Russians to Americans: Americans never give up your guns

Comments Off on Russians to Americans: Americans never give up your guns

This is a powerful letter from the Russian people.

Americans never give up your guns. 48982.jpeg

These days, there are few things to admire about the socialist, bankrupt and culturally degenerating USA, but at least so far, one thing remains: the right to bear arms and use deadly force to defend one’s self and possessions.

This will probably come as a total shock to most of my Western readers, but at one point, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on earth. This was, of course, when we were free under the Tsar. Weapons, from swords and spears to pistols, rifles and shotguns were everywhere, common items. People carried them concealed, they carried them holstered. Fighting knives were a prominent part of many traditional attires and those little tubes criss crossing on the costumes of Cossacks and various Caucasian peoples? Well those are bullet holders for rifles.

Various armies, such as the Poles, during the Смута (Times of Troubles), or Napoleon, or the Germans even as the Tsarist state collapsed under the weight of WW1 and Wall Street monies, found that holding Russian lands was much much harder than taking them and taking was no easy walk in the park but a blood bath all its own. In holding, one faced an extremely well armed and aggressive population Hell bent on exterminating or driving out the aggressor.

This well armed population was what allowed the various White factions to rise up, no matter how disorganized politically and militarily they were in 1918 and wage a savage civil war against the Reds. It should be noted that many of these armies were armed peasants, villagers, farmers and merchants, protecting their own. If it had not been for Washington’s clandestine support of and for the Reds, history would have gone quite differently.

Moscow fell, for example, not from a lack of weapons to defend it, but from the lying guile of the Reds. Ten thousand Reds took Moscow and were opposed only by some few hundreds of officer cadets and their instructors. Even then the battle was fierce and losses high. However, in the city alone, at that time, lived over 30,000 military officers (both active and retired), all with their own issued weapons and ammunition, plus tens of thousands of other citizens who were armed. The Soviets promised to leave them all alone if they did not intervene. They did not and for that were asked afterwards to come register themselves and their weapons: where they were promptly shot.

Of course being savages, murderers and liars does not mean being stupid and the Reds learned from their Civil War experience. One of the first things they did was to disarm the population. From that point, mass repression, mass arrests, mass deportations, mass murder, mass starvation were all a safe game for the powers that were. The worst they had to fear was a pitchfork in the guts or a knife in the back or the occasional hunting rifle. Not much for soldiers.

To this day, with the Soviet Union now dead 21 years, with a whole generation born and raised to adulthood without the SU, we are still denied our basic and traditional rights to self defense. Why? We are told that everyone would just start shooting each other and crime would be everywhere….but criminals are still armed and still murdering and too often, especially in the far regions, those criminals wear the uniforms of the police. The fact that everyone would start shooting is also laughable when statistics are examined.

While President Putin pushes through reforms, the local authorities, especially in our vast hinterland, do not feel they need to act like they work for the people. They do as they please, a tyrannical class who knows they have absolutely nothing to fear from a relatively unarmed population. This in turn breeds not respect but absolute contempt and often enough, criminal abuse.

For those of us fighting for our traditional rights, the US 2nd Amendment is a rare light in an ever darkening room. Governments will use the excuse of trying to protect the people from maniacs and crime, but are in reality, it is the bureaucrats protecting their power and position. In all cases where guns are banned, gun crime continues and often increases. As for maniacs, be it nuts with cars (NYC, Chapel Hill NC), swords (Japan), knives (China) or home made bombs (everywhere), insane people strike. They throw acid (Pakistan, UK), they throw fire bombs (France), they attack. What is worse, is, that the best way to stop a maniac is not psychology or jail or “talking to them”, it is a bullet in the head, that is why they are a maniac, because they are incapable of living in reality or stopping themselves.

The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from the same culture?

No it is about power and a total power over the people. There is a lot of desire to bad mouth the Tsar, particularly by the Communists, who claim he was a tyrant, and yet under him we were armed and under the progressives disarmed. Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives, leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.

So, do not fall for the false promises and do not extinguish the light that is left to allow humanity a measure of self respect.

Stanislav Mishin

The article reprinted with the kind permission from the author and originally appears on his blog, Mat Rodina

Advertisements

U.S. Marine Joshua Boston Pens Letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein in Response to Proposed Gun Control Legislation

Comments Off on U.S. Marine Joshua Boston Pens Letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein in Response to Proposed Gun Control Legislation

Feinstein

Below is a letter written by a former U.S. Marine, Cpl. Joshua Boston to Sen. Dianne Feinstein in response to the California Democrat’s proposal to tighten the nation’s gun laws in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School attack.

