Search 10 Years of Articles

1/17/22 1/17/22

FREEDOM IS WON AND CAN BE MAINTAINED ONLY BY FORCE OF ARMS

CATACLYSMIC CONFRONTATION ON THE HORIZON: FEDERAL GOVERNMENT VERSUS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

[SEGMENTS OF THIS ESSAY WERE SUBSTANTIALLY UPDATED ON 2/11/2022]

PART ONE

Forget the blither and blather of the Pelosi January 6 Commission, the claptrap and gibberish incessantly flying out of the maw of the “Grand Idiot in Chief” Joe Biden, and the facile oiliness of Garland, Fauci, and all the rest of the ungodly swine let loose to prey on the good people of our Nation.The United States as a free Constitutional Republic cannot be undone, will never be undone, as long as the citizenry remains armed—and armed to the hilt. And that is something the American Neo-Marxist internationalists and Neoliberal Globalists cannot and will not abide if their one-world transnational governmental scheme is ever to come to fruition.These Destructive elements know they cannot corral and subjugate the American people if they cannot disarm them. That end goal is essential if these Destructive forces are to realize their vision of a one-world government. They know this task has become less and less feasible and more and more daunting with each passing day.Americans have grown wise to the antics of a rogue Administration and a rogue Congress and they want an end to the charade these treacherous malevolent and malignant creatures have played upon the American people for the last year. The alacrity of ineptitude and corruption, duplicity and insincerity, audaciousness and presumptuousness of the rogue Harris-Biden Administration and the equally rogue and decadent combined cabal of Pelosi/Schumer/McConnel controlled Congress are too much in evidence for even the most lackadaisical and jaded among Americans to fail to take notice and, hence, to be alarmed.The inanity of the past year has taken its inevitable toll on both the patience and sanity of the American people and on the political, social, and economic stability of the Nation. It is impossible for people and the Nation to weather the perturbations running through them both. Even Leftist commentators know this and they have intimated as much—frantic about the outcome of the coming Midterm Elections—when they stand to lose all that the Neo-Marxist agenda has hitherto accomplished. And Rogue Republicans like Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger have long been a part of the venal, rancid Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist cavalcade. Just listen to the “Republican” Senator Mitt Romney complain that the demented, enervated, dissembling occupier of the Oval Office, Joe Biden, didn't reach out to him for Republican Party assistance to federalize the electoral system, ensuring retention of Marxist-Democrat Party control of Congress in the 2022 Midterm elections. The Washington Times laid this out just the other day, in an article titled, “Romney: Biden botched election reform by not talking to centrist Republicans.”“Mitt Romney said Sunday the White House never reached out to him on voting rights even though the Utah Republican is one of the few GOP senators who might be open to a bipartisan overhaul of election laws.Mr. Romney‘s criticism of the president’s leadership comes as Democrats forge ahead with a likely ill-fated plan to blow up Senate filibuster rules and ram through a partisan plan.The former Republican presidential nominee said he is working with a dozen Democrats and Republicans on ways to strengthen the Electoral Count Act after the chaos that culminated with the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, so it was disappointing to see the White House try and muscle through alternative plans that GOP lawmakers view as a federal takeover of elections.‘Sadly, this election reform bill that the president has been pushing, I never got a call on that from the White House. There was no negotiation bringing Republicans and Democrats together to try and come up with something that would meet bipartisan interest,’ Mr. Romney told NBC’s ‘Meet the Press.’‘They want a real dramatic change,’ Mr. Romney said of Democratic leaders. ‘They feel that instead of elections being run at the state level, they should really be managed and run at the federal level. And recognize the founders didn’t have that vision in mind. They didn’t want an autocrat to be able to pull the lever in one place and change all the election laws. Instead, they spread that out over 50 states.’Democrats say their voting bills are needed to overrule a slew of election integrity measures that have been enacted in GOP-led states since 2020.”The expression ‘Centrist Republican’ that Romney applies to himself and to others like him is a misnomer. There are none today. There can’t be, not in any meaningful sense of the word. There are, first, those Americans who believe fervently in preserving the Nation in the form the Founders created and bequeathed to us—a free Constitutional Republic. These Americans, the true Patriots, have taken an active stand to protect the Nation from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. They have made their voices heard vociferously, fiercely, even in the face of Government and the large omnipresent social media and technology companies that have pressed feverishly ahead to quell those dissenting voices. America’s Patriots are fully prepared, if or when the need arises, to take up arms against those forces that intend to destroy the Republic and who to subjugate the citizenry. Then there are, second, those Americans who have capitulated to the destruction of the Republic—either through quiet acquiescence, resignation, or outright obeisance to the forces that dare to crush the Nation and its people into submission. In that second group, there are found those who have actively joined the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist effort to undermine the Constitution and to eradicate a free Republic. These include the true believers of the new world order agenda, and Collectivist ideology, and Critical Race Theory Dogma. They are cultists, acolytes, in every sense of the word—thoroughly onboard with the gameplan that envisions dissolution of a free, independent, sovereign State and repression of the American citizenry. They are avid participants in the effort to see the Nation torn asunder. In their ranks, one also finds people like Romney, Cheney, Kinzinger, and corporatists—to be perceived less as cultists, and more crass opportunists, easily bribed, more interested in turning a profit than in preventing tyranny.Thus, in the midst of—at the moment—a seemingly quiet (Below the Threshold) American Neo-Marxist Counterrevolution aimed at overriding and reversing the American Revolution of 1776, there are to be found, among active participants in the struggle over the soul of the Country, American's Patriots, who wish to preserve the Nation in the form the founders conceived for it—a free Constitutional Republic—and Neo-Marxists/Neoliberal Globalists, who are not only conspiring to dissolve the Republic but to dismantle the very concept of an independent, sovereign Nation-State and sovereign American people, merging the Nation's remains into a neo-feudalistic, trans-Global empire.But to succeed in their Counterrevolution without bloodshed—as their agenda is exceedingly unpopular even among most of those Americans who think of themselves as liberal-minded Democrats—they are forced to work ostensibly within the constraints of the Constitution. And, to manage that, these Neo-Marxists/Neoliberal Globalists must take unlawful control of the electoral system as they did during the 2020 General Election. They must overhaul the electoral system. And that first requires overhauling the Senate filibuster Rule. But they do not have the votes to accomplish that. Democrat Party Senators Manchin and Sinema won't give them that. Both puppet-masters and their puppets are becoming increasingly worried, frantic that, even after having prevented Donald Trump from serving a second term in Office, their plans for the eradication of a free Constitutional Republic may still come to naught.The Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalists and their many toadies are, unsurprisingly, desperate to control the 2022 November midterm elections just as they had manipulated the 2020 General election. They need to enshrine their electoral fraud machinations into law if they are to maintain control over Congress. And they are not able to accomplish that. And that failure will disrupt their plans as in 2016, most certainly derailing their agenda a second time. So, once again they are resorting to the seditious legacy Press as their Sounding Board. And this Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist captured Press is, true to form, falling back on the usual dreary, boring rhetoric of racism to chastise and cajole anyone who fails to support the passage of their ridiculous voting measures. See two Fox news articles just posted, January 18, 2022. One Fox news article is titled “Liberal media use Martin Luther King Jr. day to push election Legislation, claim ‘voting rights under assault,’” and the other Fox news article is titled, “Schumer tells Democrats to reluctant to nuke filibuster: ‘We are all going to go on the record.’” These Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists are intent on maintaining a stranglehold on the Nation, insistent on the usurpation of the sovereignty of the citizenry to main indefinite and absolute control over the Federal Government, and over the Nation's institutions, and over the Nation's people.And this unlawful usurpation of the citizenry’s sovereignty by a rogue, treasonous, tyrannical Federal Government and a duplicitous Congress is too painfully evident to be reasonably denied. To enshrine a successful Counterrevolution in perpetuity, these plotters need to have absolute control over the electoral system. And their blueprint for that was laid out in the takeover of the 2020 General Election, which saw a quiet coup of Government. And these conspirators are hell-bent on keeping the lid on that, censoring, ridiculing, and strong-arming any American who insists on questioning the legitimacy of the election that took place—that resulted in the ousting of Donald Trump, and the seating of the corrupt, senile dimwit and subservient toady of the Neo-Marxists/Neoliberal Globalists, Joe Biden, into the U.S. Presidential suite.The American people need to remember and constantly remind themselves that, despite the coup d’état of the Federal Government, through the unlawful scheming and fraud of the 2020 General Election, the American people still wield, by right, ultimate and sole sovereignty over Government. But it is not succored for them, as they can see. They must assert it.And there must eventually be an accounting, and there will be an accounting, after the 2022 Midterm elections. And the American people are holding fast to, and must continue to hold fast to their firearms. Many other Americans, who, in their dim memory, recall the sacred right of the people to keep and bear arms, are purchasing firearms and ammunition for the first time, recognizing a free Constitutional Republic is rapidly falling from their grasp. And they are prepared to assert their lawful power over the Government.This absolutely terrifies the ruthless forces—operating silently in the shadows—both here and abroad. For far too long they have exerted inordinate influence and power over their many toadies——

In the Federal Government
In Many State, and Local Governments;
In the Public and Private Health Fields;
In the Press, in Social Media, and “Big Tech;”
In Broadcast and Cable News and Commentary;
In Academia and Public Education;
In Business, High finance, and the Central (Federal Reserve) Bank;
In Sports and other Entertainment.

And with the exceptionally good reason these ruthless, powerful forces are terrified of America’s many armed citizens. But these destructive forces can’t back down now. They can't ease up on their grand Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist takeover gameplan. They have come much too far for that.Yes, they have been able to prevent the Populist Donald Trump from securing a second term in office, albeit through massive election fraud, chicanery, and illegal electoral engineering. And they have unlawfully silenced dissent. And they have unlawfully denied to tens of thousands of American citizens, operation of the citizens’ sacred Constitutional Rights through blatant and glaring, disregard of and outright violations of the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. They have pushed the American people against a wall.And so, the forces that dare to crush our Nation and its people into submission must see their game through to the end: it is all, or nothing at all—both for them and for us.How do we know this? The absurdist, farcical play the Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists puppet-masters have staged to date demonstrates how frantic they are to control the actions and thoughts of the American people.These destructive agencies must proceed forthwith with their agenda, that they may undertake the grand finale: their dangerous endgame. They must and will, at some point, attempt to confiscate the firearms of the American people en masse.Just consider the outright, outrageous unconstitutional actions and schemes that Americans have suffered to date through the deceit and machinations and illegal maneuvering of the treachery of many in the Federal Government and through the treachery of many actors outside the Government as well—taunting, challenging, daring the American people to resist. Consider these outrageous assaults on our Constitution and on the Sovereignty of the American people:

Creation of Nancy Pelosi’s “Star Chamber” January 6 Commission

Establishment of the DOJ Department’s newly formed Domestic Terrorism Unit, to target and hunt down American citizens

Insidious Attacks on America’s Moms and Dads, and on Trump Supporters

Continued Mindless, Senseless Denigration of and Attacks on Donald Trump

Incoherent, Duplicitous Disinformation/Misinformation/Pseudo-Information Campaigns Orchestrated by the Federal Government, the Legacy Press, and Major Social Media Companies, all directed against the population at large

Psychological Conditioning Programs Designed to Produce and Provoke Mass Confusion, Anxiety, and Hysteria in the Nation’s Citizenry and in the Nation’s youth and young adults

The Perpetration and Perpetuation of an outlandish fictitious pseudo-religious dogma grounded absurdly on the Glorification of Victimhood and on the Idea of the Moral Righteousness of Social and Sexual Deviancy and of a host of other Psychological Pathologies

De facto Abrogation of Natural, Basic Rights and Liberties of the Citizenry

The Contemptuous Dismissal of U.S. Supreme Court Orders and Decisions; and Disdainful Disregard of Congressional Statutes

Governmental Policy Decisions and Initiatives Designed and Calibrated to Destabilize Society, Weaken the Economy, and Endanger National Security

Odd tolerance toward, even outright enabling of, harmful, illegal Actions of the worst, most detestable elements of Society and, concomitantly, Clampdowns on the Freedoms and Autonomy of Average, Responsible, Rational Americans

The Presumptuous, Outrageous Opening of the Nation’s Territorial Borders to Millions of Itinerant illegal aliens, many of whom have been deported from the Country several times before but who are given Sanctuary in the U.S. by the Administration in clear violation of the Nation’s Immigration Laws

Creation of new voting blocs from the millions of illegal aliens, convicted felons, lunatics, malleable adolescents, malcontents, and slothful individuals

Seditious Pronouncements and Narratives Passed off as “News” by a Press that is in league with the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist Agenda to Eradicate a free Constitutional Republic

Neo-Marxist Legislators blatantly and egregiously telling Social Media and Big Tech Kingpins to engage in further Censoring of Speech instead of urging restraint and the refraining of censorship on pain of Congressional action

Harris-Biden Administration nominations of the most corrupt, ill-suited, inept, Anti-American, and, in some instances, strange and bizarre cast of characters ever to hold public office

House Passage of the Voting Rights Package, combining the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act and the Freedom to Vote Act—a Bald-faced, Shameless Attempt by Congressional Marxists to unlawfully bypass Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution—thereby federalizing the election process that belongs solely to the States and ensuring that Neo-Marxists retain control of Congress in November 2022 after the Midterm elections

Unmitigated, incessant Lying and Deceit directed toward the American People

Painfully and oddly taciturn Republican Members of the Senate and House, seemingly oblivious to the blatant Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist attempt to destroy the Republic: Have they been bribed to remain quiet, or are most of them just frightened docile little lambs themselves, afraid to lock horns with the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist toadies and puppet-masters?

How can the Federal Government and various State Governments, along with the Press, and Social Media Companies, get away with continuous wholesale evisceration and immolation of our Nation and its people? The short answer is: They can’t; at least not legally anyway, but for the fact that Americans allow this to happen, at least tacitly.But how long will Americans put up with this dangerous nonsense?_____________________________________

AMERICAN NEO-MARXISM TAKES DIRECT AIM AT WHAT IT CALLS AMERICA’S “GUN CULTURE”

PART TWO

The fundamental, unalienable, absolute right of the people to keep and bear arms, as codified in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is deeply rooted in our culture. There is no doubt about that. No one can reasonably deny this. In fact, the Neo-Marxist internationalists and Neoliberal Globalists both readily acknowledge the import of the right codified in the Second Amendment even as they abhor and disdainfully object to it.But, the use of the specific phrase ‘Gun Culture,’ is a political fiction, a wholly made-up terminology, no less so than is the expression ‘Assault Weapon.’ Both are manufactured phrases that Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalist propagandists concocted to use and exploit against the American people in order to hobble, demoralize, and disrupt American society and America’s noble institutions.Their goal is not abstruse. They seek no less than the eradication of a free Constitutional Republic. And, through both their words and actions, the accomplishment of that goal has become increasingly plain. They intend to replace the Republic with an altogether alien and artificial political, social, economic, cultural, juridical construct—a nightmarish massive Collectivist scheme. They fancy an America as a totalitarian enclave devoid of geographical borders, devoid of a common language, devoid of National identity, and harboring an assemblage of ragtag, itinerants, completely dependent on the grace of Government to fulfill their minimum basic needs. If there is a throwback to an early age, to be seen in all of this, it is in their belief system and not that of American Patriots. America’s Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists imagine a world before the rise of modern nation-states, a neo-Feudalism, where a few “Lords” live in luxury and everyone else devolves to a state of penury and repression. And why would the American citizenry acquiesce to this?The forces that crush nation-states into submission view this Nation’s uniqueness not as a thing to be applauded and cherished but as a thing to be denigrated, ridiculed, denied, and ultimately destroyed. And they want to convince the American people—their incessant propaganda, attempts to convince, the American people—that our free Republic is not worth salvaging.And as the economy continues to suffer—all of it by design—and as Government doggedly continues to impose rapacious authoritarian policies on the people, and as the Government insidiously drives more and more people to destitution, many Americans are beginning to lose faith in both themselves and in the Republic; many are looking to Government for succor and protection. And all of this is as intended by the forces that crush entire nations into submission.And the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists blame the breakdown of law and order they themselves have fostered and nurtured not on the devious Government policy goals and initiatives—upon which breakdown of societal order is based—but on America’s “Gun Culture.”These malevolent, maleficent, malignant forces disingenuously argue the fault is not of their own making—that none of the problems plaguing America of late is of their own making—but that it is the result of America’s indefatigable “love of Guns,” of the omnipresence of a “Gun Culture” that permeates all of American society and that has existed since the dawn of the Republic. And they loudly bray that it is this “Gun Culture” that is the singular cause of the mayhem plaguing many of the Country’s major Cities; that it is this “Gun Culture” that manifests in cities around the Country as out-of-control “Gun Violence,” or so they say. But is this true? No!

THERE IS NO “GUN CULTURE” IN AMERICA, AND THERE NEVER WAS

Let us be clear: There IS NO “GUN CULTURE” in America. There IS, though, a unique “AMERICAN CULTURE.” And the two of them are not the same thing.This requires explication as much falsehood is generated and spouted over it and many gun owners may not be aware of it. The propaganda surrounding this notion and all the other notions thrust on the American people is the product of a long insidious campaign planned and executed by the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist-controlled Government. And they operate in tandem with the major technology companies and with the legacy Press. Their intention is to injure and soften the American psyche. And they have become very adept at it.Through an obvious long-standing—albeit never openly admitted incestuous relationship—the bloated Federal Government, the large-scale Legacy Press, and the massive Social Media/Technology companies have, for years, combined their forces in a campaign to confuse, distract, and discourage the American public in a calculated attempt to prevent the public from focusing on the salient problem facing the Country: the very real possibility of the loss of it. For that is the plan. It was always their plan. It is the finale sought by the ruthless forces that seek to crush a free Constitutional Republic, and with that, to crush the spirit of the American people.The Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists would never admit this and they still don’t. But they cannot reasonably deny it; the Nation is falling apart at the seams. Obviously, they don't wish to take credit for that, even as they are the ones that planned for it. But, they can't very well blame Trump or the American people for the multiplicity of serious ills plaguing society. So, they don't mention any of it. Rather they focus on quietly instituting more of the same, and focusing attention on the Midterm Elections. For, the longer they can retain Governmental power, the more fully entrenched they become, and the more time they have to accomplish their goal of the complete dismantling of the Country.And the Country is weakening and dying a slow death on all major indices: socially, culturally, politically, geopolitically, and juridically.The pity of it is that it need not have been so. It has less to do with the fact of it and more that Americans have only themselves to blame for it. All too many of them continually vote into high Office the vilest, vicious, inept, contemptible creatures ever to have been spawned.And why is that? There is an answer. The answer is found in the Neo-Marxists' and Neoliberal Globalists' merciless attack on America’s Spirit and Will._____________________________________

THE NEO-MARXIST/NEOLIBERAL GLOBALIST ATTACK ON AMERICANS’ VITAL SPIRIT FOCUSES ON FALSE NOTIONS OF “GUN CULTURE” AND “GUN VIOLENCE”

PART THREE

The Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist propagandists’ success to date propagating falsehoods about a pervasive American “GUN CULTURE” and concomitantly an uncontrolled wave of “GUN VIOLENCE,” plaguing the Country, leading to a sense of profound hopelessness in the psyche of Americans, is no accident. It is all part and parcel of an intricate, well-designed, well-coordinated, well-executed and lengthy campaign to weaken the Nation’s heretofore historically strong spirit, will, intellect, and emotional toughness. The Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists know that it is impossible to induce Americans to accept a completely alien and inherently outrageous vision of the world—one requiring the immolation of the American psyche and the dissolution of a sovereign, independent Nation-State and sovereign American people—unless they first severely weaken the American psyche. Apart from a few Americans who have a peculiar predilection toward acceptance of the tenets, precepts, and principles of Collectivism, which eschews the sanctity and inviolability of the Human Soul, the vast majority of Americans would have long ago forsworn Neo-Marxism had not the seditious legacy Press and assorted propaganda arms of social media and internet effectively controlled the dissemination of news and information. But, broad swathes of the population don't know. The Press and private and public media outlets assiduously mask the aims and actions of these vicious, virulent, vile Neo-Marxist and Neo-liberal Globalist forces with massive, well-orchestrated campaigns of disinformation, misinformation, fluff, and pablum, while blanketing the Nation with a complete blackout of authentic, elucidative information. Hence, the American public must dig hard and deep to obtain the truth, upon which the public may draw informative inferences concerning the direction that the present Government is taking the Country.That so many Americans have no inkling of the deception played upon them by those servants of Government, it is understandable that so many Americans would have accepted the false projection playing out in front of them, and would become ever more the passive, apathetic observer of the nonsense so projected out to them. Even so, it is wondrous strange that so many members of the public appear increasingly amenable to the most outrageous, outlandish, ludicrous ideas and thought-forms imposed on their psyche—ridiculous even by the standards of Neo-Marxism itself.This says much of the propagandists’ success in inflicting mass psychosis on the target population. Many Americans—most, unfortunately—have dealt with the sheer idiocy of the word salads and viral memes floating through the newspapers and internet and airwaves by blotting much of it out. Many have seemingly mastered, if half-consciously, a form of self-hypnosis, inducing a state of mental and emotional stupor; a kind of waking somnolence. But whether internalizing the nonsense spouted by propagandists, accepting it as gospel, or filtering it out—by spacing out—either way is fine for the Spoilers of our Nation; for, either way, the Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist puppet-masters accomplish their aims. Either way, an inattentive audience or one rapt by the garbage foisted on them, that American audience becomes a compliant, docile, mute flock of sheep.Americans either become acolytes of the new nonsense dogma, thereby looking forward to the realization of the nightmare Dystopia, or become resigned to it, having lost all will and vigor to resist the actualization of it.The truth is inescapable but the implacable horror of the future prospects for our Nation is so terrifying that most Americans won’t acknowledge it to themselves or breathe a word of it to others, even as some dim portion of their intellect compels them to accept the hard, cold, disturbing fact of it. Thus, Americans engage in psychopathological self-denial. And these are some of the signs of that malaise of Spirit, directed inward upon themselves:

Changes in eating habits
Changes in mood
Excessive worry, anxiety, or fear
Feelings of distress
Inability to concentrate
Irritability or anger
Low energy or feelings of fatigue
Sleep disruptions
Thoughts of self-harm or suicide
Trouble coping with daily life
Withdrawal from activities and friends

See article in very well mind. To that, we might add the pathological suspicion of friends, family, and business associates, and worst of all, fear and suspicion over one’s own motives—doubt concerning one’s own abilities and the inviolability of one's sacred Self.As masters of psychological conditioning and brainwashing, the Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist psychologists and psychiatrists have manipulated the public so thoroughly that many members of the public fail to think clearly and carefully through the implausibility of the nonsense continuously blasted out in the newspapers, on the cellphones, and over the airwaves at them. They simply fail to see what is in plain sight: the horrific monster looming in front, behind, and all around them.The propagandists blare out and emphasize, ad nauseum, the false idea that our Nation is immoral; ergo, the citizenry’s psyche is irremediably damaged, and that the only remedy for an immoral Nation and a damaged psyche is radical surgery: destroy the Nation, and lobotomize the psyche. But, the irony is that the citizenry's psyche was not/is not damaged but for the actions of the propagandists who would make it so.The cause of the Nation’s woes, Americans are told is this thing that the forces that crush refer to as a “GUN CULTURE” that permeates through the length, and depth, and breadth of the County, and that manifests in a plague of GUN VIOLENCE that has taken over the Country—and so the lackeys of the seditious legacy Press tells us.But this is all a fabrication, yet one carefully cultivated and nurtured. The Nation does not have a GUN CULTURE and never did.

WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF ‘CULTURE’

The word, ‘Culture,’ is not an easy word to grasp.The Cambridge Dictionary defines ‘Culture,’ as, ‘the way of life, especially the general customs and beliefs, of a particular group of people at a particular time.’ Expanding on that, the website, Thought Company, explains the word this way:

“Culture is a term that refers to a large and diverse set of mostly intangible aspects of social life. According to sociologists, culture consists of the values, beliefs, systems of language, communication, and practices that people share in common and that can be used to define them as a collective. Culture also includes the material objects that are common to that group or society. Culture is distinct from social structure and economic aspects of society, but it is connected to them—both continuously informing them and being informed by them.

If that definition isn't confusing, consider, this description of the word from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

“The meaning of the term ‘culture’ has been highly contested, especially within anthropology. . . . The first highly influential definition came from Edward Tylor (1871, 1), who opens his seminal anthropology text with the stipulation that culture is, ‘that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, law, morals, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society.’ Subsequent authors have worried that Tylor's definition packs in too much, lumping together psychological items (e.g., belief) with external items (e.g., art). From a philosophical perspective, this would be especially problematic for those who hope that culture could be characterized as a natural kind, and thus as a proper subject for scientific inquiry. Other definitions often try to choose between the external and internal options in Tylor's definition.

On the external side, anthropologists have focused on both artifacts and behaviors. Herskovits (1948, 17) tells us that, ‘Culture is the man-made part of the environment,” and Meade (1953, 22) says culture “is the total shared, learned behavior of a society or a subgroup.’ These dimensions are combined in Malinowski's (1931, 623) formulation: ‘Culture is a well organized unity divided into two fundamental aspects—a body of artifacts and a system of customs.’ ”

‘Culture,’ is often tied to ‘Heritage.’ But that raises a host of questions. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy goes on to say:

“Do members of cultural groups have special claims to own or control the products of the cultures to which they belong? Is there something morally wrong with employing artistic styles that are distinctive of a culture to which you do not belong? What is the relationship between cultural heritage and group identity? Is there a coherent and morally acceptable sense of cultural group membership in the first place? Is there a universal human heritage to which everyone has a claim?”The more elaborate and comprehensive the definition of, the more inscrutable it becomes. But the Nation's Spoilers don't thrust words and phrases onto the public to edify and enlighten Americans but to control them. The idea is to control the public by tugging on the public's emotional strings, not by appealing to the public's higher mental and judgmental faculties.

GETTING INSIDE THE HEADS OF AMERICANS———

But, targeting the public's emotions only goes so far in controlling the public. The goals of the Nation's spoilers are far more ambitious and frightening.Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist Propagandists love to play with words and language, with syntax, semantics, and structure, and they are great manipulators of it. They cleverly craft an ever-expanding array of new words and expressions and subtly devise novel meanings for old ones. They work hand-in-hand with specialists from diverse academic fields—neuropsychologists, sociologists, psychiatrists, linguists, and anthropologists—who dutifully, ruthlessly imprint, onto the psyche of the public, words, phrases, even nonsensical schizophrenic word salads. The main focus of psychological conditioning is to confuse, confound, and disrupt the American public's sense of time, place, and memory. The aim of the masters of brainwashing, on a nationwide scale, is to create in the mind of the American public an entirely new reality—a parallel world—one that is designed to slowly, inexorably replace the America that hearkens back to the dawning days of the Republic with one that draws the public into the embrace of a completely new political, social, economic, and cultural dynamic: a world-wide Collectivist organ, where the remains of the commonality are herded into special enclaves, dotted here and there around the world. The lives of the common folk will be devoid of meaning or purpose. They will live shallow lives; their minds occupied with generic, vacuous dross, played incessantly to vacant minds attuned to video monitors, and filled with soporifics to make them quiet, submissive, pliant. As little need there will be for unskilled and semi-skilled slave labor, in this brave new world, of the Collectivist future, as technology will fill much of that gap once filled by manual labor, most human beings will become superfluous, reduced to living in an essentially vegetative state.Compare that Marxist/Neo-liberal Globalist dystopian with the ideal of our present American Republic—that is, at best, but a vestige of its once greatness. The exemplars of America are unneeded commodities in the future world of neo-feudalism. In fact, in such a world as envisioned by the future Masters of the Earth, the exemplars of America are an outright liability.In the past——Nothing exemplified the American Spirit and Psyche more prominently, and emphatically than the notion of the indomitability, inviolability, and sacredness of the Human Soul. This sacred truth is itself inextricably tied to the sanctity of Selfhood. And the absolute sovereignty of the American people over Government serves as recognition of this fact. And that sole and exclusive sovereignty over Government is only maintained through the sacred right of the American people to keep and bear arms against the tyranny of Government that attempts to corrupt and profane, one's Self, and one's Spirit, and one's Soul.These notions do not exist independently but are inextricably tied to and bound up in a deep-seated, deeply-entrenched eternal Christian ethic, that itself is grounded on moral Truths, lovingly placed into the Soul of man by a Benevolent, Beneficient, and Morally Perfect Divine Creator. A free Constitutional Republic and the idea of a free, sovereign people, borne of these sacred, unshakeable, and immortal Truths—nourished by them and, having derived their strength, success, and greatness from them—cannot long survive without them. In a free Constitutional Republic, there is an enduring need for a well-armed sovereign people. For it is only through a well-armed citizenry that a sovereign and free people can ever hope to effectively withstand the inevitable tendency of Government, and of the ruthless, insufferable Satanic forces in that Government, to destroy all that is Good, Right, and Proper.The Moral Perfection of the Divine Creator as the well-spring of America's Cultural Greatness, upon which the sovereignty of the American people and the inviolability and indomitability of the American spirit are firmly, indelibly impressed in mind and body and Spirit and cannot be dislodged. These Truths can only be buried in memory, and replaced by false idols and that is what the Nation's Spoilers seek to do. But that is not so easily accomplished—not in a Country established on natural law rights, as only this Country, of all other countries or unions of countries, is.Thus, there exists—there has always existed—an enduring need for a well-armed citizenry to withstand the inevitable tendency of Government and of ruthless, insufferable Satanic forces, intent on destroying all that is Good, and Right, and Proper in America and in the world. The United States is truly the last bastion of hope both for the American people and, ultimately, for western civilization. And, therein one finds the salient reason why the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist forces both need and desire to destroy America and the indomitability of the American Soul and Spirit and Psyche.A one-world government, embracing billions of people, cannot exist without firm military/police control over those billions of people. And, when one western Nation-State—the most powerful and noble one the world has ever seen—effectively resists subjugation, those subjugated peoples around the world take notice. Rebellions here and there arise around the world; fracturing the well-oiled, well-humming titanic machine. The Neo-feudal Lords can have none of that. And that is why they are hard at work destroying every vestige of resistance: openly defying Constitution and Statute; seeding the Country with millions of ignorant, worthless, needy, malcontents, including outright psychopathic killers, rapists, child-molesters, drug traffickers, and sex traffickers; draining our Nation's resources, having no comprehension of or desire to learn of freedom and liberty and the responsibilities that come with it. And that is why the Neo-feudalistic Lords, through their corrupt and obsequious toadies in Government, academia, the Press, in business, in entertainment, and in social media are intent on undermining this Country at its root level. One sees them:

Creating an entire religion and dogma out of victimhood
Deifying the State/Government and blaspheming the one true God;
Treating all manner of perversities and perversions as acceptable life choices;
Denigrating our most sacred Christian beliefs;
Emasculating our military;
Denigrating our Nation’s Founders and Military heroes;
Eradicating our History, Heritage, Culture, and Ethos;
Dismantling our Public and Private Institutions
Destroying the Doctrine of Federalism and the Doctrine of Checks and Balances among the Federal Government's three Co-equal Branches that underpin our system of Governance;
Defying the Constitution and the Bill of Rights;
Inverting our core, sacred values;
Turning vices into virtues and virtues into vices;
Developing and implementing foreign and domestic and policy from alien UN and EU doctrine that irreparably weakens our Nation and are wholly inconsistent and incompatible with our Nation's Constitution, statutes, jurisprudence, historical and cultural underpinnings;
Making a mockery of our Nation by installing into public Office, the most inept, incompetent, corrupt, depraved and degenerate band of creatures to ever serve at one time in the Nation’s highest offices, thereby placing this Country and the world in the worst jeopardy of global thermonuclear annihilation since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962;
Turning our Nation into a massive Surveillance State, and turning our Nation’s peoples into a collection of shoo-flies: neighbor spying on neighbor; police spying unlawfully on people and associations of Americans; teachers spying on children; children even spying on their own parents;
Turning the massive power of Executive Branch police and intelligence apparatuses illegally on the American people;
Reducing Congressional Democrats into a willing and compliant tool of the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist puppet-masters and Congressional Republicans into a passive, ineffectual, effete, and useless Governmental appendage;
Transforming many State and Local Governments into docile toadies of Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist puppet-masters
Treating American citizens as a perpetual subordinate, subservient underclass, while elevating millions of contemptible illegal alien pests, who have no respect for our Nation's laws and who are free from Government mandates and who are a bane on Americans, as the new preferred overclass.

Millions of Americans who are asleep, better awake from their slumber, before they drag down the rest of us. And those Americans who are alert, best stay vigilant and hold tight to their arms. Soon, it may be all they have to remind themselves that they once were sovereign rulers of their Land and that they still are the Nation's sole, sovereign, rulers.___________________________The Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist language manipulators of thought, don't bother to define terminology that they thrust on the public psyche. They thrust terminology onto the psyche of the public, trusting—knowing, really—that emotional connotations of certain words the public is familiar with will do the hard work for the manipulators, adequately conveying to the target population's mind the images the language manipulators intend for those words to convey. And in that task, a reality is created in the mind of the target population. And, the public doesn't rationally perceive the idiocy inherent in that dubious reality, because emotion clouds the intellect.The words, ‘gun,’ ‘criminal,’ and ‘violence,’ are all common words in the English language. Two of the words, historically, ‘criminal,’ and ‘violence,’ have negative connotations, and understandably so. One, word, ‘gun,’ does not, historically, have an inherently negative connotation. And the reason why is plain. The word, ‘gun,’ is a tool. It is an object, not an agent. As a tool it can be utilized by an agent for good or ill. In our past, it was through the use of guns by American Patriots that a Nation was born; one unlike any other in the world before, or since. The Nation's Patriot-Founders conceived a Country conceived in Liberty, in accordance with the will of the Divine Creator God; a Country where the American people lived free and as sole sovereign, in control of their own lives and the destiny of their Country. And, that the Nation would ever remain so, the Patriot-Founders of our Nation codified in stone, a set of the most important of natural rights, bestowed on and in Man by the Divine Creator.The most basic of which, under which all the other Natural Rights are subsumed, is the Right of self-defense, i.e., self-defense against the predatory creature, the predatory man, and the predatory government.Armed self-defense is simply an aspect of self-defense, nothing more nor less. Armed self-defense implies man has the unalienable, immutable, illimitable, eternal right to use the best means available to defend Self and his Family against unlawful intrusion by beast, man-beast, and predatory, tyrannical Government. As a useful tool, as part of the inherent right of self-defense/survival, man has, through the centuries, come to use and to depend on the firearm to secure sustenance for Self and Family, and that tool eventually served the extended family and the greater community: one's clan, tribe, and eventually one's Nation.In times past, prior to the advent of the firearm, the most effective, efficient, personal, personnel tool for survival was the sword, which through the years andThrough man's technological prowess, that tool evolved into the firearm: matchlock, wheellock, flintlock, percussion cap, revolvers, semiautomatic firearms, selective-fire, and full-auto guns, the last few of which have, through the last century and into the 21st have become further and further refined. And in the refinement of the firearm for self-defense, the Destructors of our Nation came to abhor, loathe and fear the firearm in the hands of the armed citizen. For they know that the well-armed citizen need not long suffer tyranny if it should choose not to, and, in the ancestral mind of the American, the tyranny of Government will not long endure.The mainstay of our free Constitutional Republic is, today, as it has always been, the presence of a well-armed citizenry Not surprisingly, then, the idea of a gun in the hands of the citizen-soldier is absolutely anathema to the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist Destructors of our Nation, of our Constitution, and of a free and sovereign people. It is not only inconsistent with and detrimental to the existence of a totalitarian world governmental regime, it is inconsistent with tyranny's absolute domination and dominion over the Spirit and Soul of man. And, in that rests, not only the perversity of the present Harris-Biden Administration and Pelosi-Schumer-McConnel-controlled Executive and Legislative Branches of the Federal Government but, worst of all, the perversion of Divine Law. Our Nation is the only Nation on Earth that was created as a truly free Constitutional Republic and grounded in Christian ethics and morality in strict accordance with the Desire of the Divine Creator. And the fact that our Nation has persevered and prospered, where all others have fallen into ruin or are in danger of ruination, speaks of the Blessing bestowed on our Nation and its people by the Divine Creator. And, why, then, would any rational person or group seek to destroy that which has succeeded so well? But, then, it isn't reason and sanity that drive those forces to destroy our Nation and to destroy all nation-states. It is rabid jealousy and the avaricious and wrathful desires of ruthless men to rule over and control the lives of all men. That is what motivates them to destroy all that is Good and Right and Proper. And, they rely on the fear, lust, and desires of lesser men to do their bidding. And the corruption inherent in the souls of these corrupted souls is plain for all to see if they would but look.

IF ONE CAN SUCCESSFULLY MANIPULATE THE USE OF LANGUAGE IN SOCIETY, ONE CAN CONTROL THOUGHT AND THEREFORE THE BEHAVIOR OF THE TARGET POPULATION OF THAT SOCIETY

And the manipulators of language went to work to instill in the American psyche an irrational fear and loathing and abhorrence of the firearm to match the same fear and loathing and abhorrence these Destructors of a free Republic held toward the armed American citizen. The intent of these forces that crush was to create enmity, schizophrenia, between the citizen-soldier and that citizen's firearm.Consider the import of and the impact of the phrase, “GUN VIOLENCE,” vs. the phrase, “CRIMINAL VIOLENCE” on the public psyche. By tying the word, ‘gun’ to the word, ‘violence,’ in lieu of the word, ‘criminal,’ to the word, ‘violence,’ the mind associates guns with violence rather than criminal conduct to violence. This all by design. For, it isn't criminal acts that the Destroyers of our Nation seek to contain and constrain. The sociopathic and psychopathic agents of these criminal acts is precisely what the Destroyers of society want. It is rather, firearms in the hands of average, law-abiding, rational civilian citizens they seek to disarm. But, these Destroyers of our Nation and its institutions create the effective illusion that guns are inextricably tied to crime and that by getting rid of guns from the hands of tens of millions of average Americans will erase crime. But, it is guns in the possession of average, rational, responsible, law-abiding American citizens they seek to confiscate, and intend to eradicate. It is not guns in the hands of criminals. For it is guns in the hands of criminals they intend to preserve, as is clear from their actions, if not by their words, and it is sociopathic and psychopathic criminals and lunatics they embrace, for it is these elements that are doing the bidding of the Destroyers of America. These criminals and lunatics will continue to be released onto the streets so that their crimes and mayhem can continue unabated. Nation’s largest Cities—the Neo-Marxist controlled ones—as it so happens—is not “GUN VIOLENCE” but the plague of “CRIMINAL VIOLENCE.” Guns, knives, baseball bats, axes, bombs, motor vehicles, or hands and arms and legs and feet are merely some of the tools utilized in the acts of CRIMINAL VIOLENCE. Getting rid of guns from society won't end CRIMINAL VIOLENCE. It will only make it worse. And it is, after all, this pervasive thing, CRIMINAL VIOLENCE, around the Country that the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists want, and it is this pervasive CRIMINAL VIOLENCE, permeating all around and through our Nation's largest Neo-Marxist run urban areas that our Nation gets.Thus, criminal violence, not surprisingly, does befall major Neo-Marxist-controlled Cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, Chicago, Atlanta, Baltimore, and New York City—just to name a few of these Cities. And these Cities just happen to have some of the Nation’s most restrictive gun laws. Yet the City and State leaders constantly cast blame on the problems plaguing their respective Cities, not on these jurisdictions' acquiescence to or outright enabling and facilitating of CRIMINAL VIOLENCE but on this thing—“GUN VIOLENCE” as if CRIMINAL VIOLENCE is grounded in and derives essentially from GUNS. That is absurd. But there it is, anyway. This is what the Radical Left newspapers, periodicals, radio and broadcast and cable news stations, and the Neoliberal Globalist social media and mega-internet companies continually harp about. And that is what these propaganda organs incessantly castigate gun manufacturers, and the so-called “GUN LOBBY,” and tens of millions of average, law-abiding, responsible, rational members of the public, about: “Get rid of guns from everyone,” so they say, “and the problem of CRIMINAL VIOLENCE across the Land, will take care of itself.” Yea, sure!The expression “GUN VIOLENCE” is a misnomer but one carefully cultivated and scripted to be impressed on the psyche of the public. To be sure, there IS VIOLENCE in our society, of course. But, who is it that is generating all that violence? It certainly isn't the tens of millions of average, responsible law-abiding gun owners. It is VIOLENCE committed by sociopaths, common criminals, lunatics, and psychopathic criminal gang members, including illegal alien rapists, killers, and child molesters, whom various Marxist-controlled Cities and States, along with the Harris-Biden Administration that, perfunctorily, blatantly, even arrogantly disregard our Nation's immigration laws, welcoming into the Country and refusing to allow Federal ICE officers perform their lawful duties requiring them to deport this illegal riff-raff. Many of these innately dangerous elements happen to use guns in committing their criminal acts, sure, and they use many, many other weapons as well. And, as to gun-toting criminals, why is it that the Neo-Marxist Soros-elected prosecutors, judges, and Legislatures are routinely given a pass? This is common practice that goes back years. See, e.g., articles from the Chicago Reporter, the Charlotte Observer, the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Heritage Foundation, News Nation, and Fox News.But if these Cities and States have draconian gun laws, most of which are directed to the public, and if these jurisdictions continued to treat the worst elements of society with kid gloves, pretending to be obsessed over criminals qua gun-toting criminals, then it is clear that the problems plaguing these Cities and States is less a function of guns and is more a function of the agents of crime—the criminals and lunatics themselves. But that fact does not serve the Neo-Marxist narrative. So, the Neo-Marxist deflects the obvious question by posing, to the public, another question that better serves their aims. The Neo-Marxist asks: where are these gun-toting criminals acquiring these guns? The answer, as with the question itself, has, of course, invariably been pre-rehearsed and preprepared by the Neo-Marxists. New York Mayor Eric Adams has made it a mainstay of his recently released “Blueprint to End Gun Violence.” The Mayor raises the matter of gun trafficking—using that as a springboard to secure Federal Government involvement and action. The Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists attempt to federalize everything. This is a clear violation of both the Ninth and Tenth Amendments of the Bill of Rights and Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, and undercuts the long-standing doctrine of federalism that carves out powers between the Federal Government and the States.The American people are witnessing the inexorable erosion, through time, of what had heretofore existed as a well-defined barrier existent between Government and the people upon which the absolute sovereignty of the people over Government depends, and upon which that absolute sovereignty is enforced, i.e., through the continued presence of the well-armed citizenry. Getting the Federal Government involved in the regulation of firearms through the pretext of the makeweight of gun trafficking is merely one more surreptitious attempt by the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists to erode the fundamental right codified in the Second Amendment. Americans have seen this before. Recall the infamous “Fast and Furious Scheme,” hatched originally by the Bush Administration and further exploited by the Obama Administration. Neoliberal Globalists have, through time, tried other strategies to undermine the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms. The failed UN Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) is another example of a surreptitious end-run tactic of a treacherous lustful power-mad Federal Government to undercut the sovereignty of the American people. See article in The New American. Also see a 2019 Report conducted by the Anti-Second Amendment, The Brady Campaign To End Gun Violence, writing in part: “Current United States gun laws are dangerously weak in terms of curbing the supply of guns to the general public, preventing gun trafficking, and providing accountability mechanisms through tracing.While some states can and do mandate more stringent regulations overand above these federal laws - below is a list of some federal-level standards that often undermine the strongest state laws.” In the aforecited Report, the Report's drafters disingenuously argue that GUN VIOLENCE in Central American countries and in Mexico is the primary motivator for mass illegal migration into the United States. But is that true? One year later, it becomes apparent that the chief motivator for illegal transit into the United States is the prospects of a free lunch, made all the more enticing because the present Administration encourages it. Indeed it is tacit policy.Hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens from over 150 countries regularly pour into the U.S. from around the world in an unprecedented wave of migration. See, e.g., the article from The Trumpet. Someone or some entity/entities with a lot of money and a lot of organizational ability must be orchestrating this. The UN endorses this, and the present U.S. Administration adheres to it even though Congress never sanctioned it. Furthermore, illegal entry into the U.S. is a criminal act under U.S. immigration.And, now Neo-Marxists, like Mayor Eric Adams, are using GUN VIOLENCE in several major U.S. Cities as the pretext for imposing new restrictive gun laws, ostensibly going after the guns used in crime but actually targeting non-criminal gun owners. This goes hand-in-hand now with Federal Government-DOJ/FBI action that was already targeting exercise of the Second Amendment via Executive Department fiat, back in June of 2021, under the guise of curbing criminal GUN TRAFFICKING.Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists, argue, once again, that GUN TRAFFICKING is the CAUSE of GUN VIOLENCE in the Nations' Cities. But this ploy is nothing new. See, e.g., the Report by Bloomberg Anti-Second Amendment group, Everytown for Gun Safety.They tell the American public that criminals acquire their guns out-of-state, from those jurisdictions that have “lax” gun laws. Fine, but if that is true, it doesn’t serve to explain, but rather begs the question, why it is that these other Non-Marxist-controlled States do not themselves have a “gun” problem. But, why aggravate the problem of violence in society? Yet, Neo-Marxist-controlled Governments deliberately aggravate violence by doing all they can to encourage sociopathic behavior.And so, instead of strict enforcement of laws, Americans see———

Bail reform laws;
Reduction in the number of police, and understandably disgruntled police who remain on City police forces;
Massive prison closures;
Early release of dangerous criminals from prison;
Failure to place lunatics and drug addicts in hospitals for treatment

