War has been declared

April 19, 2009

Today is Patriot's Day. It is fitting that this is being written today. Two hundred and thirty four years ago war was declared on the People by the British. On April 18th, 1775 the British governor in Boston sent forth troops to seize the powder and shot to ensure the colonists could not wage war against the British crown. In the early hours of April 19, 1775 the British were met in Lexington, and later at Concord by the very colonists Britain attempted to disarm. Patriot's Day celebrates the historic stand taken at Lexington and Concord and the start of the American Revolution.

Several weeks ago, the Missouri government declared war on the People via the “MIAC (Missouri Information Analysis Center) Strategic Report: The Modern Militia Movement” report. The governor of Missouri endorsed and stood behind the report, as did the head of their Department of Public Safety. Once the head of the Missouri Highway Patrol became involved some sanity was imposed – the head of the MDPS was forced to resign and all MIAC reports will now have to be cleared by the Missouri Highway Patrol.

Now we have the Department of Homeland Security issuing a similar report - “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment”, which similarly declares war on the People. DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano stands behind the report.

Both reports have similar “unclassified for law enforcement and official use only, not for public release” classifications. In other words, the People where not suppose to know what the civil servants who created these reports truly think of them. Thanks to the actions of some patriotic recipients of these reports the People where made aware of the contents of both reports.

According to both reports you are a terrorist if you:
- support the Constitution for the united States
- oppose the United Nations
- oppose gun control and support the 2nd amendment
- support immigration laws and are opposed to illegal aliens
- supported Ron Paul
- support the Libertarian Party
- support the Constitution Party
- oppose high taxes

Added tho this list by the DHS report are:
- being a returning military veteran who served in Iraq or Afghanistan
- support strong local and/or state governments

On April 15th an estimated one million people participated in TEA parties across America. That one million included people from across the political spectrum, including democrats. Our elected representatives and their media lackeys tried to spin the TEA parties as “disgruntled republicans” and “funded by the rich”. Some republicans and news organizations latched onto the grass roots TEA parties for political capital they could spend in the next election – they hope that by saying they agree with the People that they will get elected. Some media outlets also latched on to the TEA parties to try to increase their failing ratings while the vast majority of the media ignored or ridiculed the TEA parties and their participants.

Those one million people did nothing more than exercise their rights guaranteed by the 1st amendment, demonstrated their disagreement with the direction our elected representatives have gone regarding taxation. Yet now, due to the Department of Homeland Security report, these one million people are terrorists because they disagree with our elected representatives on the issue of taxation.

To those democrats, others who are left of center, and centrists in their political views who participated in the TEA parties I ask, how is it that you are now a “rightwing extremist” and a “domestic” or “homegrown terrorist”? Is it that our elected representatives have gone so far to the left? Is it that you have moved so far to the right? Or could it be that our elected representatives have moved so far towards tyranny?

We have a speaker of the House who has gone on record as saying that she wants more gun restrictions. She wants registration of all guns. She does not want guns to cross state lines.

We have a president who wants registration. He wants tougher guns laws and wants to bring back the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban (also known as H.R. 355, which can be viewed here: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c103:H.R.3355.ENR:).

We have a vice president who likes to take credit for the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban. He would like to see a new Assault Weapons Ban – this time making it permanent.

We have an attorney general, Eric Holder, who has said he wants an expanded Assault Weapons Ban. The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban was passed while he was serving under Janet “Burn Them All” Reno as deputy attorney general.

We have a supreme court justice, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who says we should use the “wisdom” of foreign judges in our courts. The only foreign judges who have any bearing on American jurisprudence (only because American jurisprudence and the American judicial system is based upon the British model) are British judges and then only before 1776.

In proposed legislation at the federal level right now is a bill which is basically a new Assault Weapons Ban (H.R. 1022 from 2007 can be viewed here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1022). Language in the bill would essentially outlaw all semi automatic magazine fed handguns because at some time someone could make a magazine that could hold over ten rounds. It does not matter if there are no magazines of greater than the ten round limit for the handgun, it is simply that they could be made. It would essentially outlaw semi automatic magazine fed handguns as we know them – you would either have a fixed magazine semi automatic magazine fed pistol or a revolver. Included in this new bill is language that would not allow grandfathering of existing guns - so if you own a gun that is on the ban list you would have to destroy it, render it inoperative or give it to the jack booted thugs. There are already many semi automatic magazine fed handguns that hold over the 10 round limit listed in the bill, they would be banned upon passage of the bill.

This same bill would also outlaw pistol grips or anything that could be used as a pistol grip on rifles. This means that your average hunting rifle “C” stock and thumb hole stock would be banned. In other words, just about every stock known would be banned since folding and telescoping stocks are included in the language of the bill. It would outlaw bayonets, flash suppressors, magazines with a capacity over 10 rounds and center fire “sniper” weapons and “sniper” ammunition. To these tyrants “sniper weapon” means your deer rifle and the ammunition for them. It could, and will be, interpreted that “center fire sniper weapon” means ALL center fire rifles. That would leave you with .22 and a few other exotic rimfire calibers.

If you think that you can still keep your black powder rifle you are wrong! All firearms including black powder .50 caliber and above would be banned because they are considered “anti tank” weapons. Most black powder rifles are .50 caliber or over.

And just so you don't think that you'll get to keep your shotgun, convert your shotgun gauge to caliber and most will be over .50 caliber and therefore an “anti tank” weapon.

The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban left some “loop holes” that allowed the People to keep, produce and buy firearms the government didn't want you to have. A new AWB would close these “loopholes”. No more private sales, no more gun show “loophole”, no grandfathering of existing firearms or magazines or other banned accessories. It is not a ban on all guns or a complete confiscation and disarming, but is as good as a complete ban and disarming. When they can ban 99% of the guns based on language it may was well say “all guns are banned”. They may not come for everything at once, but they will come for everything in the end.

If you need any help understanding the character of the president, vice president, speaker of the house or most of Congress you need look no further than 90 miles south of Florida. Fidel Castro, a communist dictator who banned guns in Cuba seems to feel that he has a good understanding of our president and Congress – Castro has welcomed our new president with open arms. Our president has said that we should revisit our stand on Cuba, and Castro has said that everything is on the table for discussion. It was a democrat president, JFK, who almost went to war with the USSR over Cuba in 1962. It was JFK who started the economic embargo of Cuba. JFK, a democrat, feared the spread of communism or socialism in Cuba. No president since JFK, not even democratic presidents, suggested that we welcome Castro and Cuba with open arms. Yet our current president and Congress are doing so and are welcomed by Castro with open arms – something that has never happened before. You have to ask yourself why this is. Does Castro know something about the current president and Congress that we don't?

Make no mistake, war has been declared. The president and Congress have declared war on the People. Conduct yourself accordingly!

"Stand your ground. Don't fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here."
- Captain John Parker, Lexington Green, April 18, 1775