Boston discussed the letter this morning on Fox and Friends. Watch the interview!


Senator Dianne Feinstein,

I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government’s right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma’am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.

I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America. I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.

I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.

We, the people, deserve better than you.

Respectfully Submitted,
Joshua Boston
Cpl, United States Marine Corps
2004-2012

Fox News Insider

Wyoming Threatens Arrests for Federal Gun Grabbers

Comments Off on Wyoming Threatens Arrests for Federal Gun Grabbers

As the federal government continues to overstep it’s Constitutional bounds, we will see more of this type thing. It has been done with Obamacare as well.

(Breitbart) – As details continue to emerge regarding gun control plans that President Barack Obama and the Democrats are pushing behind the scenes, Wyoming lawmakers have a message for the federal government: “Don’t tread on us.”

Local radio station KTWO reports that lawmakers in Wyoming have proposed a “Firearms Protection Act” that provides a state-level annulment of any ban against semi-automatics or magazines that hold 20 or 30 rounds or more.

If the measure passes, it would mean that anyone–even federal agents-who try to enforce a ban within the state borders could be charged with a felony.

Is this the wave of the future for “red” states concerned about Obama’s strong anti-gun intentions?

It is too early to tell. But it is worth noting that Montana lawmakers began pushing for the same kind of legislation as soon as conservatives took control of that state’s legislature in 2010.

2013    STATE OF WYOMING   13LSO-0426   HOUSE BILL NO. HB0104

    Firearm Protection Act.

Sponsored by: Representative(s) Kroeker, Baker, Burkhart, Jaggi, Miller, Piiparinen, Reeder and

                   Winters and Senator(s) Dockstader and Hicks

A BILL for

  1. 1  ANACTrelatingtofirearms;providingthatanyfederallaw
  2. 2  which attempts to ban a semi-automatic firearm or to limit
  3. 3  the size of a magazine of a firearm or other limitation on
  4. 4  firearms in this state shall be unenforceable in Wyoming;
  5. 5  providing a penalty; and providing for an effective date.

6
7 Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming: 8
9 Section 1. W.S. 6-8-405 is amended to read:

10

  1. 11  6-8-405. Offenses and penalties; defense of Wyoming
  2. 12  citizens.

13

  1. 14  (a) No public servant as defined in W.S. 6-5-101, or
  2. 15  dealer selling any firearm in this state shall enforce or
  3. 16  attempt to enforce any act, law, statute, rule or

1 HB0104

2013                  STATE OF WYOMING            13LSO-0426
  1. 1  regulation of the United States government relating to a
  2. 2  personal firearm, firearm accessory or ammunition that is
  3. 3  owned or manufactured commercially or privately in Wyoming
  4. 4  and that remains exclusively within the borders of Wyoming.

5

  1. 6  (b) Any official, agent or employee of the United
  2. 7  States government who enforces or attempts to enforce any
  3. 8  act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation of the United
  4. 9  States government upon a personal firearm, a firearm
  5. 10  accessory or ammunition that is owned or manufactured
  6. 11  commercially or privately in Wyoming and that remains
  7. 12  exclusively within the borders of Wyoming shall be guilty
  8. 13  of a misdemeanor felony and, upon conviction, shall be
  9. 14  subject to imprisonment for not more less than one (1) year
  10. 15  and one (1) day or more than five (5) years, a fine of not
  11. 16  more than two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) five thousand
  12. 17  dollars ($5,000.00), or both.

18

  1. 19  (c) The attorney general may defend a citizen of
  2. 20  Wyoming who is prosecuted by the United States government
  3. 21  for violation of a federal law relating to the manufacture,
  4. 22  sale, transfer or possession of a firearm, a firearm
  5. 23  accessory or ammunition owned or manufactured and retained
  6. 24  exclusively within the borders of Wyoming.

2 HB0104

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

(d) Any federal law, rule, regulation or order

created or effective on or after January 1, 2013 shall be

unenforceable within the borders of Wyoming if the law,

rule, regulation or order attempts to:

(i) Ban or restrict ownership of a semi-

automatic firearm or any magazine of a firearm; or

(ii) Require any firearm, magazine or other

firearm accessory to be registered in any manner.

Section 2. This act is effective immediately upon completion of all acts necessary for a bill to become law as provided by Article 4, Section 8 of the Wyoming Constitution.