But the Neo-Marxists have an answer for that as well. Apart from the proverbial “BLAME VIOLENT CRIME ON GUNS” GAME, Americans are told that the problem of the rampant increase in violent crime is due to:

POVERTY
PEER PRESSURE
DRUGS
POLITICS
RELIGION
FAMILY CONDITIONS
THE SOCIETY
UNEMPLOYMENT
DEPRIVATION
UNFAIR JUDICIAL SYSTEM

See article in the Leftist site, Net News Ledger.Note that some of the items on this laundry list are merely Neo-Marxist pretexts—Neo-Marxist rationales for dismantling a free Constitutional Republic, DRUGS, UNFAIR JUDICIAL SYSTEM, UNEMPLOYMENT, and POVERTY. A few of the items are inherently inexplicable or are nonsensical or amount to facially overbroad generalizations: POLITICS, RELIGION, PEER PRESSURE, THE SOCIETY, DEPRIVATION. One item, in particular, involving the reformation of what Neo-Marxists perceive as the application of UNFAIR JUDICIAL SYSTEMS is itself the cause of VIOLENCE. In claiming that the Judicial System is unfair, the Neo-Marxists have implemented policies to ensure the perpetration of VIOLENCE and the perpetuation of it. Americans see this in defunding police; bail reform laws; failure to prosecute both petty and violent crimes; and release of dangerous criminals and lunatics from prisons or asylums. And by promoting drug use, and discouraging employment by encouraging sloth—these policies are, too, responsible for major increases in VIOLENCE. Thus, it is that—NEO-MARXISTS THEMSELVES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE VERY PROBLEM OF MASSIVE INCREASES IN VIOLENCE, YET DENY ALL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR IT, PREFERRING TO INVOKE GUNS AS THE SALIENT REASON FOR VIOLENCE THAT CONTINUES TO PLAGUE SOCIETY AND THEY INCESSANTLY MANUFACTURE A HOST OF SEEMINGLY LESSER CAUSES FOR RAMPANT VIOLENCE AS WELL It isn't obtuseness that is responsible for the Neo-Marxist attitude. It is craftiness. You will note that when discussing GUN VIOLENCE in society, the Neo-Marxist downplays, CRIME, and emphasizes GUNS. It is all in style for them. And, to think through any of this, one sees the inherent absurdity in all of it. No wonder the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalists refrain from any sort of debate. They would rather simply posit their nonsense as self-evident, true. And, if someone should happen to protest, they simply proclaim their stance on the matter a little louder.The true cause of waves of CRIMINAL/SOCIETAL VIOLENCE is due, in substantial part, if not exclusively, to deliberately “lax” law enforcement, consistent with the Neo-Marxist aim to tear down America's institutions and to destroy an independent, sovereign Nation and free Constitutional Republic, thereby making way for a Collectivist transnational, Global Super-State, sans geographical borders, sans a U.S. Constitution and a Bill of Rights, and marked by the loss of any sense of National identity, National character, National history, and heritage, and Christian ethical system; and subjecting the remnants of the citizenry to a life of bare existence: one of repression, subjugation, uniformity of thought and action, and abject penury? But, what kind of American would choose to live in such a society? Very few Americans it turns out, as they become more and more attuned to the reality of the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist vision.The nonsensicalness and outlandishness of the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist vision for the Country and for the world are now apparent to even the most dull-witted among the American people. But these would-be Destroyers of the Country have come too far to back off now. They are compelled to push through and just hope that the psyche of the American people has been so damaged from decades of psychological conditioning and abuse and so weakened and demoralized from the ravages wrought by over two years of the Chinese Communist Coronavirus pandemic and from the inconsistent, duplicitous, messaging of the slimeballs Anthony Fauci and Rochelle Walensky, that Americans cannot mount an effective resistance to the planned new world order.But there are few if any Americans left who are under any illusion that the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists have had anything but contempt for both them and the Country. But the forces that crush never really denied that. Indeed their incessant attacks on America’s history, heritage, Christian faith, and culture have made that disdain clear as day. It says much of how far the technology and the techniques of mass brainwashing and massaging of the psyche have come that many, many Americans have so easily acquiesced to, or have capitulated to, the Neo-Marxist messaging through incessant bullying and demeaning without nary a protest, let alone a firm, forceful stand.Have most Americans had enough of this? We think so. But, we have yet to see how this will all play out.__________________________________

AMERICAN CULTURE IS GROUNDED IN FREEDOM—WON AND MAINTAINED BY DINT OF ARMS AND FORCE OF WILL TO RESIST TYRANNY

PART FOUR

People such as the new Governor of Virginia, Glenn Youngkin, are turning things around for the State—finally—and for the better, after the horrible legacy left by the prior Governor Ralph Shearer Northam. Virginians can begin once again to live as true Americans, as the State begins its long return to sanity. And the Governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis, demonstrates how a State and Country should work. The formula is simple. Government must take heed: Place faith in and accede to the American citizenry. Recognize the Americans’ inherent sovereignty over the Government. Refrain from castigating, cajoling, controlling, threatening, and demoralizing them.Consider for a moment what would have befallen Virginia if the imbecilic and obsequious stooge Terry McAuliffe had defeated Youngkin in 2021 and what would have befallen Florida if the Neo-Marxist toady, Andrew Gillum, had defeated DeSantis in 2018. And consider a healthy, prosperous, and safe New York for a pleasant change. That would come to pass if Lee Zeldin is elected New York Governor during the mid-term elections of November 2022, displacing a Soros-sponsored Neo-Marxist puppet such as, e.g., Kathy Hochul. Juxtapose the two antithetical different visions for America.One vision holds true to a free Republic as bequeathed to the American citizenry through the AMERICAN REVOLUTION OF 1776. The other vision seeks unabashedly to overturn the AMERICAN REVOLUTION through an unstated but very real NEO-MARXIST COUNTERREVOLUTION of the 21^st Century—one that has been well underway since the dawn of the new Century, apart from a temporary lull during the Trump tenure in Office.What frightens the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists is not a belief that Republican leadership in Virginia and Florida would fail. No! It is that they would succeed—are succeeding—TOO WELL! And the public is taking notice, everywhere. Consider how California would have turned the corner from the economic, social, and political horror that pervades it, had a majority of Californians had the courage to unseat the stooge, Gavin Newsome, and elect Larry Elder. But, habits die hard. No one in California can sensibly believe that Gavin Newsome has done such a wonderful job. His contempt for the citizenry is evident, painfully so. The crime problem, illicit drug problem, and homeless problem, in particular, are way out of control. Californians had a chance during the Recall effort to chase Newsome out of Office. But having been thoroughly habituated to the empty posturing and moralizing of Democrats, they reverted to form. Apparently, they would rather accept a life of continual anxiety, strife, and fear than allow themselves to conceive that they need not resign themselves to a life of desperation. And so the slow dissolution of California continues unabated. It is uncanny how so many Californian Americans consistently see that the politicians they continuously vote into Office work against the American peoples’ own best interests, and yet they continue to vote these same horrible creatures with their dismal records, into Office: Governor Gavin Newsome; Oakland Mayor, Libby Schaaf; San Francisco Mayor, London Breed; Los Angeles Mayor, Eric Garcetti; Los Angeles District Attorney, George Gascón; San Francisco District Attorney, Chesa Boudin—to name a few of the prominent elected officials remaking the State into a Neo-Marxist hell-hole.AND THE NEO-MARXIST COUNTERREVOLUTION CONTINUES ITS MARCH TO REVERSE THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION OF 1776—AT LEAST IN SEVERAL CITIES AND STATES AROUND THE COUNTRYThe NEO-MARXIST COUNTERREVOLUTION is at the moment, at least fortunately, a non-shooting war. That can change. But, if it comes, it will be commenced by the toadies of the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalist puppet-masters, not by American Patriots. Are the would-be destroyers already preparing for this? See article posted on January 14, 2022 on BlabberBuzz, titled, “Military Prepping its Commandoes for Civil War.” The very idea of this is probably grounded less on concern of that America's Patriots would actually commence taking up arms en masse against the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Federal Government than it is based on the hope that America's Patriots would do so. This would be in line with the Government's milking of the January 6, 2021 U.S. Capitol “riot.” The Government hopes to bait the American citizenry into open confrontation. The Government would use that as a pretext to declare martial law, claiming a serious state of emergency. And that would result in an order immediately suspending the exercise of all fundamental rights, notably and especially the right codified in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Government would henceforth order the public to surrender all their firearms forthwith, on pain of immediate arrest and detention for failure to comply.Consider: “In April 1967, Greece's [a modern western democratic nation-state] new military government declared martial law, imprisoned citizens for their political views, dissolved political parties, and instituted widespread censorship, while suspending civil rights protected under the Greek Constitution.” “The Earth Alliance Constitution: International Human Rights Law And Babylon,”10 Fl. Coastal L. Rev. 33, Fall 2008, by Roy Balleste, Assistant Professor of law and Director of the Law Library at the David A. Clarke School of Law, University of the District of Columbia, Washington, D.C.But that couldn't happen here, in the United States, or could it? But hasn't it, in fact, already commenced, albeit in drips and drabs, slowly but methodically, and seemingly innocuously with the censoring of speech by the major social media and technology companies, sympathetic with the aims of Neo-Marxism/Neoliberal Globalism or otherwise cajoled into acting, consistent with Government dictates and wishes? Do we not see Government creating programs and new department agencies that specifically target Americans whose views do not cohere to that of the Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist game plan. But, what would justify the circumstances for outright suspension of all fundamental rights and a formal declaration of martial law——

A legitimate Federal Government justifiably fearing domestic terrorism of American citizen insurgents and thereby operating on the perceived need to protect a free Republic from being overthrown by domestic insurgents? Or,

A decidedly, incorrigibly illegitimate, rogue Federal Government i.e., a tyrannical Government, intent on persevering itself against a popular uprising of tens of millions of concerned Americans who, realizing the dire need to topple a rogue Government to secure and preserve a free Constitutional Republic takes up arms against that Government?

This raises the tantalizing question as to whether a charge of Treason—Treachery to the Citizenry—can apply to a rogue Government itself? See, e.g., the Arbalest Quarrel article, posted on October 1, 2021, titled, “If Tyranny is Treason, Only a Well-Armed Citizenry Can Effectively Resist It and Has the Duty To Do So.”Contrary to our supposition, scholars universally, or almost universally, maintain, that the crime of “treason” can only apply to individuals, not to the Federal Government itself, never to the Federal Government. But, if this is true, then a citizens’ revolt against a tyrannical government cannot ever be justified in law, even if it can, under some moral/ethical theory (e.g. normative deontological theories) be justified. But, if rebellion against the tyranny of Government is, at best, under our Constitution, only ever justified on moral grounds, but never on legal grounds, then the underlying legal imperative for the Second Amendment loses its impetus, i.e., “the right” of the people to revolt against tyranny has no legal basis even if there exists a moral basis to do so. Contrariwise, that tyrannical Government can argue its own legal imperative for repelling a popular uprising against that very tyranny, and would no doubt do so, harshly. Several legal scholars acknowledge this very point. They argue that the purport of the Second Amendment as an individual right of the citizenry to keep tyranny of Government in check is self-defeating and therefore deeply flawed. These scholars claim that the framers of the Constitution could not have intended for the Second Amendment to serve as a legal, basis for dismantling the Federal Government, apart from whatever purely moral basis may happen to exist for doing so.Thus, taking this idea to its logical and morbid conclusion, this means that even if the Federal Government were to devolve into outright tyranny—usurping the sovereignty of the American people, followed by systematically subjugating them, clearly incurring the peoples’ wrath—the Second Amendment does not invite the people to resist that tyranny, under any legal theory or legal justification, whatever the moral imperative there might be for doing so.Unfortunately, this jurisprudential, philosophical problem is not relegated to mere academic contemplation. The Executive Branch of the Federal Government, under Joe Biden, its titular head—a corrupt, incompetent, debilitated and demented buffoon—and the Legislative Branch under the control of the equally corrupt and treacherous Pelosi-Schumer tag team have imposed tyranny on the American people. They really make no pretense of this, and openly defy the public’s justifiable acrimony. Something to ponder!____________________________________

WHERE SHALL AMERICANS FIND “TRUE DEMOCRACY” IF NOT IN THEIR THOUGHTS, THEIR ACTIONS, THEIR ARMS?

The Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalist stooges in Government and in the legacy Press and media constantly talk of “Democracy”— bantering endlessly that only the “Democrat Party” is intent on preserving it. Yet, they never bother to explain what they mean by it, even as they lavish attention on it. But what is really going on here? These stooges constantly claim they are all for “democracy,” and that they and they alone are the only protectors of it. And they dare anyone who might object to what surely comes across as mere pretension when they mention ‘democracy,’ and ask for explication of what they mean by it.Yet, think about what these imbeciles don’t say when they go on and on about “Democracy.” They never mention the word ‘freedom’ in association with it. They never mention ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ in the same breath. In fact, they don’t mention the word, ‘freedom’ at all. And why is that? Might it be that ‘freedom’ is not something they want; that it isn’t a thing they adhere to, and, by the same token, it’s not something they wish others to adhere to either. But why would these “Democrats” object to “freedom,” and why would they vigorously attempt to dissolve man’s natural bond to it? Indeed! Do you think this might have something to do with their concern over Americans’ exercise of their fundamental natural rights?In fact, “freedom” is tied up with and inextricably bound to natural law rights of the people—those that are enumerated in the first Eight Amendments of the Bill of Rights, and those unenumerated rights as exemplified in the Ninth Amendment. Recall that the Antifederalists demanded that the U.S. Constitution provide explicit expression of the rights of the American people. The Federalists objected, concerned that, if a Bill of Rights delineated a set certain of specific rights, then a strong, centralized “federal” government might henceforth claim, one day, the natural rights of the American people must be limited to the rights specifically enumerated only, and they must ever refrain from asserting an unalienable right that has not been enumerated.But, the Antifederalists, for their part, knew that, if natural law rights of the people were not explicitly etched in stone, then a strong, centralized federal government could, and would, eventually, invariably, one day, deny, to the people, exercise of any right that government did not deign to bestow directly onto them. Tyranny is the natural state of Government. The history of the actions of governments, regimes, and empires against the populace, going back to antiquity, is laden with evidence of that. The very struggle of America’s colonists, the Nation’s first Patriots, attests to the tenacity, voraciousness, and virulence of Tyranny. It was only through a mighty struggle that America’s first Patriots, through strength of will and force of arms, were able to extricate themselves from the morass of tyranny. But having won their hard-fought freedom, the question remained how to preserve that freedom against tyranny that would, from time to time, invariably rear its ugly head.The Antifederalists’ concern has been shown to be entirely reasonable and justified. For, even as founders of a new Nation struggled to construct a Government that would be able to resist intrusion of future tyranny, they knew that tyranny would always sit at the doorstep to the Nation. They were well aware that the forces that they had defeated would soon resume the conflict and the Nation’s Patriots must have contemplated the next attempt to insinuate tyranny would be surreptitious and devious. Assisted from the outside, malevolent forces would subvert the will of the people from the inside. So, with great care and industry did the founders construct a Federal Government—a Government deemed necessary, but, paradoxically, dangerous to freedom and liberty. And, that prescient concern is now coming to fruition, over two centuries later. But even a carefully constructed Federal Government—one of limited powers and defined checks and balances—is of itself insufficient to prevent tyranny.The shadowy, sinister Destroyers of our Nation, operating through their obsequious toadies—those of an innately evil bent, or, those emotionally and spiritually weak, and, so, amenable to corrupting influences—have, through substantial effort in time, money, and organization, come close to exacting revenge against the Nation after suffering a disastrous defeat in the American Revolution of 1776. The only hope for America to preserve the gain of freedom won through a Revolution fought more than two centuries ago, is to hold tight to their natural law rights—those rights that the would-be destroyers of our Nation, both inside and outside the Country, have struggled mightily to constrain. These forces know full well that, as long, as Americans have the capacity and will to exercise their natural God-given rights, the Nation cannot fall. And these forces that crush entire nations have made substantial inroads against in their effort to undercut and, in one case, even curtail exercise of some of those rights.The Antifederalists’ concern has been shown to be entirely reasonable and justified. For, even as founders of a new Nation struggled to construct a Government that would be able to resist intrusion of future tyranny, they knew that tyranny would always sit at the doorstep to the Nation. They understood the forces that they had defeated would soon resume the conflict. And the Nation’s Patriots must have contemplated the next attempt to insinuate tyranny would be surreptitious and devious. Assisted from the outside, they contemplated that malevolent forces would attempt to subvert the will of the people from the inside. The only hope for America to preserve the gain of freedom won through a Revolution fought more than two centuries ago, is to hold tight to their natural law rights—those rights that the would-be destroyers of our Nation, both inside and outside the Country, have struggled mightily to constrain. These forces know full well that, as long, as Americans have the capacity and will to exercise their natural God-given rights, the Nation cannot fall. Yet, these forces that crush entire nations have made substantial inroads against this Nation in their effort to undercut and, in one case, even curtail exercise of some of those natural law rights.Americans have all but lost the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. The attack on the fundamental rights of free speech and the freedom of association (an attendant right of freedom of speech) are under siege, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, and has been, for decades, under vigorous assault. Had these rights not been explicitly delineated, the American people would have lost, long ago, any vestige of their once free Constitutional Republic. Those who presently control Congress and the vast and powerful police, military, and judicial apparatuses of the Executive Branch of Government do not accept the reality and legitimacy of natural law rights. They categorically reject any notion of laws that stand beyond their power to create, modify, and rescind at will. Thus, the Bill of Rights, a set of natural law rights, existent in man before the inception of Government, serves as a perpetual annoyance for them.The Antifederalists dealt with the thorny issue presented by the Federalists, among them—those who were against the creation of an express, but limited, set of natural law rights—by adding a Ninth Amendment. The Ninth Amendment states, plainly and succinctly that,“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”The very presence of the Ninth Amendment buttresses the ineluctability of the first Eight. And the presence of the first Eight points to the illimitability and impenetrability of the essence of the Divine Creator. Through time, the Divine Creator will manifest through man further obligatory, eternal natural law rights that, at present rest, behind the veil of inscrutability that further elucidate the sanctity and inviolability of man’s Spirit and Soul.And what are the American people to make of the Tenth Amendment? The Tenth Amendment says,“‘The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.’ The Tenth Amendment is the principal expression of federalism, an assertion that the Federal Government shares power and authority with the States and the people. But it is also an expression of autonomy and sovereignty of the people over Government, both State and Federal. This idea, rarely mentioned, is, nonetheless, made explicit in Justice Clarence Thomas’ well-reasoned and amplified dissent in the case, United States Term Limits vs. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1994).The case involved whether the people of Arkansas can amend their State Constitution concerning the State’s electoral process. In a close decision, the majority opinion, penned by now retired Associate Justice John Paul Stevens, and joined by Associate Justices, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, ruled the people of Arkansas do not have that right. Chief Justice Rehnquist, and Associate Justices Scalia, O’Connor, and Thomas vociferously disagreed. Discussing Justice Thomas’ reasoning, who penned the dissent, the author of the law review note writes, in pertinent part,The author of the law review note writes, of Thomas:“Thomas contends that all power stems from the people of the states and that ‘reserved’ powers therefore include all those not specifically granted to the federal government in the Constitution. . . . Justice Thomas reasons that the ultimate source of the Constitution's authority is the consent of the people of each individual state. Further, ‘because the people of the several States are the only true source of power . . . the Federal Government enjoys no authority beyond what the Constitution confers: the Federal Government's powers are limited and enumerated.’ The remainder of the people's powers not specifically granted to the federal government through the Constitution is therefore either delegated to state governments or retained by the people.” “Term Limits and the Tenth Amendment: The Popular Sovereignty Model of Reserved Powers, 29 Loy. L.A. L. Review 1163 (April 1996).Although this topic of elections and electoral process would seem abstruse as discussed in the above-referenced law review note, it is of paramount importance in the upcoming midterm elections in November 2022, and it has implications for the rights of the American people.It all boils down to this:The would-be Destroyers of the Nation realize that they need a few more years to complete their agenda—an agenda that involves further destabilization of society, dissolution of the Nation’s institutions, eradication of all memory of the Nation’s rich and vibrant history, heritage, culture and Christian ethical system, and the dismantling of the Republic for eventual inclusion of the remains of the Country into a supra-transnational governmental structure embracing the world. But these Destructors need time. And to obtain time, they must maintain firm control over the electoral process in the upcoming election. The liberal wing of the U.S. Supreme Court knows this to be true, as well, and their rulings in the Arkansas case suggests a desire to defeat the doctrine of Federalism, underlying the Tenth Amendment, and their rulings also underscore the liberal-wing’s contempt for any notion that the American people are, have been, and remain the sole true sovereign over all Government, State and Federal, and down to the municipal level.Anti-American forces have already stolen one U.S. Election, undermining the great strides made during the Trump years to impede the Clinton/Bush/Obama Globalist agenda that had severely weakened the security of the Nation and undermined the sovereignty of the American people.Americans must not allow these malignant forces to waylay the 2022 midterm elections, as well.___________________________________

THE PUPPET BIDEN CALLS AMERICANS THE GREATEST THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES! IS THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF INCITING VIOLENCE AGAINST THE CITIZENRY?

