clearly understood the proposal to be protective of individual rights”. Massachusetts delegate Fisher Ames wrote that among other rights, that of bearing arms “to be inherent in the people”. Writing under the name “A Pennsylvanian” in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, Madison’s friend Tench Coxe argued that the delegates wrote the Second Amendment to “guarantee the right of the people to have ‘their private arms’ to prevent tyranny and to overpower an abusive standing army or select militia”. Madison read Coxe’s articles and agreed, the amendment pertained to an individual right.²⁶

So much, did the Founders write about the Second Amendment; its meaning is beyond question. These documents and writings are available to anyone. On what basis can opponents of an individual right interpretation justify their position? Simple. The truth is unimportant. Only the Great Project matters. All narratives, including history, must be made to fit and support it. Like a starfish turning a clamshell over searching for a vulnerability by which to penetrate its defenses, so too do enemies of the Bill of Rights search for weaknesses. They find it in contemporary American’s unfamiliarity with grammatical construction.

It is important to keep in mind, of the Bill of Rights none refers to “States having rights”. Each refers to a right of the people. These are individual rights. To argue the Second Amendment applies only to members of a military organization turns it into a State not individual right. We have clearly seen that was not the Founder’s intention. If the Founders had intended military or militia membership dependency in order to own or possess arms, “Why would they say, ‘the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”? Madison and those who shaped the amendment’s wording “chose to put the militia reference into a dependent phrase” choosing “the weakest possible construction by using the participle (word formed from a verb) ‘being’ instead of writing say, ‘Since a well regulated militia is necessary…” The militia wording’s weak form demonstrates its framers listed it as a right of states. “The main independent clause” of the amendment reads, “The people’s right to have guns ‘shall not be infringed”.²⁷

An independent clause is a stand-alone sentence dependent on nothing. The militia part of the Second Amendment forms a dependent phrase. It cannot stand alone by itself containing a subject, verb, and complete thought. Therefore, it is secondary in importance to the main independent clause. The words; “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state” would mean what by itself? The words; “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” would mean what without the first part of the amendment? People have a right to keep and bear arms. By reversing this order, the amendment’s drafters made emphatic that the independent clause was its most important part. “The Founders correctly intuited that in a bill of rights (list), the last thing the reader should have ringing in his mind’s ear is the absolute prohibition on infringement of the natural right to own guns”.²⁸

If the Bill of Right’s enemies read America’s founding documents and writings, they know the truth. None of that matters. What does matter to them is total disarmament of American citizens. The Great Project cannot culminate until that happens. Toward that goal, the end always justifies the means.

1¹ Unlike men and women since the dawn of time, those on the Left are stymied when it comes to determining their sex, of which, there are but the two aforementioned options.

2² As with the Marjory Stoned Man Douglass high school “useful idiots,” Emma Gonzalez, Cameron Kasky, David Hogg, et al, the Left cowardly uses kids as stooge props, their youth supposedly giving them and their terribly immature and uninformed rantings an unassailable immunity against critique. Isn’t this what Muslim terrorists do, hide behind children?

3³ Martha MacCallum Show, FOX News, 31 December 2019.

4⁴ Sheldon Richman, “Reading the Second Amendment”, The Freeman 2 (February 1998), 112.

5⁵ Ryan McMaken, Mises Institute, 22 August 2018, “Why We Can’t Ignore The ‘Militia’ Clause Of The Second Amendment”, Mises Institute, at https://mises.org/wire/why-we-cant-ignore-militia-clause-second-amendment/

6⁶ Marvin Olasky, Fighting For Liberty And Virtue: Political and Cultural Wars in Eighteenth Century America (Wheaton, Illinois, Crossway Books, A Division of Good News Publishers, 1995), 93.

7⁷ IBID. 97-98, 102-105, 107, 109.

8⁸ Stephen Halbrook, The Founder’s Second Amendment (Chicago, Illinois, Ivan R. Dee Publisher, 2008), 13.

9⁹ IBID. 17-19.

10¹⁰ Halbrook, 104-105.

11¹¹ Willard Sterne Randall, Ethan Allen: His Life And Times (New York, N.Y., W. W. Norton & Company, 2011), 8.

12¹² Robert Middlekauff, The Glorious Cause, The American Revolution 1763-1789 (New York, N.Y. Oxford University Press, 2005), 272-274.

13¹³ Randall, 8, Halbrook, 76-79.

14¹⁴ McMaken.

15¹⁵ IBID.

16¹⁶ Stephen Halbrook, That Every Man Be Armed: The Evolution of a Constitutional Right (Albuquerque, New Mexico, University of New Mexico Press, 1984), 73-75.

17¹⁷ McMaken.

18¹⁸ Edwin Meese III, Matthew Spalding, and David Forte, The Heritage Guide to the Constitution, (Washington, D.C., Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2005), 139-143.

19¹⁹ Gary A. Shade, “The Right to keep and Bear Arms: The Legacy of Republicanism vs Absolutism,” at http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/papers-shade/TheRightToKeepandBearArms.PDF.

20²⁰ Clarence B. Carson, A Basic History of the United States, Volume I: The Colonial Experience 1607-1774 (Wadley, Alabama, American Textbook Committee, 1987), 182-183.

21²¹ Forrest McDonald, Novus Ordo Seclorum: The Intellectual Origins of the Constitution (Lawrence, Kansas, University Press of Kansas, 1985), ix, 60-63. See also, Gary T. Amos, Defending the Declaration (Brentwood, Tennessee, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, Inc., 1989), 35-74, 117-118.

22²² Sheldon Richman, “Properly Interpreting the 2^nd Amendment” Human Events (June 16, 1995), 16.

23²³ IBID.

24²⁴ Halbrook, Founder’s Second Amendment, 22.

25²⁵ Shade.

26²⁶ Halbrook, That Every Man Be Armed, 76-77.

27²⁷ Richman, Reading the Second Amendment, 112-113.

28²⁸ IBID.

Username

Password


Remember me

Forgot Password?
Join Us

Jews. Guns. No compromise. No surrender.