(END)

2013                  STATE OF WYOMING            13LSO-0426

3 HB0104

Breitbart

Egyptian Press Confirms Washington Infiltrated By Islamists

Comments Off on Egyptian Press Confirms Washington Infiltrated By Islamists

You have to wonder, would a “Christian” man do this?

The radical Muslim Brotherhood doesn’t just threaten Israel and Mideast peace. According to the Egyptian press, several of its operatives have infiltrated the U.S. government and are influencing policy here.

The respected Egyptian magazine Rose al-Youssef has identified at least six Brotherhood-tied agents of influence who have worked into positions inside the Obama administration.

The weekly publication, founded in 1925, said the operatives have turned the White House “from a position hostile to Islamic groups and organizations in the world to the largest and most important supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood,” an Egyptian-based jihadist movement that supports Hamas and al-Qaida.

President Obama backed the Brotherhood’s takeover of Egypt and has courted its front groups in America. Secret Service records show their representatives making hundreds of visits to the White House since 2009.

“The Brotherhood in America is committed to destroying the West from within,” former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy told IBD, citing secret documents unearthed by the FBI after 9/11. “It has spent half a century building a considerable infrastructure here,” largely with Saudi funding.

“Unfortunately,” he added, “our government has done much to empower the Brotherhood’s American network under the guise of ‘Islamic outreach.'”

The lengthy Rose al-Youssef article, translated from Arabic by the Washington-based Investigative Project on Terrorism, is largely unsourced.

But ex-FBI agents who have investigated the Brotherhood’s influence operations inside the U.S. confirm some of those named in the story have come under scrutiny. They include:

• Mohamed Elibiary, a Homeland Security adviser who came under congressional fire for improperly accessing a federal database. The Egyptian magazine says he’s helped shape the administration’s counterterror strategy, including censoring FBI training materials dealing with jihad.

It also alleges he helped draft Obama’s remarks calling for former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to leave power. Mubarak had banned the Brotherhood as a terrorist group.

• Rashad Hussain, former White House lawyer and now Obama’s special envoy to the Muslim world. Hussain, who has defended convicted terrorist Sami al-Arian and other U.S. Brotherhood leaders, helped draft Obama’s conciliatory speech in Cairo, where he invited banned Brotherhood leaders.

• Arif Alikhan, former assistant Homeland Security secretary for policy development and now a distinguished visiting professor of homeland security and counterterrorism at the National Defense University. As a Los Angeles city official, Alikhan worked with the Brotherhood-tied Muslim Public Affairs Council to derail police efforts to monitor radical mosques.

• Imam Mohamed Magid, another Homeland Security adviser, who heads the Islamic Society of North America, or ISNA, a Brotherhood front named by the Justice Department as an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal plot to raise millions for Hamas.

Longtime ISNA board member Sayyid Syeed is captured in a new documentary, “The Grand Deception,” saying to fellow American Muslims: “Our job is to change the Constitution of America.”

Brotherhood agents posing as “moderate” Muslim leaders — such as now-jailed al-Qaida fundraiser Abdurahman Alamoudi — have successfully infiltrated previous administrations. But law enforcement officials say Brotherhood infiltration is more extensive and alarming under Obama.

Read More

Does President Obama have authority to bypass Congress on the debt ceiling

Comments Off on Does President Obama have authority to bypass Congress on the debt ceiling

Just discovered this guy Ben Swann from Fox 19  in Cincinnati, Ohio…a couple of things he misses in this segment is the 14th amendment says, “authorized by law” and what is the law? The Constitution is the law. The Constitution only authorizes Congress as far as spending money goes. Section 5 of the 14th amendment (which most are also leaving out) says what? CONGRESS shall have the power to enforce this by appropriate legislation. I don’t read anything in here about the Executive branch………that’s because of checks and balances. Not giving too much power to one branch over the other. The founders were brilliant.

The 14th Amendment says:

Section 4.

“The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned……..”

Section 5.

The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Is British Crime Rate Really as Low as Piers Morgan Claims

Comments Off on Is British Crime Rate Really as Low as Piers Morgan Claims

The answer is no they aren’t. If you been watching the debates on CNN by Piers Morgan, you know he attempts to relate gun control to low crime rates and murders in the UK, but we know by the UK’s on admission at the Sunday Telegraph that Morgan is wrong. Since Piers Morgan is an intelligent man, I have to assume he knows these facts and chooses to ignore them in order to get his gun control agenda to be accepted by the American people. So here are the facts from the UK themselves, not Piers Morgan.