It is one thing to presuppose the need for undertaking stringent matters to protect the Nation and its citizenry against foreign terrorists, as for example, after the 9/11 Attacks by Islamic Terrorists—likely with a little help from collaborators on “the inside”—true. And likely they received a little help from collaborators on “the inside”—also true. Even so, it is quite another thing to contemplate a rogue, tyrannical Federal Government that would dare posit the presence of a far greater threat that the American citizenry poses to the well-being of the Nation. But, didn't, the swine, Joe Biden, do just that? Didn’t he make just an absurd claim? This is what he said——“White supremacist terrorism is the deadliest threat to the United States, President Joe Biden told lawmakers Wednesday night as he aimed to pivot from the country's post-9/11 foreign fights to one at home.‘Make no mistake. In 20 years, terrorism has metastasized. The threat has evolved beyond Afghanistan,’ Biden said, describing the lingering threats of the Islamic State and al Qaeda before warning of a new war in Americans' backyard.‘We won't ignore what our intelligence agencies have determined to be the most lethal terrorist threat to our homeland today: White supremacy is terrorism,’ Biden said. ‘We’re not going to ignore that either.’ See the Washington Examiner article, titled, “White supremacy ‘most lethal’ threat to America, Biden says”, published on April 28, 2021. And, on that, score the decrepit, treacherous, demented Biden has acted true to word. The DOJ/FBI Attorney General lackey, Merrick Garland, has dutifully complied. In a later Washington Examiner follow-up article, titled, “Justice Department creates new domestic terrorism unit to target wave of violent extremists,” published very recently, on January 11, 2022,“A Justice Department official on Tuesday announced the formation of a specialized unit to combat domestic terrorism, saying investigations into violent extremism have skyrocketed.FBI investigations into domestic terrorism cases have more than doubled since March 2020, and the new unit will augment the department’s existing approach to prosecuting those crimes, said Assistant Attorney General Matthew Olsen, who leads the department’s National Security Division.‘This group of dedicated attorneys will focus on the domestic terrorism threat, helping to ensure these cases are handled properly and effectively coordinated across the Department of Justice and across the country,’ he said at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.Justice officials said the new focus on domestic terrorism does not target groups based on their political leanings, but they identified one of the biggest threats coming from citizen militias.Tuesday’s hearing was part of a steady drumbeat in Washington raising concerns of a growing domestic terrorism threat in the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol attack.‘The insurrection should be a wake-up call,’ said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Richard J. Durbin, Illinois Democrat. ‘A reminder that America is still confronted with the age-old menace that’s taken on a new life in the 21st century: terror from White supremacists, militia members and other extremists who use violence to further their twisted agenda.’He echoed President Biden, who has vowed not to let right-wing extremists put ‘a dagger at the throat of democracy.’Over the summer, President Biden announced a sweeping strategy to deal with the threat, which the administration said largely ‘emerges from racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists and networks whose racial, ethnic, or religious hatred leads them towards violence.’The Department of Homeland Security deemed the threat of ‘racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists’ a ‘national threat priority.’ The FBI announced in November that it has 2,700 open investigations of domestic extremism.‘The threat posed by domestic terrorism is on the rise,’ Mr. Olsen told the Senate panel.” The reader will note that even as “Justice officials [disingenuously quip that] the new focus on domestic terrorism does not target groups based on their political leanings, [yet, in the same breath they are quick to point out that the new special domestic terrorism unit has] identified one of the biggest threats coming from citizen militias.” By ‘citizen militias’ the reader can be damn-well sure that the DOJ/FBI isn't planning on using its new domestic terrorism unit to investigate, hound, harass, and intimidate Radical Leftist Neo-Marxist and Anarchist groups like Black Lives Matter and Antifa and why should they. Those groups serve the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists: assisting in them, actively and avidly undermining the Nation’s institutions and in destabilizing society in furtherance of the penultimate goal of destroying a free Constitutional Republic so that the ultimate goal can be achieved: inserting the remains of a once great independent and sovereign nation-state into a Neo-Feudalistic post-nation-state super world empire structure.The use of the expression, ‘citizen militias’ is a dead giveaway. As for the Radical Marxist/Anarchist groups—these groups are given a pass, precisely because they assist, knowingly or not, the aim of the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist puppet-masters, to destabilize American society, to make way for a new post-nation-state transnational global world order. See the article in RationalWiki, on the Leftist ADL website, and on the rabid radical Left Southern Poverty Law Center website.The expressions ‘militia group’ and ‘militia movement’ are tied, traditionally, innocuously, non-pejoratively, to any group that happens to support the Bill of Rights and a free Constitutional Republic that the Founders bequeathed to us. They exemplify the right and the need for an armed citizenry to protect and preserve a free Republic.But, of late, these expressions—as played by the Federal Government, and by a compliant and sympathetic seditious Press, and by sympathetic cable and broadcast “news” and commentary stations and by sympathetic social media companies—carry pejorative connotations. The expressions ‘militia group’ and ‘militia movement’ allude to racism and bigotry, and to white supremacism. And, that explains the impetus for the rabid and rapacious attacks by the Neo-Marxist-Neoliberal Globalist-controlled Government, by the Legacy Press, by social media companies, by academia, and by various sundry Radical Left groups, against these“militia groups.”Even the seemingly centrist legacy newspaper, “The Wall Street Journal,” in an article, published on October 10, 2020, titled, “What are Militias and are They Legal,”Even the seemingly centrist legacy newspaper, “The Wall Street Journal,” in an article, published on October 10, 2020, titled, “What are Militias and are They Legal,” demonstrates a proclivity for viewing America's militia groups in an altogether negative light, treating them as right-wing terror groups. In so doing the newspaper lends at least tacit support for the Government’s undertaking of unlawful, predatory assaults on American citizens' lawful exercise of their First and Second Amendment rights of speech, association, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms.Those groups recognize that a Free Constitutional Republic can only exist where the Sovereign American people can exercise their rights. And it is in the core exercise of the First and Second Amendment rights—the First Amendment directed to the fundamental, natural, immutable, illimitable, eternal, and absolute right of free discourse and free thought, and of free association with like-minded individuals, uninhibited and unrestrained and constrained by Government and by other men who might harbor discontent, wariness, and resentment toward the idea of the uninhibited, unrestrained and unconstrained expression of one's individual Selfhood that some individuals and the present Government happen to take exception to; and the Second Amendment directed to the uninhibited, unrestrained, unconstrained exercise of one's fundamental, unalienable, immutable, illimitable, eternal, and absolute right of armed self-defense that enables one to effectively thwart any and all attempts by the predatory man, the predatory creature, or a predatory Government.The raison d’être of citizen militias is the protection and preservation of a free Constitutional Republic as understood and defined by the Founders of that Republic. And, it is in that fact, alone, that the interloper Harris-Biden puppet Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist Administration and the puppet Pelosi/Schumer/McConnel Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist-controlled Congress perceive an imminent threat to their survival; their tyranny. And, in a manner, this fraudulent Government is correct in that perception. The present Government is an abomination. It has usurped the sovereign power of the American people; pompously flaunts and flourishes illicitly gained powers, flagrantly and blatantly defies the dictates of U.S. Statute and the dictates of the U.S. Constitution; shamelessly lies to the American people. The economy is in disarray. This sham Government has cast the Southern Border wide open to hundreds of thousands of poverty-stricken and sickly illegal aliens from over a hundred and fifty countries that pose a physical and economic threat to the security of the Nation. It wantonly left to Islamic Terrorists in Afghanistan, billions of dollars of state-of-the-art weaponry, and has brought thousands of unvetted alien savages into the interior of the Country. This sham Government has nakedly exploited the Communist Chinese Coronavirus to destroy small businesses, disrupt the education of our youth, and unlawfully exert control over the lives of individuals. And, most ominously, this sham Government has, now, of late, threatened Global Thermonuclear war against a massively powerful nuclear power, Russia, over an aberrant, corrupt Country that sits on Russia's border, the Ukraine, whose existence has absolutely no vital, strategic, national security interest to this Country.If this Country's myriad failed policies were due to gross, criminal incompetence alone, that fact alone would constitute reason enough to commence impeachment/treason proceedings against a myriad number of Government Administrative officials and to consider a complete revamping of the Executive and Legislative Branches of the Federal Government. The sad fact is that this sham Government's policies have been specifically designed to destroy the political, social, economic, cultural, and juridical structure of the Country. And the extent of the treachery across the Government is so pervasive in scale and so devastating in its intensity as to defy any attempt by anyone to reasonably, seriously deny it.An incurious insouciance of this Harris-Biden Administration toward all of this debacle unmasks the truth. In one year this Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist Government has opened this Country to catastrophe on all critical indices. This Government is nothing more than a tool of shadowy and powerful forces bent on destabilizing society and destroying the very foundations of a free Constitutional Republic. The Government has itself become the mechanism of the Nation’s own destruction—the vehicle for the dissolution of a free Republic and mortification of the American citizenry. The citizen militia movements know this. They hold fast to the sacred principle grounded in cherishing of the Right of Personal Selfhood—in sanctifying the Right of the Individual to be Individual in the face of a Tyrannical Government and of psychopathic predatory actors whom this Tyrant use. They have sworn an oath to their bestial gods to eradicate the very idea of the sanctity and inviolability of the individual Soul and Spirit. The citizen militia movements know this. They hold fast to the sacred principle grounded in cherishing of the Right of Personal Selfhood—in sanctifying the Right of the Individual TO BE Individual in the face of a Tyrannical Government and of predatory men and predatory groups whose sworn purpose is to kill the idea of the sanctity and inviolability of the individual Soul and Spirit. _______________________________

THE GOVERNMENT’S ATTACK ON CITIZEN MILITIAS IS AN OBLIQUE ATTACK ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT

In treating citizen militia groups as domestic terrorist organizations, this tyrannical Government has created a false chimera to delude the public about these groups. This sham Government intends to springboard off its attack on militia groups to target tens of millions of gun owners. For it is indeed the armed citizenry—this citizen army—that does serve as a threat to a Tyrant, as well that citizen army should.The dire situation facing the Nation today is the inverse of one that prompted one legal scholar and military officer to write, over twenty years ago——“In 1998, Americans were exposed to the specter of martial law in the form of a hit movie, ‘The Siege.’ The movie vividly depicted the aftermath of a terrorist attack on New York City where the government declared martial law and rounded up thousands of Arab-Americans and put them in internment camps. Unfortunately, at some time in the future, life may imitate art and America's experience with martial law may extend outside the movie theater into reality. It seems obvious that a number of anti-American groups exist both within and without our borders that would not hesitate to employ terrorism and other tactics that could result in upheaval and, perhaps, anarchy within our country. The circumstances that would prompt a declaration of martial law are so horrendous that they are almost beyond contemplation. But that dreadful eventuality should not translate into a lack of preparation, for if the nation is prepared, it is less likely to fear even the most awful possibilities. Those who worry about the profound legal, moral and social implications of declaring martial law must seriously contemplate Thomas Jefferson’s insightful words:‘A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means . . . The officer who is called to act on this superior ground, does indeed risk himself on the justice of the controlling powers of the Constitution, and his station makes it his duty to incur that risk . . . . The line of discrimination between cases may be difficult; but the good officer is bound to draw it at his own peril, and throw himself on the justice of his country and the rectitude of his motives.’” “The Imposition of Martial Law In The United States,” 49 A.F. L. Rev. 67, (2000), by Major Kirk L. Davies, Chief of Operations Law in the Office of the Staff Judge Advocate, 16th Air Force, Aviano AB, Italy.Necessity and Self-Preservation inform Thomas Jefferson's consideration that, perhaps, the U.S. Constitution might, in theory, one day, need be suspended if the threat to the continued existence of the Country as a free Constitutional Republic were sufficiently severe. On that score, Jefferson is wrong. Under no circumstances ought, under a Deontological ethical theory of morality, suspension of the Constitution—which would, thus, mean, suspension of the Bill of Rights—ever be warranted. It is anathema because it is the sovereign authority of the people in whom the Country as a free Constitutional Republic exists. Suspension of the Nation's Bill of Rights is tantamount to the destruction of the very Republic that Thomas Jefferson, as cited by the author of the afore referenced article talks about preserving. Be that as it may, the dire situation facing the Nation today springs from a Government that operates contra to the Constitution and exists for no purpose other than to destroy a free Republic, i.e., to destroy a sovereign American people. Tyranny of Government=_dfTreason By Government.The American people have no duty to suffer a Government whose very existence is directed to the destruction of a free Constitutional Republic, ergo destruction of the sovereignty of the American people over Government. And in that regard and given the fact that the very presence of this imposter—a senile, corrupt, flaccid, incompetent placeholder of a hidden ruthless force—occupying the Executive Branch of Government, as Chief Executive, is the face of an immense, elaborate and diabolical fraud perpetrated on the American people, the American people have a right and the concomitant responsibility to voice vociferous objection to the inanity observed. But, no armed resistance should be effectuated against this Harris-Biden Administration until or unless the Administration itself initiates action against the American people. And what kind of action on the part of this sham Government against the people would amount to an act necessitating active resistance would be if the Administration were to issue a state of emergency culminating in the declaration of martial law suspending exercise of the fundamental, natural rights including most specifically, the suspension of the right of dissent against the Government coupled with the nationwide suspension of the right of the citizenry to keep and bear arms. Nothing like that has ever occurred in the history of the Country, not during world wars, nor even during the American Civil War, apart from Lincoln's declaration of suspension of Habeas Corpus, which was a radical and arguably illegal action on the part of Lincoln's Government. And that suspension of Habeas Corpus was rightfully criticized. Compare Lincoln's reprehensible action to the recent unlawful detention of American citizens ostensibly predicated on rioting at or in the U.S. Capitol Building on January 6, 2021, including allegations of beatings of detainees during unlawful detention. See, e.g., May 2021 article on this in The American Spectator. And, nary a voice complains in the Press, or in Congress. Even Republicans have remained oddly and painfully silent. Is there not sound and valid evidence of violations of the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments of the U.S Constitution, and evidence of de facto suspension of Habeas Corpus here? Pelosi's January 6 Star Chamber Commission is ongoing. See article in The Spectator. Yet, Congressional Republicans haven't demanded investigations of numerous and serious allegations of violations of the Constitutional rights of American citizens apropos of the January 6, 2021 incident. In fact, for all the hoopla surrounding violations of American citizens' Constitutional Rights, Pelosi dismisses those deep concerns out-of-hand. And she demonstrates something palpably more than mere reluctance about sharing with the public all available and pertinent January 6 video evidence and emails—including, no doubt, her own emails—that would certainly shed more, and likely ALL, light, on what truly inspired events of that day. On February 2022, Judicial Watch pointed out, disconcertingly, albeit, unsurprisingly, as reported infra, Nancy Pelosi's unconscionable attempt to hide what can only be described as damning, and likely exculpatory, evidence that, if released would not only serve to exonerate the actions of the defendants but would serve to implicate herself and many of her cohorts. “Judicial Watch announced that it filed an opposition to the U.S. Capitol Police’s (USCP) effort to shut down Judicial Watch’s federal lawsuit for January 6 videos and emails. Through its police department, Congress argues that the videos and emails are not public records, there is no public interest in their release, and that ‘sovereign immunity’ prevents citizens from suing for their release.Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit under the common law right of access after the Capitol Police refused to provide any records in response to a January 21, 2021, request (Judicial Watch v. United States Capitol Police (No. 1:21-cv-00401)). Judicial Watch asks for:

Email communications between the U.S. Capitol Police Executive Team and the Capitol Police Board concerning the security of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The timeframe of this request is from January 1, 2021 through January 10, 2021.

Email communications of the Capitol Police Board with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security concerning the security of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The timeframe of this request is from January 1, 2021through January 10, 2021.

All video footage from within the Capitol between 12 pm and 9 pm on January 6, 2021

Congress exempts itself from the Freedom of Information Act. Judicial Watch, therefore, brought its lawsuit under the common law right of access to public records. In opposing the broad assertion of secrecy, Judicial Watch details Supreme Court and other precedents that upholds the public’s right to know what “their government is up to:”‘In ‘ “the courts of this country’— including the federal courts—the common law bestows upon the public a right of access to public records and documents” … “the Supreme Court was unequivocal in stating that there is a federal common law right of access ‘to inspect and copy public records and documents.’ ” . . . ‘[T]he general rule is that all three branches of government, legislative, executive, and judicial, are subject to the common law right.” The right of access is “a precious common law right . . . that predates the Constitution itself.’The Court of Appeals for this circuit has recognized that ‘openness in government has always been thought crucial to ensuring that the people remain in control of their government. . . .’ ‘Neither our elected nor our appointed representatives may abridge the free flow of information simply to protect their own activities from public scrutiny. An official policy of secrecy must be supported by some legitimate justification that serves the interest of the public office.’‘The Pelosi Congress (and its police department) is telling a federal court it is immune from all transparency under law and is trying to hide every second of its January 6 videos and countless emails,’ stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. ‘The hypocrisy is rich, as this is the same Congress that is trying to jail witnesses who, citing privileges, object to providing documents to the Pelosi rump January 6 committee.’In November 2021 Judicial Watch revealed multiple audio, visual photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Ashli Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records include a cell phone video of the shooting and audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Lt. Michael Byrd. In October, Judicial Watch released records, showing that multiple officers claimed they didn’t see a weapon in Babbitt’s hand before Byrd shot her, and that Byrd was visibly distraught afterward. One officer attested that he didn’t hear any verbal commands before Byrd shot Babbitt.Also in November, Judicial Watch filed a response in opposition to the Department of Justice’s effort to block Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit asking for records of communication between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and several financial institutions about the reported transfer of financial transaction records of people in DC, Maryland and Virginia on January 5 and January 6, 2021. Judicial Watch argues that Justice Department should not be allowed to shield ‘improper activity.’”Let us hope the Third Branch of our Federal Government has not been corrupted to the extent of the First and Second Branches, and that unethical conduct and outright crimes will be available to the public. It is only through complete disclosure and transparency of unethical and outright illegal conduct of Congressional Legislators and their staff, and of the unethical and illegal conduct of high-level Executive Department Officials and Officers, that these horrible people may yet be brought to account for their criminal behavior—that our Federal Government may yet be salvaged, for the sake of our Constitution and for the American citizenry.One would have to go back to the days prior to Nationhood when the British attempted to confiscate the colonists' arms. This may not have been the singular match that lit the powder keg starting the American War for Independence, but it certainly was one of the major reasons. See the article titled, “Gun Control and the American Revolution,” by the Second Amendment scholar, David Kopel, published on the website, Guns&Tactics. The article commences, thus——“This Article reviews the British gun control program that precipitated the American Revolution: the 1774 import ban on firearms and gunpowder; the 1774-75 confiscations of firearms and gunpowder; and the use of violence to effectuate the confiscations. It was these events that changed a situation of political tension into a shooting war. Each of these British abuses provides insights into the scope of the modern Second Amendment.Furious at the December 1773 Boston Tea Party, Parliament in 1774 passed the Coercive Acts. The particular provisions of the Coercive Acts were offensive to Americans, but it was the possibility that the British might deploy the army to enforce them that primed many colonists for armed resistance. The Patriots of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, resolved: ‘That in the event of Great Britain attempting to force unjust laws upon us by the strength of arms, our cause we leave to heaven and our rifles.’ A South Carolina newspaper essay, reprinted in Virginia, urged that any law that had to be enforced by the military was necessarily illegitimate.”See also article in the Morning Call.The insidious thing about present-day events is that the shadowy forces that seek to destroy this Nation and, hence, the sovereignty of the American people, have deviously, surreptitiously attacked the Nation and its people and the Nation's Constitution from within. They have employed corrupt treacherous instruments of tyranny to betray the Nation. Under the pretense of serving the Country and its people by the very fact of being Office-holders, these characters have been betraying the Country and its people, implementing policies, prepared for them by outside, powerful, ruthless elements. All of these policies are aimed at destroying the Country. Some of these policies can be seen in U.N. compacts and position papers that Congress has never signed onto, such as the Open Borders policies. The policies are inconsistent with U.S. law. The Biden Administration has implemented them anyway. And then blatantly lies about such policies, claiming the Borders are closed. And, yet two million illegal aliens have skipped through our Borders since the Great Imposter, Joe Biden, took Office. And tens, even hundreds, of thousands more, are even now, making their way through Panama to the Southern Boundary of the U.S.The sole purpose of this Harris-Biden Administration is to serve as a convenient cover for the true powers, running the Government. It is they who feed their toady, Biden, and his Cabinet officers and other high-ranking Executive Branch officials with their marching orders—policies and initiatives designed to hobble and destroy a free Republic under the guise of serving it.But Americans still have a chance to salvage their Country and their sovereignty in whom a free Constitutional Republic resides. And many Americans are waking up to the possibility that all is not lost. Americans can still prevail if they do not allow themselves to be dissuaded by the plethora of false messaging, and continue to hold fast to their faith in themselves, and in the one True God, and in our Nation’s sacred history, heritage, and core Christian values.______________________________

AMERICAN CULTURE REQUIRES AN ARMED CITIZENRY TO GUARD AGAINST THE TYRANNY OF GOVERNMENT

It is our hope that the richness and vibrancy of our Nation—a free Republic, gained at great personal risk taken by and great personal sacrifice made by the Nation’s first Patriots, through the American Revolution Of 1776—will long be preserved. And it is our fervent hope that the blood spilled by American Patriots in the decades and centuries since, to keep our Nation strong and true to the words set in stone in our Nation’s founding documents, will not have been in vain.As in those decades and centuries past, Americans living today now see that they need not sit idly by, passively resigned to the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist world post-nation-state feudal empire, ruled by Communist China and those in the employ of the Rothschild Banking dynasty, such as George Soros. That nightmarish world need not come to pass. But, even the millions of “liberal-minded” Americans are beginning to realize that, for far too long, they have been played for fools. They are finally coming to their senses. They clearly see what is at stake. They have, at long last, awakened from their long slumber that all-encompassing, and thoroughly noxious psychological conditioning has coaxed them into. And the stirring of Americans en masse is not lost on the Nation’s would-be Destroyers. They know the jig is up, and it scares the hell out of them.Americans are beginning to realize that, for far too long, they have been played for fools. They are finally coming to their senses. They clearly see what is at stake. They are at long last awakening from the long slumber that the propagandists have coaxed them into. And that isn't lost on the Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist would-be destroyers of the Nation either. They, too, are cognizant that the jig is up, and it scares the hell out of them.Of course, those in America’s militia movement were never fooled by the game plan of the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists; were never taken in by it. So, naturally, they were and are vigorously attacked for their opposition to it, and are treated as the primary instigators of it. The enemies of our Nation will not abide the militia movement; will have none of it; are dead-set against it, and are chastising those who happen to champion it.Back in 2020, the corrupting, malignant Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist forces constantly blared out that Trump is a threat to “liberal democracy.” The New York Times was and still is one of the primary pipe organs of the forces that crush. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/22/opinion/liberals-conservatives-trump-america.html. Yet, even with Trump out-of-office, which came about only through massive unethical and unlawful engineering of the 2020 U.S. Presidential election, these malignant, malevolent forces are still at it, bemoaning the threat to “liberal democracy” by everyone and everything that pushes back against them. And the pushback is strong and enormous; for the aims of the corruptors of a free Constitutional Republic are crystalizing, becoming noticeable, too obvious for any American to rationally deny. And these Americans, of a liberal mindset, don’t like what they are seeing; don’t like what is taking shape before their eyes. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/16/world/americas/democracy-decline-worldwide.htm, Americans Do recognize that theirs is an “American Culture” to have and to hold. And Americans Do see that malevolent forces Do exist and Do intend to crush both it and them into submission. But what is this thing, ‘American Culture,’ that America’s enemies erroneously scorn and mock as a ‘Gun Culture?’ How is ‘American Culture,’ identified?It is identified by and exemplified through the Bill of Rights—a codification of elemental Natural law Rights and Liberties residing intrinsically in Man. The keystone and epitome of “American Culture” Is Freedom: Freedom Of Thought; Freedom Of Action; Freedom Of Will And Spirit; the Right of the Individual to be Individual, free from Government encroachment and coercion.American Culture takes as axiomatic—self-evident true—the existence of a body of Natural Law Rights and Liberties that emanate from an infinite benevolent and morally perfect Divine Creator. This means Natural Law Rights and Liberties exist intrinsically in man, bestowed on and in Man by the Divine Creator. These Rights and Liberties are not constructs created by Man through an operation of Government, and it is an error to think it so. The Nation’s Bill of Rights comprises a set of fundamental, unalienable, immutable, illimitable, eternal Rights and Liberties. The laws laid down in the Bill of Rights are not all-inclusive, as the Ninth Amendment of the Bill of Rights makes abundantly clear.Nonetheless, the salient Natural Rights and Liberties are explicitly set forth in the Bill of Rights.These sacred Rights and Liberties serve as both a constant reminder and warning to those serving in Government that they are servants of the American people and that the Federal Government—as all Government—operates at the exclusive pleasure of the American people and exists for no purpose other than to serve the interests of the American people. Government is nothing more than a manmade contrivance, an artificial device that must cease to exist once it fails to recognize or fails to remember for whom it exists to serve.All Natural Rights are ultimately subsumed in and encapsulated in the Second Amendment Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms—a right that is absolute and SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. That Right is itself subsumed in the fundamental Right of self-defense—the cornerstone of the fundamental Right of Autonomy that exemplifies the sanctity and inviolability of the Soul—the seat of Man's Free Will.A Government of limited Power and Authority and a set of unlimited Rights and Liberties are the building blocks upon which true American Culture is built and in which it has, since the inception of the Republic, resided.Our Constitution is the blueprint for and the foundation for——

A free Republic;
An independent, sovereign Nation-State; and,
A free, independent, sovereign people.