The number of violent crimes in England per person compared to America is significantly higher. England is a far more violent place than America, despite having a total gun ban. (see chart below)

Figures from the EU Commission and the UN show that the number of violent crimes per 100,000 residents in England is around 2,000 compared to just 466 in America. For all Piers Morgan’s claims about the proliferation of guns leading to an increase in violence, it’s four times safer to live in American than England and according to the latest FBI statistics, America’s violent crime rate continues to fall.

Gun crime 60pc higher than official figures…

The true level of gun crime is far higher than the Government admits in official statistics, it can be revealed.

Last year 5,600 firearms offences were excluded from the official figures. It means that, whereas the Home Office said there were only 9,800 offences in 2007/8, the real total was around 15,400. The latest quarterly figures, due to be released on Thursday, will again exclude a significant number of incidents.

The explanation for the gulf is that the Government figures only include cases where guns are fired, used to “pistol whip” victims, or brandished as a threat.

Thousands of offences including gun-smuggling and illegal possession of a firearm – which normally carries a minimum five-year jail sentence – are omitted from the Home Office’s headline count, raising questions about the reliability of Government crime data.

Source: EU Commission, UN

Dominic Grieve, the shadow home secretary, said: “These alarming new figures not only highlight the appalling state of gun crime in this country, but also remind us just how poor the Government’s statistics actually are.

“Crime statistics must also be compiled and published independent of the Home Office, and crime mapping rolled out so that people can have confidence in what they are being told about the state of crime in this country.”

Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said the figures revealed the extent to which gun crime is a “scar on society”.

“It is shocking that the Home Office is in denial about the extent of gun crime by refusing to include offences where a gun is present but not brandished,” he said.

“This is another strong reason why the Home Office should not be in charge of collecting its own statistics, which should be put directly under the responsibility of the Office for National Statistics.

“Gun crime must be treated with the same seriousness and concern as knife crime. Both are a scar on our society.”

In all, there were at least 5,612 offences excluded from the Home Office’s official gun crime total last year, according to figures supplied by police forces.

The true total number of excluded offences will have been even higher, because two of the 43 forces in England and Wales, Thames Valley and Leicestershire, failed to hand over their data when asked to do so under the Freedom of Information Act, and a large urban force, Greater Manchester, provided incomplete statistics. Scotland records gun crime differently.

When the Home Office publishes its latest quarterly crime figures on Thursday, they will include a section on gun crime injuries and deaths, but the figures will again exclude a significant number of incidents.

The Sunday Telegraph‘s figures suggest that the Metropolitan Police’s official tally of 3,300 gun crimes in 2006/7, the most recent available, would have risen to around 5,000 if excluded categories had been counted. In 2007, Met officers dealt with 1,678 firearms incidents which were not included in the official tally. The Met’s figures show that offences of firearms possession in the capital rose from 850 five years ago to 1,400 last year.

After the Met, the second-highest number of offences excluded from the official statistics was recorded by West Midlands Police with 404, taking the force’s true annual total of gun crimes to around 1,400.

“Firearms offences are comparatively rare in Britain, and the vast majority thankfully do not result in a serious or fatal injury. But if the police already collect this information it is difficult to understand why it should not be put routinely into the public domain.”

The Sunday Telegraph also recently revealed that knife crime figures were at least two-thirds higher than official figures.

Police statistics showed forces in England and Wales are on course to record 38,000 serious knife crimes this year, or more than 100 a day, compared with last year’s official total of 22,151 offences, a figure announced by the Home Office in July in its first annual count of knife crimes.

Telegraph

Read more

Also we have from 2009:

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S.

No We’re Not Joking: Bill Clinton named ‘Father of the Year’

Comments Off on No We’re Not Joking: Bill Clinton named ‘Father of the Year’

As Steve says, you just couldn’t make this stuff up. I find it strange that he is named “Father of the Year” for his “tireless dedication to both his public office and many philanthropic organizations.”, instead of dedication to his daugther and doing things with her.

Former President Bill Clinton is getting props for being a good dad.

Clinton was named the “Father of the Year” by the National Father’s Day Council on Wednesday.

The group selected Clinton for his “profound generosity, leadership and tireless dedication to both his public office and many philanthropic organizations,” Dan Orwig, chairman of the National Father’s Day Committee, said in the announcement.

The award will be presented at a luncheon in June.

Politico