It is this Constitution which the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists both here and abroad contemptuously scorn and constantly deride through such pejorative descriptors as ‘old,’ ‘outmoded,’ ‘antiquated,’ ‘archaic,’ ‘anachronistic,’ ‘out of touch with international law and international norms,’ ‘inconsistent with the constitutions of other countries.’ In fact, our Constitution is unique and that is a good thing—it is the very thing that allowed this Nation to become the most prosperous, powerful Nation on Earth. So, then, why would the Neo-Marxists consider this to be such a bad thing?In truth, it is the very success of the United States on all important indices that Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists find frustratingly, extraordinarily difficult to attack in any convincing manner. So they create fiction, fairy tales, fanciful horror stories in their unconscionable attempt to convince Americans that the Country is inherently evil—that the Nation was conceived and constructed on the backs of African slaves and indigenous American Natives. By postulating that the Republic is inherently immoral, these ingrates attempt to convince Americans that the Nation ought not to continue to exist in its present form; that it never deserved to exist.The dogma thus created is nothing but a façade, a cloak, a disguise to mask the Neo-Marxists deep-seated antipathy toward, even loathing, of the very success of America for over 200 years of its existence as a free Constitutional Republic. But these Neo-Marxists are able to tap into an inexhaustible supply of money made available to them through over 200 George Soros-connected organizations and these Soros organizations have slowly, inexorably attacked the very underpinnings of America’s institutions. And, the more secretive Rothschild network lurks above the Soros organizations, unseen, but the Rothschild tentacles are vast. They are everywhere and their negative impact is felt deeply in the United States. See, e.g., articles in Stillness in the Storm, and American Patriot Contact Tracers.Major News Organizations that have not sold their souls to the Neo-Marxist internationalists and the Neoliberal Globalists need to be more outspoken about the threat these ruthless elements pose to the Nation. Some commentators, such as Tucker Carlson of Fox News, have demonstrated courage just to mention George Soros, by name, explicitly, as a singular danger to our free Constitutional Republic, which Soros is. News publications such as Epoch Times, the New York Post, and The Washington Times have done their part, but they need to do more.Soros, after all, isn’t operating in a vacuum. Both he and the major technology companies are working in concert through a much larger and shadowy network of destructive influences across the globe that are dead set on destroying the nation-state paradigm. More investigative work needs to be done. The fate of the western world hinges on the strength of the American people to remain true to their Constitution—and, especially, to their Bill of Rights and never doubt for a moment the absolute importance of keeping and bearing arms. For only through an armed citizenry can a free Republic and Sovereign people truly expect to survive. A transglobal world empire cannot be accomplished without the inclusion of the resources of the United States. It is for this reason the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists have spent so much time, money, and organizational effort to undermine the Country. Americans must see to it that these ruthless forces do not succeed.While many of the forces behind the effort to destroy the Nation cannot be easily discerned, absent serious investigation, the negative effects, and impact of the assault and treachery on our Nation, the Constitution, and people cannot be reasonably, rationally denied. Consider:

Release of the Chinese Communist Coronavirus into the Country

Massive Electoral Fraud Perpetrated on the American people in the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election, and deceitfully, incessantly Denied by a Seditious Press

Misapplication or Outright Dismissal of the Dictates of Law and Constitution by both the present Administration and by the Pelosi/Schumer run Congress

Illegal Usurpation of the Sovereign Authority of the American Citizenry over the Federal Government

Incessant and Blatant Lies and Deceit to Cover up the Emasculation of the Country’s Military

Unlawful Commandeering of DOJ/FBI, Military, and Intelligence Apparatuses of the Nation by the Administrative Deep State to Target Innocent Americans

Illegal Attempts by the puppet Harris-Biden Administration to Federalize State Electoral Systems; State Education Systems; and State and Local Police Forces

Unlawful Commandeering of U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Department and Department of Labor’s OSHA to implement an Authoritarian Regime over the American People in defiance of the Bill of Rights and in contradistinction to the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Illegal Suspension of Habeas Corpus in violation of the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution

Treating Serious Gun Crimes committed by Common Criminals as misdemeanors (reported in the western journal)

Bombastic Threat of Global Thermonuclear War against Russia over the Ukraine, that sits on Russia’s border, see International Business Times but noticeably docile over China’s Geopolitical Ambitions

And, the list goes on——The Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalist stooges in Government constantly talk of “DEMOCRACY.” They constantly banter that only the “Democrat Party” is interested in preserving DEMOCRACY in the Country, without bothering to explain how any American would object to that or to them.But, think for a moment what it is that these stooges in Government don’t bother to mention when they continuously throw out the word ‘Democracy’ and claim that they are all for it and that they are the only protectors of it. They never mention the word ‘freedom.’ And why is that? Might it be that ‘freedom’ is, after all, associated with Natural Law:“THE RIGHT OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO BE INDIVIDUAL.”Freedom is a function of the autonomy of the individual. It embodies the sanctity and inviolability of the Human Soul.Democracy as understood by the Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal stooges has nothing to do with freedom. Democracy for these detestable creatures is just a word that sounds “good” and plays well to the target audience. What they are talking about is “Direct Democracy” as Majority Rule. The Majority Rule for these stooges is associated with Mob Rule. And what is Mob Rule? Mob Rule is predicated on the idea that people, as a group, tend to operate simplistically through emotion, and emotion is susceptible to easy manipulation. Mob Rule is ascendant in our Country, pushed by the Neo-Marxist Pelosi/Schumer-led Congress. The Government doesn't talk of Mob Rule though. The Government refers to something called ‘Direct Democracy,’ but this is simply a device that makes it easy for Tyrants to control the mob. And many there are in this mob of millions that accept control by Tyrants, even relish it, as long as their minimal physical needs are met. The mob is simply a vast collection of malcontents, and idiots—the dregs of society—and always looking for handouts, as are the millions of illegal aliens that the Obstructors and Destructors of our Country are intent on utilizing to assist in erasing a free Constitutional Republic. But the mob also includes otherwise intelligent people who give too little thought to the fact of the swindlers, grifters, and sociopaths in public office who are using hard-earned taxpayer dollars to line their pockets and those of special interests and couldn't care less about the interests of the American people. And many Americans seem not to mind or assume that there is nothing they can do about any of that anyway. So they would rather indulge themselves with the fluff available to them through the agency of mass entertainment—fluff carefully orchestrated to keep them from thinking about the fate of their life, and those of their Country and Countrymen, at all.And the Government stooges understanding the usefulness of mobs, are intent on loosening voting standards to give voting rights eventually to millions of convicted felons and to millions of illegal itinerant aliens who feel beholden to a Government that will provide them safe haven, free education for their kiddies, food, lodging—free everything—all the bare necessities that will allow them to live their lives as contented little sheep.The only thing these SHEEP won’t have will be “FREEDOM”—FREEDOM OF THOUGHT, OF ACTION, AND OF WILL.But with FREEDOM—TRUE FREEDOM—comes ATTENDANT DUTY AND PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Those individuals who are slothful by nature and who otherwise are encouraged by a Government willing to give them handouts for their vote, don't care about FREEDOM and the attendant duty and responsibility that comes with real FREEDOM. They would rather forsake the sanctity of Selfhood, the Right to be left alone. They would willingly forsake THE RIGHT TO DEMAND TO BE LEFT ALONE AS RIGHT TO BE ARMED OBLIGES, IF GRUDGINGLY, BY THOSE IN GOVERNMENT. They would give up all of it for a few crumbs and trinkets—dutiful little sheep, easily coddled.Sheep prefer to have Government take care of them. It is easier to allow the Government to care of them, of their basic needs, than to invest time and effort in themselves; to take responsibility for their own life. But then such sheep eventually end up in the slaughterhouse—all of them. Yet until the last moment, sheep never give a thought to that, and when that moment does come around, as it will, as it must, it will be too late to protest, much too late, as they are left with no tenable means to defend themselves. Indeed, many will go resignedly to their deaths anyway. It would be much easier to relent than to resist. That is what they have been trained to do; what they have been conditioned to do.Intensive investigative work on these destructive forces and influences on our Nation needs to be done. But, it rests upon the will strength, and tenacity, and courage of average Americans to do this work. Don't expect this work from the Press. And don't expect help from Congress. For most of Congress is “on the take” or otherwise impotent. And that demented fool hunkered down in the Executive Suite has no more control over the Executive Branch of Government than he likely has over his own bladder and bowels. Such is the state of our Nation. Had he any sense of pride of self and dignity over himself, he would have spared both himself and the Nation from making fools of both. Alas, he does not. But the shadowy and sinister puppet-masters who have orchestrated the creation of the EU and the UN and who are orchestrating the demise of our Country are not fools. They are as crafty and intelligent as they are evil and ruthless. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the policies they have crafted and implemented to destabilize the political, social, economic, cultural, and juridical structures and institutions of the U.S. go hand-in-hand with their desire to transform the very appearance of our Nation into burlesque. From Biden and Harris right on down the line, the creatures that the puppet-masters have selected to inhabit the highest Offices of the Federal Government were not selected merely for their incompetence and for lack of any sense of personal integrity, and moral decency. No! They were carefully screened and selected to appear like the buffoons they are. A circus needs its troupe of harlequins. And, those marched out in front of the American people are calibrated to create an image on both the world stage as well as on the home front of a Nation that has devolved into a veritable “Punch and Judy” puppet show. And Americans are forced to watch this drivel and, more, to accept this shameful display to National pride as something to be emulated.From the CCP's unleashing of COVID upon the world (through the active assistance of or acquiescence of Government toadies) to the meticulously engineered creation of pseudo-English constructs and other crass and calculated strategies to induce confusion in one's thought processes; and through the investiture of a nonsense pseudo-ideology infecting the entirety of public and private U.S. institutions—this “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion”—the United States and the rest of this so-called “free world” is all the verge of collapse. And it is all part of a grand, intricate, horrific design. But, the collapse of the U.S. and of western civilization is not a fait accompli. Much depends on the indomitability of the American will and spirit to resist this mental assault on the American psyche.The fate of the western world and of our own Country hinges on the strength of the American people to consciously remain true to themselves and to trust their inner moral guide; place faith in their history, heritage, and core Christian values; and remain steadfast to the tenets and precepts and principles of Individualism upon which our Constitution rests—and remain especially true to the most important component of our Constitution: the Bill of Rights.Take as a categorical imperative, the right, the need, and, yes, dare we say, duty of the patriotic American citizen, to always keep and bear arms. For only in the exercise of that Right can a free Republic and Sovereign people truly expect to survive and prevail against the forces that crush.A transglobal world empire cannot be accomplished without the inclusion of the resources of the United States. It is for this reason the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists have spent exorbitant amounts of time, money, and organizational effort to undermine a Free Republic. But the Country is not Theirs. It is Ours. Remember that!_____________________________________________

THE PHRASES “GUN CULTURE” AND “GUN VIOLENCE” ARE NOTHING MORE THAN PROPAGANDA TOOLS TO DISTRACT AND CONFUSE THE UNWARY

PART FIVE

Anti-American propagandists have coined the expression ‘Gun Culture’ just as they have coined the phrase, ‘Gun Violence’ as propaganda devices.Malevolent, malignant forces use these coined phrases in tandem, in a deceitful attempt to generate, in the minds of suggestive members of the American public, an abhorrence of and phobia of firearms.There is a problem of “Violence,” in America, surely, but there is “Violence” in every country throughout the world.The insidious thing about violence existent in America is that it is compounded, multifold, by the fact Marxists in the Federal and State and Local Governments not only tolerate violence but actively encourage it; even commend and celebrate it. This accounts for the recent development of entirely new kinds of violence. One such is called the “smash and grab” operation. It has become so prevalent in Marxist-run Cities that it has become institutionalized. How is this possible? Take a look at this article in “The Republican Daily” for one.Neo-Marxists rationalize, even attempt to justify this imbecilic “Smash and Grab” violence. They see it as an acceptable vehicle to provide “Reparation Payments” to Blacks because Congress won’t enact laws to give tax-payer money to black Americans. But why should they? See the article in “Fleeting Freedom.”In allowing for this, Government makes fools of those blacks who take part in it.Many, if not all of these blacks, are nothing more than common criminals who, not surprisingly, have realized the great opportunity given to them by the Neo-Marxist-controlled Government. And, these people are just the sort to vote into office Neo-Marxists—as long as voting is made easy enough for them. That helps explain the Neo-Marxists' urgency to pass comprehensive voting-made-simple legislation for citizens and non-citizens alike, the latter of which shouldn't be voting anyway—but, hell, who would know if there is no mechanism to ensure the integrity of the voting process?Neo-Marxists are encouraging the worst elements of society to engage in the worst conduct. It is all part of their grand design to destabilize the Country, thus ushering in their new world order regime.Neo-Marxists have already decriminalized violence in many parts of the Country and have given meager arguments at best to support it. Perpetrators of these crimes apparently don’t realize—or otherwise are so giddy of being encouraged to engage in felonious criminal misconduct unimpeded—that they don’t care that Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist “white” elites are playing them for dupes. But there is a price tag for this behavior; a price to be paid; a day of reckoning is around the corner. If these Corruptors of America do take over the Country, they will subjugate all Americans, regardless of their race or ethnicity. to a state of abject penury, surveillance, and control.This explains why Neo-Marxists and fabulously wealthy Neoliberal Globalists, alike, are not interested in dealing with the true cause of pathological criminal violence. It is in their interest to promote such violence, consistent with their aims to tear down a free Republic, thus making way for a transformational Collectivist regime in America. And they are following through with their plan to pervert the Nation’s youth. Marxism has gone mainstream. The Destructors of society are absolutely shameless.The corrupt, alien, thoroughly detestable Black Lives Movement is actively, avidly proselytizing around the Country. And Government—our Government—celebrates it. Parents are justifiably alarmed and outraged at the presumptuousness and audaciousness at these efforts to corrupt even the most innocent of Americans—our children. Parents Defending Education are fighting back. See their web article, titled, “‘Black Lives Matter at School’ in K-12 Classrooms Nationwide in 2022.” And see Article on the same website, titled, “Denver Elementary School announces plans to instruct kindergartners and 1st graders about why it’s important to disrupt the nuclear family and be trans and queer affirming; they host racially segregated playground nights too.” These articles draw attention to the calumny of the highest order—defamation of our entire way of life.The forces that aim to dismantle a free Constitutional Republic have orchestrated, implemented, and are exploiting the violence occurring across the Country that they deliberately enabled. Their aim is to induce a rapid breakdown of law and order, in public schools, in the greater social community, in houses of worship in business, in entertainment, in Government, even down to the individual family. No area of civic or personal life is to be left untouched by the forces that desire to crush this Nation. Every sector of the economy and every institution is to be affected, thus demoralizing and destabilizing society. These malignant forces intend to scorch and burn to ashes the entirety of our Nation down to the minutest detail.Had Trump not been denied a second term in Office, this breakdown of law and order would not have occurred. It would have been stopped in its tracks, all of it; and the serious fractures and the gaping ruptures in our Nation would be repaired and the Country could commence the long healing process to both the physical body politic and the Nation's psyche. Americans would have seen a re-stabilization of society and the revival of a booming economy to replace the present stagnant disintegrating one. The free Constitutional Republic would be conserved and preserved intact. It would be the incorrigible lunatics, psychopaths, common criminal elements, and tens of millions of itinerant illegal aliens and rabid transnational criminal gangs that have been allowed to gain a foothold in our Nation that would lose out. And to that list, we could add malevolent, malignant, and rabid Neo-Marxist and Anarchist gangs and similar assorted riff-raff that would lose out.And, too, the Mega-Billionaire and Trillionaire Neoliberal Globalists would also lose out. They would be compelled to rethink and recalibrate their goal of creating a mammoth neo-feudalistic post-nation-state, transnational world empire. Thus their goal of a new world order, sans the United States, would have to wait decades or a century longer. They would not be pleased.But Trump is not in Office. Still, the desperation of the Neo-Marxists and Neo-Liberal Globalists is palpable. The public, seeing what one year of the puppet Biden has wrought, is signaling that, maybe, some voters, made a huge mistake in voting for the senile, corrupt stooge, Biden.The forces that aim to dismantle a free Constitutional Republic have orchestrated, implemented, and are exploiting the violence occurring across the Country that they deliberately enabled. Their aim is to induce a rapid breakdown of law and order, and thereby demoralize and destabilize society.The fear is readily apparent in recent articles of their propaganda tool, The New York Times. The articles have become increasingly strident, demonstrating how frantic the Neo-Marxist Democrats are to get their voting package through Congress. And it doesn't look like that is going to happen.In the most recent articles, the Times has argued how critical it is that the Senate approve the combined voting rights package that passed the house. That won’t happen unless the Senate changes its filibuster Rule. But that isn’t going to happen either. The New York Post explains:“Congressional Democrats will begin a futile bid to jam sweeping election reform through the Senate and alter its 60-vote legislative filibuster later Thursday when the House votes on a bill merging two separate voting measures.The complex effort is certain to fail due to opposition by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) to changing the filibuster rule — and a new memo from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) suggests a promised showdown vote may not happen at all.Democrats have opted to use an unrelated bill extending NASA’s property leasing authority as the vehicle to send both the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the Freedom to Vote Act to the Senate.The newly constructed measure cleared two procedural votes in the House along party lines late Wednesday and a vote on final passage is expected at midmorning Thursday.Because the original bill was already passed by the House and Senate, Schumer does not need 60 votes to open debate on the election proposals. Republicans repeatedly blocked debate in the 50-50 Senate on both the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the Freedom to Vote Act last year and none are expected to support cloture when Schumer moves to end debate.”The mega-Billionaire Neoliberal Globalist puppet-masters successfully seated their senile, corrupt, physically and emotionally wreck of a man in the Executive Branch of Government, having successfully carried out their quiet coup of the Government, these shadowy forces that crush have urged Americans to accept the explanation for and acquiesce to all of the imbecilic foreign and domestic policy blunders and failures. Many or all of these policy failures weren’t really failures at all. They were deliberately designed to weaken and destabilize the Nation, and they have.Some Americans have acquiesced to and are resigned to the loss of their Nation, or—among the most ignorant or lazy among Americans—have bought into the nonsense with little prodding. Most Americans who have originally voted for the Biden, have, though, come around to their senses, realizing they have been played for jackasses, taken in by the claim, as broadcast by the many propaganda arms in the Press and Social Media that Biden is a “Political Moderate” and will unify the Country. Never mind that the guy never campaigned even though he, as the U.S. Presidential contender, would have certainly been expected to do so. But, then, the man is a blithering idiot, his mind addled by years of dementia. Better it was to let the idiot’s many stand-ins do his campaigning for him.And, as many people were so brainwashed to fear a second term from Trump—even though they couldn’t think of anything the man did that was ever wrong for the Country, or for them personally—they mindlessly allowed themselves to be taken in by the propagandists.But most Americans who accepted a Biden Presidency as preferable to Trump, are beginning to push back, realizing their error—realizing that real autocracy lay with the Harris-Biden Administration, not with the Trump Administration. The idea that Trump was/is the Autocrat was another bit of fiction that all too many American were all too ready to believe even though a few minutes of contemplative thought would have made clear how ridiculous the notion.And many Americans are beginning to push back hard even as a few holdouts, having been early and completely seduced into accepting the Neo-Marxist propaganda, are, psychologically, too far gone to return to sanity. They have turned irrevocably into brain-damaged acolytes of the incessant nonsense propagated by the Press and the media. But is it too late, then, for the Country?The Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalists know that, when the screws tighten slowly, inexorably, the public becomes more inured to the pain and anguish. But there is a line in the sand the Government and its many friends and agents in the Press, in social media, in business and finance, in academia, and in entertainment do not yet feel confident to cross. Yet, at some point, in time, they will definitely try, as they must. And that day may be coming sooner than most Americans think. And, with the midterms rapidly approaching, and with the unlikelihood that they will get their voting package passed, without which the forces that would destroy the Country will definitely lose control of Congress in November 2022, they must go for broke.The Government must engage in the attempt at mass gun confiscation very soon. But, how will that play out? Authoritarianism has already taken root—in a way that has never existed before.Still, most Americans believe that however appalling and heinous the Government’s actions have been since Biden took Office, they will never see a day when the Government would dare demand mass confiscation of guns, let alone would the Government actually be able to accomplish it.But, then, consider: How inconceivable would the actions of the toadies in the Federal Government, and of the other assorted grovelers and lackeys operating on Government’s behalf, seem to Americans even thirty years ago if they were to imagine the breadth and depth to which authoritarianism has taken firm root in our Country today, and as it marches toward outright totalitarianism tomorrow? Americans would think it all well-nigh impossible.Much of America is in denial and has been so for many years. But that will surely change. It is changing. It must change.For, if an attitude of placid acceptance to Federal Government control over our life, or quiet acquiescence to it, or blunt obsequious groveling in the face of it, does not change, the United States, as a free Constitutional Republic, will cease to exist. The Nation will become nothing more than a small and forgotten footnote of history; not a vestige of its prior greatness would remain.And America’s descendants will never know they were once a free and powerful people, destined—through tenacity and a hard-fought war for independence from tyranny—to live and thrive in a free Constitutional Republic as sovereign rulers over Government.__________________________________________

THE NEO-MARXIST AGENDA REVOLVES AROUND CONVINCING AMERICANS TO ACKNOWLEDGE AMERICA’S “GUN CULTURE” AND TO RENOUNCE IT

PART SIX

It must be reiterated. There IS NO AMERICAN “GUN CULTURE.” That notion is merely a fiction, and a makeweight into which Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists have cast everything they abhor about a free Constitutional Republic. “Gun Culture” becomes a descriptor for other fictions: “White Supremacism;” “Police Brutality;” “Systemic Racism;” “Toxic Masculinity;” and so on and so forth—all fictions, created and thrust on the American public to deceive them into accepting a new and perpetual Neo-Marxist reign.The phrase ‘Gun Culture’ has also become a stand-in and general descriptor for other false claims, including such claims that America is inherently:

RACIST
XENOPHOBIC
NATIVIST
JINGOISTIC
CHAUVINISTIC
PAROCHIAL, PROVINCIAL, UNSOPHISTICATED
OBSTINANT, RECALCITRANT, INTRANSIGENT, IGNORANT

Radical Left elements blame it all on the Second Amendment. They ultimately pin the wrap on America’s “Gun Culture,” i.e., on everything they perceive as wrong about America. They see this false notion of American “Gun Culture” as emanating from average Americans desire to exercise the right to keep and bear arms. What the Radical Left doesn’t accept or even acknowledge is that the desire to exercise the right to acquire, own, and possess firearms is grounded on the God-given right of self-defense against predatory creature and predatory Government.Yet, Marxists don’t even accept the notion of a rational basis for the right of self-defense, let alone a right of armed self-defense.The Arbalest Quarrel has discussed this idea in depth. See, e.g., the recent AQ article titled, “Tyranny, Fundamental Rights, and the Armed Citizen,” posted on December 2, 2021. But, if anything at all is to be sensibly made of the idea of a purported “Gun Culture” in America, it is nothing more than the manifestation of the Neo-Marxists’ own tolerance of, even encouragement of, criminal use of guns to prey on innocent Americans, whether black or white. But that is hardly something the Neo-Marxists would care to acknowledge.Nonetheless, if there is anything to be made of this notion it is that “Gun Culture” equates with the Neo-Marxist tolerance of, even encouragement of “Criminal Violence” of which “Gun Violence” is merely an aspect of such violence. Thus, “guns” as used in crime are not a “cause” of violence. Firearms are merely one of many tools used in the commission of violent criminal acts, according to FBI statistics.Read how one Leftist-leaning academician spouts his contempt for America’s “Gun Culture” and the imbecilic assertions he makes, attacking both the police and the natural right of self-defense. The below article appears in the Leftist publication, Boston Review:“On August 25, 2020, in my hometown of Kenosha, Wisconsin, seventeen-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse joined several other white vigilantes with AR-15-style rifles. They came purportedly to defend businesses from people protesting the police shooting of Jacob Blake, a twenty-nine-year-old Black man. A few days earlier, a police officer had shot Blake seven times in the back outside of his car, while his sons were in the backseat.Despite violating a city curfew, Rittenhouse and other vigilantes were given bottles of water by the police, who told them, ‘We appreciate you guys, we really do.’ Within hours, Rittenhouse had shot three protestors, killing two of them. Overnight he became a hero among the far right, which enabled him to crowdsource his $2 million bail. Rittenhouse’s actions, acquittal, and celebrity status are the culmination of a tactical turn in U.S. gun culture, which began in the late twentieth century. Tactical clothing, training, weaponry, and language have now become commonplace among private gun owners and law enforcement, rendering both nearly indistinguishable from soldiers. Individual gun owners are increasingly seeing themselves as de facto militia members regardless of whether they engage in paramilitary training or formally associate with an organization. Even law enforcement officers who don’t serve in tactical units are now ‘armed, dressed, trained, and conditioned like soldiers,’ writes Radley Balko in Rise of the Warrior Cop (2014). . . . The freedom they defended was, indeed, not intended for everyone and the purpose of an armed segment of the population, as U.S. history has consistently demonstrated, was to enforce its exclusivity: an armed white citizenry, working in tandem with law enforcement, has for centuries sustained white rule in the United States through legal and extralegal violence. Violence is necessary to maintain what Martin Luther King, Jr., called ‘a democracy for white Americans but simultaneously a dictatorship over Black Americans.’ As for those ‘otherwise intelligent Americans’ . . . the history of white supremacy is replete with those who speak about universal rights yet doggedly pursue a white-dominated racial order. . . .In the late twentieth century, what had been . . . still only a subculture with disproportionate influence rose to the level of popular culture. At the same time, the forms of white supremacist rule it has historically supported now face legal challenge on par with what they faced during the classic civil rights era and Reconstruction. Though the story of this tactical development in U.S. gun culture is complex, I focus in this essay on a few particularly crucial components. The first is that border enforcement has been increasingly militarized since the 1970s and diffused deeper into the interior of the country. This has blurred the boundary between domestic and foreign conflict, brought the use of exceptional police powers into nearly every U.S. town, and turned militarized ‘border security’ into a ubiquitous mechanism of racialization. This has also corresponded with the militarization of local police forces, which was certainly worsened by the War on Terror, but which historian Elizabeth Hinton has identified as having deeper roots in the Johnson administration’s War on Crime. Like the nationalization of ‘border security,’ it turned the nation’s city streets into sites of militarized racial enforcement.Second, individuals once arming themselves for self-defense—often out of racial fears or a perceived threat to their masculinity—are now frequently claiming to do so in defense of the Constitution and freedom itself. The NRA has played an outsize role in this vigilante reframing by promulgating the myth that gun ownership has always been an individual, constitutional right and oriented toward a nativist vision of self-defense. This vigilantism operates in conjunction with the extralegal violence of law enforcement officers and is fueled by an individualist notion of sovereignty more dangerous than any military-grade weaponry. It rejects the freedom of others as equal to one’s own and views any attempt to support such equality as tyranny. Most importantly, this sovereignty is assumed to grant the individual the power to take life (vitae necisque potestas) in defense not of law, but of particular social and racial orders.”There is a lot to unpack here, but it is worth an analysis because the author’s sophistry encapsulates, better than many such articles, a true Neo-Marxist internationalist/Neoliberal Globalist contemptuousness toward Americans and toward the very precepts, tenets, and principles of Individualism upon which the U.S. Constitution is grounded.Preliminarily, we point out that the article came out fairly recently, December 17, 2021, and aptly describes, in an academic format, a definitive Neo-Marxist Anti-Second Amendment sentiment toward American gun ownership and possession. The article is also demonstrative of the extent to which Neo-Marxists design and construct elaborate fairy tales around that sentiment.The author of the article, Chad Kautzer, is an Associate Professor of Philosophy at Lehigh University. Kautzer’s article appearing on the website, Boston Review, encapsulates the Neo-Marxist contemptuousness of America’s heritage and core values.Kautzer’s all-encompassing and obviously virulent disdain for America is detailed in his book, “Radical Philosophy.” Routledge Books published it, a few years ago, in 2015. Routledge is a major publisher of professional and academic books.A short review of the book makes clear the extent to which Kautzer extols the virtues of Marxism, Feminism, and something called “Queer Theory,” a thing concocted by Marxist Sociologists. See also, article in IU Libraries. This all goes to the glorification of victimhood, the Neo-Marxists mantra and new religious dogma, suffusing itself throughout the landscape of American society, perverting and polluting and corrupting the psyche of Americans.Most Americans are waking up to this fact, and the puppet-masters and their Government toadies know this and they are not too happy about it, but there isn’t much they can do to quell the rapidly rising resentment welling in the American people. _________________________________

THE PLAN FOR WHOLESALE GUN CONFISCATION IS JUST AROUND THE CORNER

PART SEVEN

Chad Kautzer, the Neo-Marxist American philosopher, associates the idea of an American “Gun Culture” with notions of ‘white supremacism,’ ‘militias,’ and ‘police brutality toward blacks.’ See the article in Truth About Guns, by Dan Zimmerman, on Chad Kautzer’s nihilist philosophy, for another perspective on Kautzer.Everything negative about America in the mind of Neo-Marxists eventually circles back to America’s purported “Gun Culture”—more specifically, America’s purported “White Man’s Gun Culture.”America’s so-called “Gun Culture” is encapsulated in the primary premise upon which Neo-Marxists promulgate and propagate their deep-seated abhorrence of America: in what Kautzer refers to as “the myth that gun ownership has always been an individual, constitutional right and oriented toward a nativist vision of self-defense.”But the individual, constitutional right of armed self-defense against predatory animal, predatory man, and predatory Government isn’t myth at all. It is a God-given natural, unalienable right. It is a basic, inherent, axiomatic Truth. And, we are the only Nation on Earth that recognizes that fact. Small wonder, then, that those who envision a totalitarian new world order would seek to destroy, once and for all time, the sacred salient underpinning of that one remaining absolutely free Nation on Earth, and the one remaining truly sovereign people—all maintained and preserved forever by the one essential and incommensurable Right codified in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms. And, with that, the Neo-Marxists intend to destroy the very notion of the sanctity and inviolability of the individual Soul and Spirit.How are the forces that crush going about this demanding task? Below is their game-plan

Desecrate the very notion of the ‘armed citizenry.’
Instill, in the mind of the polity, a phobia toward guns and a general animus toward those Americans who adamantly insist on owning them and bearing them
Instigate a breakdown of public order
Demoralize and generate fear and anxiety in the American people
Declare a State of Emergency, necessitating the surrendering of all civilian-owned firearms to the appropriate authorities
Engage in a mopping-up operation of those remaining Americans who fail to comply with the National Surrendering and Laying Down of Arms Emergency Order

Do you see what is going on here? Do you understand the Neo-Marxist game plan?Taking away exercise of the Second Amendment Right is well-nigh difficult, perhaps impossible. They know this to be difficult. They also know it to be necessary for the would-be Destroyers of America. For, if they can accomplish that, everything else becomes easy.

THERE IS NO AMERICAN “GUN CULTURE”: THAT IS A NEO-MARXIST PLOY TO ATTACK THE SECOND AMENDMENT

The American Neo-Marxist Kautzer uses the notion of an American “Gun Culture” as a strawman argument. Having created the fiction of it, and as it comes across as an inherently negative idea, as it is intended to do, Marxists suggest, and at times boldly assert that this idea of an American “Gun Culture” is inextricably linked to the Right codified in the Second Amendment.The tacit inference that the Marxist urges one to draw is that, since the notion of a society embroiled in a “Gun Culture” is a terrible society, that society can be only rectified by eliminating the salient cause of the troubles inherent in it. In other words, American society can begin to be regenerated as a psychologically healthy society if the right of the people to keep and bear arms is erased. And that is what people like Kautzer aim to do.In attacking the right of the people to keep and bear arms, Kautzer consciously and unabashedly attacks the American Soul—the very heart of the American psyche.This doesn’t bother people like Kautzer because he has inculcated his very being to envision the creation of a Marxist Collectivist America. But that goal is impossible to realize as long as the right embodied in the Second Amendment continues to exist.Having tied the sacred, natural, unalienable right of the people to keep and bear arms to this nonsensical “wild west” “Gun Culture,” strawman creation of the Radical Left, he sees the civilian gun ownership and possession as morally bankrupt and innately corrupt. So he has no compunctions in denouncing both. He and many other academics do so with relish. And a sympathetic Press and Social Media circuit heralds their works as major achievements.Kautzer also points to a so-called “Whiteness Problem,” in America. But, instead of proving the existence of such a thing, he takes aim against it. He treats it as self-evident, true, and runs with it. Kautzer invokes it as a real phenomenon, and not a myth—but this idea of a so-called “Whiteness Problem,” in America, is, as well really nothing but fiction. It is a thing deliberately carefully constructed and generated by, and cultivated and fostered by America’s Neo-Marxist movement. It is all part and parcel of an overall campaign strategy to destabilize American society.Race, though, if one should stop to think about it, has nothing to do with classical Marxism and never did.Classical Marxism divides the world’s classes neatly by income, not by race. Karl Marx saw the world as a dichotomy of Rich Capitalists versus Poor Laborers and not, as America’s Neo-Marxists portray it as one of elect white people versus damned colored people, that is to say, Privileged White People contrasted against “Preterite Damned People, regardless of income status. The latter notion is more ridiculous than anything Karl Marx ever dreamed up. It suggests that people like the Obamas, Oprah Winfrey, and Lebron James—deca-millionaires or billionaires, all, suffer the pains of Sisyphus, while white Appalachian miners and oil refinery workers, who have always had a difficult life made all the worse by the Neo-Marxists’ “Green New Deal” nonsense, live the life of Riley. It is all absolute nonsense. But so the Neo-Marxists propagate it and proselytize, this rubbish, endlessly, to the masses.But to argue this is to maintain that the color of one’s skin trumps the money in one’s bank. Indeed, if these fabulously wealthy colored people truly suffered because of their race, then a society that is fundamentally racist as the Neo-Marxists pretend, would never have enabled the Obama clan, Winfrey, James, and many other successful colored people to succeed.Classical Marxism doesn’t easily fit into the program orchestrated by and this paradigm promulgated by America’s would-be Destroyers of our Nation. So America's Neo-Marxists deny Classical Marxism out-of-hand, constructing their own simulacrum out of it and from it, even going so far as to attack adherents of Classical Marxism, suffering no resistance to their own contrived orthodoxy.America’s Neo-Marxists—predicating warfare not on the basis of wealth, i.e., economic class, but on race, irrespective of monetary wealth—deliberately instigate a rabid animus between and among Americans, and they do this to create and then to exploit tension between and among Americans. For, if Americans are warring among themselves, they will be too busy to notice that the Nation's Destructors are machinating the destruction of society to completely reengineer it. Adherence to the tenets and precepts and principles of Classical Marxism doesn't lend itself well to the destabilization of American society as quickly and as thoroughly as they want it to occur.Thus, America’s Neo-Marxists must do more than simply give little thought to Classical Marxism, they must actively denounce Classical Marxism along with anything else that contravenes or contradicts their belief systems. Fancy that! See the article in The New York Times on the topic.Modern Neo-Marxist internationalists and Neoliberal Globalists manufacture social and political contrivances and jargon to undermine the social, political, economic, cultural, and even juridical fabric and framework of the Country, grounded on one unique attribute upon which America’s greatness over all the other nations on Earth depends: the native ability of the American citizenry to keep the power of the Federal Government ever in check through the exercise of the natural God-given of armed self-defense. These fictions, postulated by Marxist academics, like Chad Kautzer, Ibram X. Kendi, Nicole Hanna Jones, and others, are disseminated by and reiterated ad nauseum by the legacy Press, by social media, and by Neo-Marxist commentators. They are unconscionably treated as gospel in the Nation’s colleges and universities, and they are even taught to many if not most of the 50,000 children attending over 130,000 public and charter schools. And these and other noxious curricula, are likely taught in many private schools as well. See article in Education Week, and article in the New York Post.America's Neo-Marxist educators proselytize this rabid nonsense to our children. The Harris Biden Administration flunkies then shape and mold these malodorous fictions into political initiatives and political actions to be shoved down the throats of the adult population as well. It is one more tool utilized by Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists to destabilize the Country and to ready it for inclusion in a mammoth multicultural, neo-transformational, post-nation-state neo-feudalistic world.These fictions permeating through society and perpetuated in the Nation's public and charter schools, colleges, social media, the Press, and in the Federal Government itself, are conceived as and operate as useful indoctrination tools for undercutting and overriding the tenets, precepts, and principles of Individualism upon which the Nation’s Constitution is grounded and upon which a free Constitutional Republic depends for its perpetuation. Take that away, and the Republic falters and falls. That is the intention of the Neo-Marxists and the Neoliberal Globalists._____________________________________________

THE CORE OF AMERICA’S FREE REPUBLIC RESTS ON RKBA

PART EIGHT

Adherence to natural law is not only the core of American culture, it is THE basis of America’s foundational structure as a free Republic and it is the essential predicate for it. Natural law is grounded on the sanctity and inviolability of the individual Soul.This idea is in constant tension with the Government that, by its own nature, seeks to inhibit free expression, as it must. The Government does not ask for but demands obeisance, subordination of the Self, submission of personal autonomy, and subordination of independence of spirit and will to the power of Government.Thus, the sovereignty of the American people over Government must, at all costs, be sanctified in law if that sovereignty over Government is to be preserved against that Government. And sovereignty over Government can only be preserved if the American people have the tenable means to do so.The Framers of the Constitution knew this full well. And the natural law right of self-defense over predatory animal, predatory man, and predatory Government was thereby enshrined in the Nation's Bill of Rights through the codification of the Right of the people to own, keep, and bear firearms. Neo-Marxists don’t deny the historical rationale for this. In fact, they are well aware of it even though they don't accept the truth of it. It is the predatory Government that Neo-Marxists seek to install—the antithesis of what the Framers of the U.S. Constitution intended, and what they fervently abhorred. That is why the Marxists see the need to eradicate the armed citizenry and they intend to do so. That is their ultimate order of business.Marxists know that as long as the idea of the inherent sovereignty of the American people over Government remains p, pervasive, and persuasive in the psyche of Americans, the Marxist-envisioned and Neo-Marxist-engineered society cannot exist. And they know the idea of the inherent sovereignty of the American people over Government is part and parcel of the physical fact of firearms in the hands of the citizenry.Get rid of the latter, so say the Marxists, and the former notion of the sovereignty of the American people over Government falls away of its own accord, for there is nothing tangible left to maintain it. Free Speech—the right of the people to dissent and to make certain that their voices are heard—means nothing, comes to nothing, in the absence of the means to require Government to listen and to cohere to the demands of the true and sole ruler over Government: the armed American citizenry.The Sovereignty of the American people only continues to exist and function through exercise of the natural, indelible, immutable, unalienable Right to acquire, keep, and bear firearms.This is the predicate basis of the Nation’s strength and singular greatness and it is the foundation of the citizenry’s sovereignty over Government.It is the salient basis of and also proof of the inference that the framers’ understood and intended for the American people to be and to remain sole sovereign over Government, for all time. And only through the exercise of force of arms will the people retain the ability to check the power of Government, and thereby have the certain means to assert their sovereignty over Government if such becomes necessary. And it may well come to that from what we see transpiring today since the Great Pretender—Joe Biden took Office.American Neo-Marxists accept as axiomatic—no less so than do America’s Patriots—that the sovereignty of the American people over the Federal Government is a function of the citizenry’s ability to acquire, keep, and bear firearms. But, the Neo-Marxists adamantly reject the notion of a natural, God-given Right of the people to keep and bear arms, even as the Right is clearly, categorically, concisely, unequivocally codified in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Neo-Marxists reject the very idea of natural law rights that precede the construction of Government, that exist independent of Government and of man-made law, that exist intrinsically, eternally in man, bestowed in man by the Divine Creator.As the right of the people to keep and bear arms is the bedrock principle upon which the Country came to exist as a free Republic, it can only ever continue to exist as a free Republic, and remain as a free Republic, exactly as the founders of the Republic intended, so long as the people remain armed.The Neo-Marxist and the American Patriot both know that American identity is tied inextricably to natural law which, at the primal level, is wrapped up in the intrinsic right of self-defense, of which armed self-defense remains the one true capable means of self-defense. If that goes, the Nation goes with it as there is nothing left of value to be salvaged in America. The Neo-Marxist doesn’t pretend otherwise. For the Neo-Marxist all of America must be destroyed, and that idea is exemplified in Neo-Marxist depredation and degradation of America’s history and heritage and core values; its despoiling of America’s statues and monuments to its leaders and heroes; its unapologetic denunciation and denigration of America’s Founders.And this unmitigated, unrelenting Neo-Marxist attack on the Nation is taken up by the Corporatist Billionaire Neoliberal Globalists, too, as they also seek to destroy America for their own ends.The Neoliberal Globalist doesn’t buy into Neo-Marxist claptrap, but as they both desire to demolish America as an independent, sovereign Nation-State, they have entered into an unlikely truce, at least for the moment.For the Neo-Marxists, the aim is to create what they perceive to be a pure, stateless Communist-run world Government, where Government provides for every person’s minimum wants and needs. And, with the Government in absolute control of all political, social, and economic rulemaking and planning, they believe that an orderly world is possible, and a relatively contented one, for billions of people. The fact that the life of the individual is meaningless in such a world where all thought and conduct is rigorously controlled is of no consequence to the Neo-Marxist internationalist. For him, the notion of the sanctity of the individual and the notion of the importance of human purpose are, at best, nostalgic, but essentially archaic, empty concepts—both devoid of meaning. The Neo-Marxist perceives the idea of the sanctity of the individual as a concept as devoid of functional import and purport as are the notions of ‘independent, sovereign nation-state,’ ‘citizen of a nation-state,’ ‘national identity,’ and ‘national spirit;’ and as archaic and anachronistic as are ideas of ‘freedom,’ ‘personal autonomy,’ ‘free Constitutional Republic,’ and as senseless and dangerous, as is the notion of ‘a people reigning as supreme sovereign over Government.’The Neo-Marxist scoffs at the idea of man having an immortal Soul, and denies out-of-hand the truth of natural, fundamental, unalienable, illimitable, immutable, God-given Rights, bestowed on Man and in Man by a benevolent and infinite Divine Creator.Obviously, there can be no meeting of minds, no negotiation. The basic principles and precepts, along with the goals and aims of the Neo-Marxist are wholly incompatible with the principles and precepts of human worth, dignity, of the sanctity and inviolability of the individual, and of a free Constitutional Republic and of a free Sovereign people. And what is one to make of the thought processes of the mega-billionaire Neoliberal Globalist financiers and corporatists? What is one to make of their goals and aspirations?For the Neoliberal Globalist, the aim is to control rapidly diminishing resources and contain a wildly growing world population. The world they aim to create is structured on ancient feudalism. It is a world where a few mega-rich, i.e., they, themselves, can live in regal splendor, and billions of others can be safely and securely corralled in various massive containment centers, dotted here and there around the world, where the bare necessities of life—food, water, shelter, clothing, and medical care—are doled out sparingly, minimally. It is to be expected that, eventually, a few billion people will die through natural attrition: plague, the elements of nature, and malnutrition. And that is perceived as a good thing, as it will place less stress on the life and well-being, and enjoyment of the elite leisure ruling-class and of scarce natural resources.Since automation and technology will make fewer demands on the need for unskilled and minimally skilled labor in the future, as is rapidly becoming apparent today, the need for such labor as was once necessary in an industrial-based society, as in the world of the 20th Century, will be de minimis. Thus, the value of the average person is de minimis. Some minimal human labor will be needed of course. And substantial numbers of paramilitary police and military will be necessary to maintain public order and to provide protection for the ruling elite from the occasionally expected revolts of the millions of downtrodden Hoi Polloi.People both in this Country and abroad are already beginning to see the inklings of this “Brave New World” to Come. And it isn’t a pretty sight.If the Nation as the founders of a free Constitutional Republic envisioned it is perceived by the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists as one outdated, and archaic, hopelessly out of touch with the rest of the world, then so be it. Better it would be that Americans happily maintain their archaic island of resistance in the futurist neo-feudal transglobal world gone mad._____________________________________Copyright © 2022 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

1/10/22 1/10/22

THE LIBERAL WING OF THE U.S. SUPREME COURT OPERATES MORE AS AN ADVOCATE FOR GOVERNMENT POWER THAN AS A PROTECTOR OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

On January 7, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court heard argument in the case Biden vs. Missouri. The formal issue before the High Court in that case as set forth on SCOTUSblog was “whether the Supreme Court should issue a stay of the injunction issued by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri blocking a federal rule that requires all health care workers at facilities that participate in Medicare and Medicaid programs to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 unless they are eligible for a medical or religious exemption.”Missouri and other States filed a direct challenge to the autocratic Harris-Biden Administration’s demand that all Health care workers—22 million as of April 5, 2021, whose medical facilities participate in Government funded Medicare and Medicaid programs, according to the Government census report—accede to Government demands that health care workers obtain COVID-19 vaccinations.The States contested this broad Government mandate against liberty and the rule of law. Missouri, in its Brief, stated at the outset, that the “Secretary of Health and Human Services’ sweeping and unprecedented vaccine mandate for healthcare workers threatens to create a crisis in healthcare facilities in rural America. The mandate would force millions of workers to choose between losing their jobs or complying with an unlawful federal mandate. But for the district court’s preliminary injunction, last year’s healthcare heroes would have become this year’s unemployed.” The Government for its part, argued that its mandate is a response to “an unprecedented pandemic that has killed 800,000 Americans.”The Government retorted that “the Secretary of Health and Human Services exercised his express statutory authority to protect the health and safety of Medicare and Medicaid patients by requiring healthcare facilities that choose to participate in those programs to ensure that their staff are vaccinated (subject to medical and religious exemptions).”Does the Government have this broad legal authority? Is the exercise of that authority consistent with the Constitution, or is it a direct infringement of it? Is the Administration truly concerned about the health of Americans or is it using the Pandemic merely as a convenient pretext to take control of the States and the people?The unstated but underlying issue, in this case, is whether the Harris-Biden Administration is engaging in an unprecedented power grab to exert control over the States and the American people.One expects this from an autocratic Government and an autocratic Congress, controlled by the Pelosi and Schumer stooges.That leaves the American people with one Branch of Government to place constraints on unlawful moves of Congress and the Executive Branch. And that Third Branch of Government is the U.S. Supreme Court.Unfortunately, the High Court consists of a few people, who don’t seem to concern themselves with defending the Nation and its people from the throes of autocracy and, hence, tyranny. One such person is Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor. For whatever reason, Justice Sotomayor asserted—didn’t ask the attorneys for the Government or for the State of Missouri—during oral argument, that 100,000 children have been hospitalized and are on ventilators.As reported in the National Review, Sotomayor claimed that“‘We have hospitals that are almost at full capacity with people severely ill on ventilators. We have over 100,000 children, which we’ve never had before, in serious condition, and many on ventilators.’” This was a grossly inflated figure. In the same article, the National Review pointed out that,“The current number of confirmed pediatric hospitalizations with Covid in the U.S. is 3,342, according to data from the Department of Health and Human Services released on Friday. The average number of children admitted to the hospital per day with Covid was 776 as of Tuesday, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”Why did Justice Sotomayor make such a spurious claim during oral argument? She must have known that a straightforward declarative assertion could be and would be fact-checked as, in fact, it was. The legacy Press itself jumped on this falsehood. Fox News points out that even the Washington Post said the claim deserved “four Pinocchios” for the “absurdly high” figure.We suspect that Justice Sotomayor knew that her remark was unsupported, and that she was not acting as a neutral Justice, attempting to elicit comment from the Advocate for the Government and the advocate for Missouri, but was herself operating as an Advocate for the Government.This behavior on the part of a U.S. Supreme Court Justice is not only shameful, it is dangerous to the well-being of the Republic and the Constitution. A decision in this case will be forthcoming, but there are other High Court decisions expected in the weeks and months ahead.Any decision of the High Court involving an interpretation of the U.S. Constitution has major repercussions for the Nation. No decision is more important to the well-being of the Republic than those involving the Bill of Rights.A decision in the Bruen case is expected in early Summer if not sooner. The Bruen case is the most important case on the Second Amendment since the Heller case of 2008 and the McDonald case of 2010. Given the nature of the issue before the Court, constricted and restricted as the Roberts’ Court made it, the Bruen case is unlikely to have an impact beyond the jurisdiction of New York. Nonetheless, the American people can expect that Justices Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor will take the opportunity to draft opinions that hearken back to the Stevens and Breyer dissenting opinions in Heller, in a shameless attempt not only to denigrate Bruen, but to weaken Heller.Likely the outcome of Bruen will be supportive of the Second Amendment, but it won’t be as far-reaching as it could have been in support of the Second Amendment—as far-reaching as the issue in Petitioner’s Brief sought: whether the right of the people to keep and bear arms extends beyond the domain of one’s home.The three Liberal-wing Justices will likely reassert their false argument that the right codified in the Second Amendment is always subject to Government restraint and constraint and that, notwithstanding Heller and McDonald, the Government has the lawful authority to place stringent checks on the exercise of the right as it sees fit. For Justices like Sonia Sotomayor and others, the American citizen’s ownership, possession, and utilization of the right codified in the Second Amendment is more akin to a glorified “privilege,” than a fundamental, immutable, unalienable right._____________________________________Copyright © 2022 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

1/9/22 1/9/22

THE UNITED STATES SHALL SURVIVE AS A FREE REPUBLIC IN THE 21ST CENTURY ONLY IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE REMAIN VIGILANT AND ARMED

PART ONE

A MESSAGE FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FOR 2022

“Liberty must at all hazards be supported. We have a right to it, derived from our Maker. But if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us, at the expense of their ease, their estates, their pleasure, and their blood.” ~John Adams, from “A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law, 1765”Through time immemorial all great nations and empires have had to struggle with stressors, and the United States is no different.Strong nations capably resist hostile outside influences bent on destroying them.The United States has since its inception as a free Constitutional Republic ably weathered all attempts by hostile nations and other antipathetic foreign entities that sought the Nation’s destruction. And the reason for our Nation’s uncommon ability to thwart such attacks is grounded on its exceptional strength, resilience, and fortitude.These essential qualities derive from our Nation’s philosophical, jurisprudential, political, social, and ethical underpinnings, all of which are reflected in its unique Constitution—the foundation of our Nation’s fundamental governing principles. That says much of our Country’s inherent greatness as well as its formidable power.A nation’s governing documents are, after all, the best indices of its health and vitality. A nation’s governing documents are the barometer of a modern nation-state’s ability to weather adversity and to grow ever stronger and more resilient in having overcome adversity.The United States has, since its inception, become the most powerful, resourceful Nation-State on Earth: militarily, economically, financially, technologically, and geopolitically. It has excelled on all indices of National health, well-being, and vigor. It did so through recognition that the strength of the Country ultimately derives from the strength of its citizens: a free, sovereign, independent, and armed people.Our Nation did not see an easy birth, shackled as it was to a powerful empire. Yet, against all odds, it threw off the yoke of tyranny. And it did so, not through wizardry, but through determination, selflessness, resourcefulness, an abundance of courage, firm conviction, and an indomitable will to prevail over oppression and tyranny: the armed American!Yet, the most dangerous perils to impact the continued well-being of an otherwise strong nation, such as the U.S., are those perils emanating inside its geographical boundaries, not outside them—by forces that seek to confuse, cow, frighten, and disarm the American citizenry. A new tyranny is on the rise. And this tyranny is in our midst.Countries sicken and die more often through an inability to deal effectively with attendant institutional weaknesses and treacherous machinations of heinous and loathsome elements residing within them than by antagonistic forces marshaled against them from the outside.The traps and snares that emerge within the nation itself are the most dangerous to a nation’s continued existence because these traps and snares are often masked and cloaked and, so, they go unrecognized. Remaining hidden and unseen, they remain unchallenged, until too late.Destructive forces have seeded their viral plague into our Nation centuries ago. And these forces have bided their time, for they know it takes time to destroy a strong, resilient Nation from within. And these destructive forces and influences existent within the Country supported by and in collusion with formidable forces and influences outside the Country have exhibited infinite patience.They have, through recent years and decades, and with the rapid advances in the technology and the art of social conditioning, slowly, inexorably, surreptitiously, and ever so quietly insinuated themselves into the public psyche, manipulating the thought processes of the American people—creating confusion, anxiety, fear, and a sense of profound hopelessness in the polity. Thus the Destructive forces of a free Constitutional Republic have effectively “softened” the willpower and the spirit of many Americans even as many other Americans remain resolute, able to see through the ruse, and therefore able to contain it.In the last decade of the 20^th Century and at the turn of the 21^st Century, these Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist forces—implacable, intractable foes of Americans—have been bent on transforming the whole of western civilization into a unified transnational globalist empire, sans nation-states and national borders. And they have felt confident enough in their control over Americans and, particularly, over the American psyche, to eventually merge the United States, as their ultimate prize, into their new world order scheme. And, in the first one and a half decades of the 21st Century, they have speeded up their timetable for the dissolution of the United States.Through the sinister machinations of their toadies—Clinton, Bush, and Obama—the citizenry’s ties to their history, heritage, ethos, culture, ethical foundation, and fundamental Christian grounding began to loosen, to fracture.The American belief system founded, first and foremost, on the sanctity and inviolability of the individual has through time been systematically, surreptitiously, and assiduously replaced with an altogether new and alien, fabricated and sinister, belief system.The forces that crush have concocted their false belief system to divide the American people, to prevent them from forming a durable, imperishable defense against the forces amassed against them. These malevolent forces have designed their false belief system to attack the Nation’s traditional belief structures at an elemental, subconscious level. They have designed their counterfeit belief system to engulf and destroy the core precepts, principles, and tenets of a free Republic, predicated as they are on fundamental, unalienable, God-given rights and liberties.Unseen but axiomatic, the sanctity and inviolability of the individual soul rest at the core of this Nation’s strength. The inherent and absolute sovereignty of the American people is grounded on this sacred notion of the sanctity and inviolability of the individual soul. This is the predicate basis of the citizenry's sovereignty over their Government. And the citizenry's sovereignty over Government isn't maintained by blind faith that the Federal Government will abide by the immutable authority of the American citizenry over that Federal Government, but by the fact that the citizenry is armed and will ever remain so.The citizenry’s sovereignty over Government depends on the fact that the citizenry remains armed. Under no situation or circumstance is the Government permitted lawfully to constrain, restrain, abrogate or suspend the right of the people to keep and bear arms. This is a core Truth, and the forces that seek this Nation’s destruction know this.The eternal enemies of the American people know that this core Truth is detrimental and altogether antithetical to the goal of realizing a one-world governmental regime. With cold, callous, calculated determination, these Neo-Marxist internationalists and Neoliberal Globalists have designed and have thrust into the American psyche an entirely new, alien, and fabricated belief system. This system is calibrated to undercut the core sacred Truth upon which the Country absolutely depends for its existence as a free Republic: the nobility and autonomy and sanctity and inviolability of the Individual Soul.______________________________

SEVER THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM THEIR OWN PAST AND THEY WILL READILY SURRENDER THEIR WITS, THEIR ARMS, THEIR SOUL

PART TWO

“The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.” ~George OrwellA goodly portion of America’s citizenry ably sees through the actions of Neo-Marxist Internationalism and Neoliberal Globalism a design to disembowel the United States. Most Americans see a diabolical design to loosen their ancestral ties and bonds to the Nation and to each other, even if some are oblivious to this,Americans see the breakdown of the family unit. They see the assault on Christianity. They see the attempt to corrupt their Soul and to weaken their faith in the Divine Creator. In 2016, Americans voted into Office a man that promised to set things aright.Not that Donald Trump is worthy of emulation for his personality, but whatever his personal character flaws and motivations, he immediately instituted changes to the Clinton/Bush/Obama Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist agenda. And that panicked the Nation’s would-be destroyers. Their agenda came to a screeching halt.They pulled out all the stops. They amassed the power of the Press and social media, academia, business and finance, and the Government itself, which they control, to waylay Trump and the tens of millions of Americans who supported the Country and who celebrate the American Revolution of 1776, each July 4^th, that this successful Revolution gave them.In one final act of desperation, in an attempt to secure the success of their own Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist Counterrevolution, these Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist forces took control over the electoral process and prevented Trump from serving a second term in Office.Through their vast stores of money, influence, organizational ability, and sheer ruthlessness, these monsters succeeded in placing a physically and emotionally effete, corrupt, compliant, decadent, indolent, and senile toady in the highest Office of the Land. Hands down, Joe Biden is the most inept and embarrassing “Chief Executive” the Nation has ever had cause to suffer.Joe Biden serves as an untended but perfect symbol of the disdain and contempt the Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist puppet-masters hold for the Nation and for its people.Biden is nothing but an errand and messenger boy, and in that he fails, as one painfully sees in his mumbling, bumbling, rambling remarks. But the puppet-masters can control him and that is what matters to them. That is all that matters to them.The puppet-masters feel confident that, with their firm control over the Government, the Press and media, business, academia, and finance, the public is powerless to demand a proper accounting; is powerless to remove this pathetic figure that belongs more properly in a nursing home but that inhabits the Oval Office.Both Biden and those other unprincipled lackeys, seeded throughout the Federal Government and through the depth and breadth of local and State Governments across the Land, are the tools upon which and through which the Neo-Marxist Internationalists and Neoliberal Globalists intend to destroy a free Constitutional Republic, merging its remains into a transnational world totalitarian empire.These malevolent forces have coerced through bribes, threats, and intimidation, many other prominent and wealthy individuals holding important positions in business, finance, industry, technology, academia, entertainment, media, and the Press, compelling them to do their bidding if they are not otherwise sympathetic to the new world order agenda. But, unfortunately, all too many of them are.But for all the duplicity and chicanery, the forces that crush may yet fail in their endeavors, and they realize this. Their concern is demonstrated through obviously desperate attempts to frighten, seduce, and deceive the American public.But why should it be so difficult for the puppet-masters to destroy our Republic?That goal is a difficult one for them to achieve because our Nation is unlike no other nation on Earth.Our Nation is grounded on governing principles derived from natural law.The framers of our Constitution recognized that the strength and resilience of the Country and its people rest, ultimately, not in the carefully structured framework of the Federal Government as set forth in the Constitution’s Articles, but rather in the American people themselves: in the firm, clear recognition of the sanctity and inviolability of the human soul.“On June 21, 1788, the Constitution became the official framework of the government of the United States of America when New Hampshire became the ninth of 13 states to ratify.” See article in National Constitution Center. But, the foundation of a free Republic didn’t end at that point because the Constitution wasn’t complete.The defining moment for the Country came with the ratification of the Bill of Rights, on December 15, 1791. See Article in Landmark Events. The Nation’s Bill of Rights, consisting of a set of unconditional, illimitable, immutable, and eternal rights of man, are no mere collection of noble sentiments, set down into law by man.The Bill of Rights isn’t manmade law at all. This Document is a codification of Divine Law and, as such, it is understood to be beyond the power of the Federal Government to modify, amend, dismiss, rescind, suspend, abrogate, or ignore.Natural Law is fundamental, unalienable, and absolute.The Nation’s Bill of Rights serves at once as a constant reminder to the servants of Government that the American people are and always remain the one, true, sole, supreme sovereign over Government. It is an emphatic notice of that fact. The Nation’s servants—those serving in Government—serve at the pleasure of and at the behest of the American people; not the other way around.It is the American people who are and remain the masters over their own life and over their Government and over the destiny of their Nation. And the right of the people to keep and bear arms exists to ensure the American people will forever remain master and sovereign over this Government and their Dominion. Let the American people never forget that, lest they lose their Country, their Spirit, and their very Soul._____________________________________Copyright © 2022 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

12/14/21 12/14/21

ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT FORCES CONTINUE THEIR PUSH TO ERODE THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS

NEW JERSEY SENATE BILL S. 3757 IS ONE MORE SLAP-IN-THE-FACE FOR THE SECOND AMENDMENT AND HELLER

PART ONE

The Arbalest Quarrel read with interest the NRA-ILA alert concerning New Jersey Senate Bill S. 3757 “that would force gun owners to store their guns and ammo under lock and key or face felony-level penalties.” We also read with interest and agree with Scott Bach’s well-written explication of the bill. Scott points out, “this ill-conceived bill imposes an absurd, one-size-fits-all totalitarian mandate to keep guns unloaded and locked up inside the home and to keep ammunition separately locked up inside the home, except when ‘in use’ – an utterly undefined term that will surely be interpreted to exclude everything except target practice.”As Scott notes, the New Jersey gun bill is absurd. And it is idiotic on logical grounds alone.But there is also a legal matter attendant to the bill. The bill flaunts and raises a disconcerting matter about the law that needs to be addressed.Just how broadly or narrowly is Heller to be read? This idea is not as simple as it may seem.Apart from the clear and categorical holding that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right unconnected with one’s service in a militia—ostensibly knocking down once and for all time the erroneous idea often still propounded by some that the Second Amendment refers to a “collective right”—the Court addressed another matter that directly impacts the New Jersey Senate bill.The Heller Court said——“In sum, we hold that the District's ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.” Does the New Jersey Senate bill square with the Heller holding? And, if it doesn’t, what is the impetus for the New Jersey Legislature drafting the thing at all?Let’s take a closer look at the bill as written.A preliminary “Statement” of intent, in the bill, reads in pertinent part as follows:“This bill, titled the ‘New Jersey Safe Storage of Firearms Act,’ establishes penalties for improper storage of a firearm that results in access of the firearm; requires a warning to be issued to firearms purchasers; and requires the Attorney General to establish a public awareness campaign regarding the risk associated with improper storage of a firearm. The bill also repeals the provisions of current law that establish penalties only for a minor's access of an improperly stored firearm, and makes an appropriation.Under current law, there are storage requirements and penalties imposed if a minor accesses a loaded firearm that is not in use. However, there currently are no general requirements for storing firearms when they are not in use.This bill requires a legal owner of a firearm to: (1) store or secure a firearm that is not in use at a premises under the owner's control unloaded, in a gun safe or securely locked box or container; and (2) store ammunition, separately, in a securely locked box or container.Under the bill, if the owner of a firearm fails to store the firearm properly as required under the bill, the owner will, for a first offense, be sentenced to period of community service of not less than 10 hours and not more than 40 hours. For a second or subsequent offense, the owner is guilty of a disorderly persons offense. If an improperly stored firearm is accessed by another person, and the access results in serious bodily injury to or the death of the person who accesses the firearm or another person, the owner is guilty of a crime of the fourth degree. A disorderly persons offense is punishable by up to six months' imprisonment, a fine of up to $1,000, or both. A crime of the fourth degree is punishable by up to 18 months' imprisonment, a fine of up to $10,000, or both.”The language of the bill, proper, says in pertinent part:A legal owner of a firearm shall:

store or secure a firearm that is not in use at a premises under the owner's control, unloaded, in a gun safe or securely locked box or container; and
store ammunition, separately, in a securely locked box or container.

The bill also imposes requirements on the firearms dealer: The Superintendent of State Police, in conjunction with the Attorney General, shall adopt guidelines in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, P.L.1968, c.410 (C.52:14B-1 et seq.), to require each licensed retail firearms dealer in the State, or the retail dealer's employee, to provide to any person who receives, possesses, carries, or uses a firearm, a written warning printed on eight and one-half inches by 11 inches in size paper in not less than 14 point bold point type letters which shall state:“NEW JERSEY STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT ALL FIREARMS MUST BE STORED, UNLOADED, IN A SECURELY LOCKED GUN SAFE OR LOCKED CONTAINER, AND ALL AMMUNITION MUST BE STORED IN A SEPARATE, SECURELY LOCKED GUN SAFE OR LOCKED CONTAINER. FAILURE TO DO SO IS PUNISHABLE BY LAW AND COULD RESULT IN FINES AND IMPRISONMENT.” The written warning provided pursuant to subsection a. of this section shall include the requirements and penalties imposed pursuant to P.L. , c. (C. ) (pending before the Legislature as this bill).The superintendent shall provide each licensed retail firearms dealer with a sign to be displayed prominently at a conspicuous place on the dealer's business premises at each purchase counter. The sign shall contain the statutory reference to section 3 of P.L., c. (C.). . . .”Left unsaid in the bill, is how the New Jersey Government is to know whether or how a person stores a firearm in his house.Is a New Jersey police officer to be given carte blanche authority to check on this? If so, would this not violate an individual’s Fourth Amendment Right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures?But the more pressing issue is whether NJ S.B. 3757 is, on its face, patently illegal. Is the bill inconsistent with the Heller holding pertaining to one’s right of immediate access to a firearm in the home for the purpose of self-defense? It would seem so. But there is a problem.Just how broadly, in regard to immediate access to a firearm in one’s home, is Heller to be taken? We look at this in the next segment, and consider the ramifications of Heller, for Bruen.__________________________________________

ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT JURISDICTIONS ROUTINELY AND BLATANTLY IGNORE HELLER AND MCDONALD PRECEDENTS

PART TWO

To both proponents of the Second Amendment and its detractors, Heller is known for its salient holding: that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right unconnected with one’s service in a militia. No one has any doubt about that holding whether one accepts the truth of it or not.It is the central holding of Heller and it is a broad ruling; no question about it. This is as it was always meant to be, and the Heller majority opinion says this clearly, succinctly, and categorically. And the Court meant for this holding to have universal application—applicable to every jurisdiction in the Country.Moreover, contrary to what some say or wish to believe, this central holding of Heller is consonant and consistent with the plain meaning of the language of the Second Amendment. The language of the Amendment does nothing more than codify a fundamental, unalienable, illimitable, immutable, natural right that exists intrinsically in every person. The one odd thing about the Heller case is that the High Court would have to point this out at all.Even so—All too many Courts blithely ignore Heller’s holding notwithstanding they are all dutybound to be mindful of and rigorously adhere to the import of it when reviewing government actions that target it. The implication of Heller cuts across and into all government actions directed against the application of the right embodied in the Second Amendment.These Anti-Second Amendment Courts merely rubberstamp unconstitutional government actions when they should be striking down government actions that, on their face, infringe the core of the right of the people to keep and bear arms.But there are other holdings in Heller that Anti-Second Amendment proponents and other “neutral” Americans miss.Unlike Heller’s paramount and broad holding pertaining to the universal nature of the right of the people to keep and bear arms as an individual rather than as a mere collective right, there are other seeming “narrow” holdings in Heller.These additional holdings address the District of Columbia’s actions concerning handguns and the right of the people to have immediate access to them in one’s own home, for the purpose of self-defense.The New Jersey gun bill, S. 3757, if enacted, would preclude a gun owner’s immediate access to a firearm for self-defense in the gun owner’s own home. On its face, NJ S.B. 3757 mirrors the major import and purport of the D.C. law that the Heller Court struck down as unconstitutional. Justice Scalia, writing for the majority, said this:“In sum, we hold that the District's ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense.” But is this seeming narrow holding, directed as it is to the District of Columbia, truly meant to be confined only to the District? Or, is it a broad-based, universal holding, applicable across the board, to every jurisdiction in the Land even as the High Court addressed the language of a law enacted by the District of Columbia that could only apply to the District?Assume for purpose of argument that this holding is meant to be confined to D.C. This isn’t to suggest that, if the New Jersey’s gun bill were enacted and someone were to challenge its constitutionality on appeal, the High Court would find the New Jersey law to be constitutional when the District’s law wasn’t.With the conservative wing in the majority, New Jersey’s gun bill, if enacted, would be summarily struck down, as patently illegal. No question about it.But who knows if the High Court would ever hear the case? Likely it wouldn’t, presumably because the New Jersey gun bill is similar to the D.C. law that was struck down. The New Jersey Legislature knows this. Very few cases make it to the U.S. Supreme Court for review.The New Jersey bill, as law, would be inconsistent with the D.C. gun bill but would be enforced by New Jersey anyway, unless or until it was struck down.Consider longstanding unconstitutional gun laws such as New York’s notorious “Safe Act”—which, itself, merely expands on unconstitutional laws going back decades. And the New York Legislature still expands upon the “Safe Act” slowly and inexorably engulfing and dissolving the whole of the Second Amendment.The “Safe Act” is, as we have expressly said, not the finalization of the work of Anti-Second Amendment zealots, but a work in progress, building upon the notorious, discriminatory Sullivan Act, enacted over one hundred and ten years ago.And while there have been challenges to New York’s gun laws through the century, following upon enactment of the Sullivan Act of 1911, look how long it took for the U.S. Supreme Court to accept review of a major challenge to New York’s firearms’ licensing scheme. The case is New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., vs. Petitioners vs. City Of New York, commonly referred to and known as the New York City Gun Transport case. That case was decided in 2020, and it did not meet expectations.The liberal wing of the Court, along with the ostensibly conservative wing Chief Justice John Roberts—who, it seems, cajoled the Trump nominee Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh to go along with him, adding a crucial fifth vote—emasculated the Gun Transport case. Justices Thomas and Alito were justifiably outraged.The High Court majority refused to review the case on the merits, thus allowing the massive, bloated, convoluted, confusing gun licensing edifice to remain intact.How much more damage can Anti-Second jurisdictions and the Harris-Biden Administration do to the Second Amendment before a decision in Bruen is published? Even today, we can see the stirrings of unrest among the anti-Second Amendment proponents.Using propaganda to focus the public’s attention anew on guns, the corrupt and senile messenger boy for the Marxists and Globalists is attempting to drum up public support for new assaults on the Second Amendment. Resurrecting the Sandy Hook Elementary School incident, Biden said, as reported by The Hill:“‘As a nation, we owe all these families more than our prayers. We owe them action,’ Biden said in a video message released by the White House.He said the Senate needed to quickly pass three House-passed bills, one to extend background checks, another to keep guns out of the hands of abusers and his Build Back Better act that includes a $5 billion investment in community violence prevention and intervention.‘I know our politics are frustrating and can be frustrating and it’s particularly frustrating now. But we can’t give up hope, we can’t stop,’ Biden said.The president mentioned the school shootings in Parkland, Fla., in 2018 and in Oxford, Mich., last week, adding that similar shootings occur in Black and brown communities every day. The White House unveiled a fact sheet on Tuesday on the work the administration has done to combat gun violence, touting executive orders from the president to reduce the proliferation of ghost guns, which are untraceable guns assembled using parts bought online; regulate stabilizing braces used on firearms and help states enact red flag legislation, among other things. It also noted that local governments have used funding from the American Rescue Plan, which Biden signed into law in March, towards community violence intervention and hiring more law enforcement officers.When asked if there are any conversations about a filibuster carve-out to pursue gun legislation, a senior White House official didn’t comment directly.‘I think the president and the direct to camera really speaks to this issue in an impactful way. He shares in the frustration with gun safety advocates regarding the lack of progress made in Congress, and he also talks about the progress made in the past,’ a senior White House official said, referring to the video released on Tuesday. In the video, the president called Sandy Hook, which occurred during the Obama administration when he was vice president, ‘one of the saddest days we were in office. . . . We have to keep up the pressure.’”This is more than just a veiled threat. The Harris-Biden Administration is preparing a major assault on the Second Amendment, in part to deflect attention from Biden’s dismal poll numbers—hoping that most Americans will support a campaign to destroy the right of the people to keep and bear arms. But it is a dangerous gamble that can backfire. The Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalists know this but figure they have no choice given the 2022 Midterm elections that they must prepare for. The economy is in tatters. Foreign and Domestic policy is in complete disarray. Geopolitically, militarily, economically, socially, politically, the Country is in the throes of chaos. This is just as the Destructors of the Marxist/Globalist agenda intend, but they must convince the American public that the Nation is on the right path, “to build back better.”One must wonder who dreamed up that imbecilic slogan. It sounds oddly like the slogan in the old Burger King commercial: “the bigger the burger the better the burger. . . .” And that is what the Destructors of our Nation and their puppets are doing: grinding our Country and its people into hamburger meat._____________________________________

REGARDLESS OF THE IMPACT OF THE BRUEN RULINGS IN NEW YORK, WHAT IMPACT WOULD BRUEN LIKELY HAVE ON OTHER JURISDICTIONS?

PART THREE

A ruling on Bruen likely won’t be handed down until next summer, keeping many New York gun owners and applicants for concealed handgun carry licenses in limbo for months. And it will be months longer still for the State and the New York City Licensing Division to redraft its concealed handgun carry license Rules, assuming a Bruen ruling requires that to happen.And what would be the impact of a ruling on Bruen in all other “may issue” jurisdictions?Would those jurisdictions construe the rulings in Bruen narrowly or broadly: applicable to those jurisdictions as well, or as having no impact on them?Given what we have seen to date, many jurisdictions blatantly ignore Heller whether the Heller holdings and reasoning are construed broadly or not.So, why then would or should one expect other “may issue” jurisdictions to give Bruen any credence?They ought to, of course. The right of armed self-defense, as a natural right, is not to be taken lightly in the United States, even as it goes unrecognized in other western nations, including the Commonwealth Nations and countries of the EU. And it is unrecognized by the UN, as we pointed out in prior articles.The breadth and depth of High Court rulings is not to be considered a matter of academic interest to legal scholars and legal historians only—as rulings to be adhered to or not, or as stringently or not, as this or that lower Federal and State Court wishes.U.S. Supreme Court holdings often do have or should have, real impact on our Nation even as many jurisdictions routinely misconstrue them. But is this inadvertent or not? Do these jurisdictions deliberately twist, contort and distort Second Amendment Heller and McDonald holdings and reasoning they don’t like?Do these jurisdictions alter Heller and McDonald rulings and reasoning to suit their personal fancy about guns and gun possession, thus allowing Anti-Second Amendment agendas can continue to be pursued, unimpeded? It would seem so.And, this, is, unfortunately, a disturbingly familiar occurrence we see with those government actions that infringe the core of the Second Amendment.

ON THE MATTER OF “NARROW” AND “BROAD” U.S. SUPREME COURT HOLDINGS

But what constitutes a narrow or broad U.S. Supreme Court holding, really? What does the expression “narrowly tailored ruling” mean?This often perplexes the Federal Appellate Courts.See, e.g., United States vs. Skoien, 614 F.3d 638 (7th Cir. 2010). The Seventh Circuit opined,“We do not think it profitable to parse [all the] passages of Heller as if they contained an answer to [all] the question[s] [of what] is valid. They are precautionary language. Instead of resolving questions such as the one we must confront, the Justices have told us that the matters have been left open. The language we have quoted warns readers not to treat Heller as containing broader holdings than the Court set out to establish: thatthe Second Amendment creates individual rights, one of which is keeping operable handguns at home for self-defense. What other entitlements the Second Amendment creates, and what regulations legislatures may establish, were left open. The opinion is not a comprehensive code; it is just an explanation for the Court's disposition. Judicial opinions must not be confused with statutes, and general expressions must be read in light of the subject under consideration.”So, if the issue of immediate access to a firearm for self-defense in the home is, as the 7th Circuit says, meant to be broadly construed—then why is it that some jurisdictions routinely choose to ignore Heller?The answer is plain: because they can and because they want to.NJ S.B. 3757 is a blatant example of this practice. The language of this bill is, in its import, essentially a rehash of the original D.C. handgun bill that the High Court struck down as unconstitutional.Many jurisdictions across the Country loathe the Second Amendment. And it is apparent that, given this loathing of the right of the people to keep and bear arms, they pretend Heller and McDonald don’t exist. This blatant dismissal of these two seminal cases enrages Justices Thomas and Alito to no end, and justifiably so.But the U.S. Supreme Court has no enforcement mechanism to see to it that its Heller and McDonald rulings and reasoning are adhered to.Lower Courts are required to adhere to precedential rulings of higher Courts in their jurisdiction. And all Courts, State and Federal, are required to adhere to U.S. Supreme Court rulings. They are obligated to but often do not.Courts, in a very real sense, are merely on the honor system in this regard. They may be roundly chastised for failing to adhere to higher Court rulings, and should be, but, really, the worst that happens is these Court holdings are, simply, overturned on appeal.Jurists who flagrantly fail to adhere to precedential rulings get a pass. They have absolute immunity from liability.And, as we have heretofore pointed out, even if the High Court rulings were truly expansive, it is unlikely that Anti-Second Amendment jurisdictions will pay heed to those rulings. They will attempt to find ways around them just as they have done with the rulings in Heller and McDonald; treating them with the same disdain and incredulity; rendering opinions that serve merely to torture and obfuscate the rulings and reasoning of the High Court. Nothing is likely to change as long as the citizenry keeps voting into Office individuals who support the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist agenda.Anti-Second Amendment State legislatures that enact laws that violate the core of the Second Amendment continue the practice because they know their Courts will uphold the constitutionality of illegal laws if challenged. Thus, plaintiffs who might otherwise challenge the constitutionality of gun laws that flagrantly defy the Second Amendment and blithely ignore U.S. Supreme Court precedent must think twice before doing so. They know they have an uphill battle.The attendant time wasted for plaintiffs, who challenge unconstitutional government gun regulations, and the attendant monetary costs associated with bringing such actions, are significant, and will usually amount to wasted effort.State and local Governments know this as do Anti-Second Amendment members of Congress.One must appeal to the next higher Court to obtain relief from adverse lower Court decisions. And Appellate Courts will often just rubber-stamp decisions of the Trial Courts. And, appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court for review is, especially, no easy task. It is time-consuming and extremely expensive. And the High Court grants review in a pitifully small number of cases.It would be nice if the High Court could issue orders sua sponte, enjoining Governments from enacting laws that blithely ignore its Second Amendment Heller and McDonald rulings. But the Court cannot do this.Indeed, it would require a separate office within the Court just to keep tabs on all the unconstitutional actions of the State and Federal Governments and of the erroneous rulings coming out of lower Courts.But the U.S. Supreme Court doesn’t have the authority even to efficiently monitor unconstitutional actions of government and erroneous rulings of lower Courts that negatively impact the exercise of the right of the people to keep and bear arms, even if it had the wherewithal and resources to keep tabs on unconstitutional gun laws.And within the High Court itself, several of the Justices all too often interpose their own philosophical prejudices and biases on the Second Amendment issues to be decided. And those prejudices and biases come into play even in the very construction of the legal issues.This has disturbing implications for Bruen. We discuss this matter in the next segment and in future articles._______________________________________________

THE LIBERAL WING OF THE HIGH COURT WITH THE HELP OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE CONSTRAINS BRUEN

PART FOUR

It is a rather curious thing, when one stops to think about it, that the broad right of self-defense, and the narrower fundamental right contained in it and inextricably bound to it—the fundamental, natural, and unalienable right of armed self-defense—would have to come up for review by the U.S. Supreme at all. After all, the right of self-defense/the right of self-preservation and the concomitant natural right of armed self-defense are axiomatic; self-evident true.One would think that, a Country such as ours, with a rich heritage of cherishing natural rights, would not have to suffer enactment of laws that place so many hurdles in the path of citizens who wish nothing more than to be able to exercise the rights the Bill of Rights guarantees them. The Second Amendment, though, is treated by those jurisdictions, controlled by Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists as an outlier, even an outcast—a thing inconsistent with international norms and, so, something to be mercilessly attacked and eventually abrogated. Will this change?Many people, both proponents of the natural right of armed self-defense and its detractors, expect a decision in Bruen, when handed down next summer, will be expansive and all-encompassing and resurrect the Second Amendment’s status as a cherished right—a right absolutely essential to the maintenance of the Nation as a free Constitutional Republic and for the preservation of the Nation in the form of a free Republic for centuries to come.But, even with an expected Conservative wing majority, a positive decision will likely not be as broad-based and all-encompassing as proponents of the Second Amendment yearn for and expect and as the Amendment’s opponents anticipate and dread.Assume, for purpose of argument, that the High Court does strike down New York City’s notoriously oppressive and repressive “may issue” requirements involving the issuance of concealed handgun carry licenses outright. How will this impact similar statutes in other “may issue” jurisdictions? The answer is clear.The Bruen ruling won’t affect other “may-issue” jurisdictions. It won’t affect the prerogative of State and Local Governments in these other jurisdictions that have, in place, their own may-issue procedures. The Chief Justice and the liberal wing of the Court have seen to that in having reframed the issue, as we explain below.A ruling for Plaintiff Petitioner would probably, at best, only serve to strike down unconstitutional procedures established by the City’s gun Licensing Division. Such a ruling would not logically or legally entail the dissolution of “may issue” regulations. It would just impact the particular procedures the City presently employs when rendering its decision.In order for a Bruen majority opinion ruling to be compelling, it would have to be all-encompassing. This means the Court would have to rule that the very notion of “may issue” concealed handgun carry licenses, instead of “shall issue” concealed handgun carry licenses—in the absence of major failings in a person, including, for example, a felony conviction, a dishonorable discharge from the military, mental incompetence, or illegal alien residency in the Country—are logically inconsistent with the import of the right codified in the Second Amendment regardless of procedures utilized. See, 18 USCS § 922(g).And the Court should render a ruling on this because geographical constraints on the exercise of armed self-defense are absurd.For, if a law-abiding, rational, responsible person has the right to preserve his or her life and safety with a firearm, being no threat to another innocent person, how is one’s life and safety to be adduced more valuable in one locale—one’s home say—but not in another locale, i.e., outside one’s home.The Court should respond to this but won’t do that, and the reason is plain: Built-in constraints due to the framing of the issue before the Court preclude a decisive ruling on the exercise of armed self-defense outside one’s home.That is not to say all the Justices would be pleased by this, for the idea behind “may issue” impacts and infringes the very core of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. “May issue” is an affront to the Second Amendment and logically contradicts the very import and purport of the sacred right.From their writings and musings on the Second Amendment, Justices Alito and Thomas would, if they could, strike down “may issue” gun regulations across the board, both as utilized in the City of New York and around the Country. But they can’t. Chief Justice Roberts and the liberal wing of the Court have seen to this.Chief Justice Roberts and the liberal wing of the Court were keenly aware of the ramifications of a major ruling on New York City’s “may issue” regimen if “may issue” were on the table. These Justices abhor other profound rulings as in Heller and McDonald. The entire legality of “may issue” should have been on the table. It should have been on the table, but it isn’t.Roberts and the liberal wing had thought very carefully through this, and they made sure that “may issue” gun licenses would not be targeted, even as Plaintiff Petitioner brought the very issue of “may issue” to the fore, as the question goes to the heart of whether, or to what extent, there should be limitations on where the right of armed self-defense is to be exercised.There should be no geographical parameters defined apropos of one’s exercise of the right of armed self-defense but there will be.____________________________________________

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS AND THE LIBERAL WING OF THE HIGH COURT DIDN’T LIKE THE ISSUE AS PETITIONERS PRESENTED IT IN BRUEN

PART FIVE

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS AND THE LIBERAL WING DEMANDED THE ISSUE TO BE RESOLVED, BE RECAST, TO MAKE IT PALATABLE TO THEM

The question for review, succinctly but broadly presented by Petitioner in his Brief in Corlett(recaptioned Bruen) was,“Whether the Second Amendment allows the government to prohibit ordinary law-abiding citizens from carrying handguns outside the home for self-defense.”This is a broad-based issue that questions the legality/constitutionality of may issue/atypicality requirements, on any conceivable interpretation.The issue as presented to the Court is meant to question the constitutionality of “may issue” concealed handgun carry regimes not only in New York City but in every jurisdiction in the Land. And that is precisely what Petitioners set out to do.The Bruen Petitioners clearly and concisely challenged the idea of Anti-Second Amendment proponents that an unassailable right of armed self-defense does not extend beyond the doorstep of one’s home.Recall that the Heller Court confined its ruling on the geographical perimeters of armed self-defense to the issue at hand: whether an individual has a right of immediate access to a handgun for self-defense inside one’s home.In answering that question, many jurisdictions interpreted the ruling as applying only to the District of Columbia, when the Court never stated or implied that the ruling on the right of immediate access to a firearm inside one’s home is directed to the District of Columbia gun codes and doesn’t implicate similar gun codes or laws in other jurisdictions. In fact, the implication is that the right of immediate access to a firearm for self-defense in one’s home does apply to all jurisdictions.Many State Governments and State and Federal Courts also interpreted the Heller decision as suggesting that a right of armed self-defense doesn’t extend beyond the doorstep to one’s home, regardless of the jurisdiction, but is to be confined—if there is to be such a recognized right at all—only to one’s home.But that idea is simply wrong. The High Court’s silence on the issue meant only that the issue was not before the Court. So, nothing further was to be presumed or deduced from that ruling.New Jersey’s bill, S. 3757, requiring disassembly of firearms in one’s home erroneously presumes the Heller ruling was meant to apply very narrowly only to the District of Columbia. Either that or the New Jersey Legislature didn’t care if the Heller ruling was meant to apply to other jurisdictions, figuring that, if wrong about its application to other jurisdictions, it didn’t matter. The Legislature knew that, if S. 3757 were enacted, a gun owner, unhappy with the law, would have to challenge its constitutionality in Court to obtain recourse—a time-consuming and expensive ordeal.Yet, one’s right of immediate access to a firearm for self-defense in one’s home is not to be presumed to be locale-specific. The ruling applies to all jurisdictions, albeit tacitly, but still unmistakably, by logical implication. Still, the Heller Court ruling didn’t expressly assert the universality of the ruling. It should have done so. The Court should have articulated clearly and categorically that its ruling on one’s Constitutional right of immediate access to a handgun inside the home, for purpose of self-defense—although directed to the D.C. gun codes—was meant to apply, as a general holding, throughout the Country. But the Court didn’t do that.Likely Associate Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito wanted to make the ruling unambiguous on that score but could not do so if they were to gain a majority. That would require positive votes from Chief Justice Roberts and from Justice Kennedy, and those Justices wanted the ruling to remain narrow and nebulous as to its application in other jurisdictions. The only clearly broad-based holding in Heller is that where the Heller Court held that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right unconnected to one’s service in a militia.As to the impact of specific rulings on the D.C. gun codes on other jurisdictions, for one to infer or assume that the rulings on the D.C. gun code rulings do not apply and were not meant to apply outside the District is implausible, but theoretically possible—hence the draft legislation in New Jersey:S. 3757. And that follows from the fact that the Chief Justice and Associate Justice Kennedy wanted to make clear that the Heller ruling was not intended to constrain the right of States to regulate the citizen’s access to guns. That message came out loud and clear and Justice Scalia was compelled to make that assertion explicit, assertingAnd this takes us back to Bruen.On granting the writ for certiorari in Bruen, on April 26, 2021, the Court recast the salient issue very narrowly: “Granted limited to the following question: Whether the State's denial of Petitioners' applications for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated the Second Amendment.”Chief Justice Roberts and the liberal wing of the Court “gamed the system,” even though some legal scholars don’t wish to acknowledge this and some patently deny it.Amy Howe, for one, erstwhile preeminent editor and reporter of SCOTUSblog, who regularly covers U.S. Supreme Court cases, and who ostensibly has an inside track on the musings of the High Court, made light of the Court’s recasting of the issue. Howewrites, in part, “After considering the case at three conferences, the justices agreed to weigh in. They instructed the parties to brief a slightly narrower question than the challengers had asked them to decide, limiting the issue to whether the state’s denial of the individuals’ applications to carry a gun outside the home for self-defense violated the Second Amendment. But the case nonetheless has the potential to be a landmark ruling. It will be argued in the fall with a decision expected sometime next year.” But will Bruen lead to a landmark ruling? Is this recasting of the issue in Bruen a big deal? Amy Howe, apparently, doesn’t think it is, or at least, won’t admit it if she harbors any reservation about it. But we do believe the matter is a big deal and are not reticent about asserting this. If this recasting of the issue in Bruen amounted truly to a slightly narrower question, as Amy Howe asserts, then why would the Court bother to reconfigure the issue at all? The answer to this question is alluded in Heller, as we explain in the next segment.____________________________________

WHY CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS AND THE LIBERAL WING OF THE HIGH COURT INSISTED ON RECASTING THE LEGAL ISSUE IN BRUEN

PART SIX

To understand why Chief Justice Roberts and the liberal wing of the Court were adamant that the Bruen issue be recast narrowly and in the form that it was, it is necessary to go back to the reasoning in Heller. It is pertinent to the matter at hand to understand why the Court dealt with the paramount issue of whether the right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right unconnected to one’s service in a militia because that wasn’t an issue in the case, as framed. In the opening sentences of Heller case, the late Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, said:“We consider whether a District of Columbia prohibition on the possession of usable handguns in the home violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The District of Columbia generally prohibits the possession of handguns. It is a crime to carry an unregistered firearm, and the registration of handguns is prohibited [citations omitted]. Wholly apart from that prohibition, no person may carry a handgun without a license, but the chief of police may issue licenses for 1-year periods [citations omitted]. District of Columbia law also requires residents to keep their lawfully owned firearms, such as registered long guns, ‘unloaded and dissembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device’ unless they are located in a place of business or are being used for lawful recreational activities [citation omitted].”The Heller majority opined that the District of Columbia’s total ban on handgun possession in the home along with the requirement of disassembly of all firearms in the home hit at the very heart of the Second Amendment, as the D.C. Government did intend for it to do.But, Justice Scalia, along with Justices Thomas and Alito, knew quite well, that it was impossible logically to rule against the District of Columbia’s draconian gun law without ruling on the ultimate issue—tantalizingly kept at bay since ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791:Does the right of the people to keep and bear arms constitute an individual right unconnected with one’s service in a militia” or only a collective right, contingent on one’s service in a militia?Of course, to anyone with even a smidgeon of understanding of law and logic, and who is intellectually honest, knows that the import of the right as codified in the Second Amendment is clear on its face.But many academicians and many jurists, too, have for decades, erroneously treated the right as a “collective right” only. And they still maintain that, even after Heller made categorical and irrefutable what was already clear from the plain meaning of the Second Amendment’s language.One’s philosophical or emotional bent often gets in the way of one’s intellectual reasoning faculty.If proponents of the collective right thesis were correct, then any government regulation on gun ownership and possession must be construed as lawful and constitutional so long as a “rational basis” for the government action existed.This means that, while a collective right of the militia to keep and bear arms must be construed as a fundamental right and an action infringing that right would require stringent review of the government’s action, an individual’s right to keep and bear arms would not require such scrutiny. That is bizarre, to be sure, but that is consistent with the “collective right to keep and bear arms” thesis.Taking that thesis as true, arguendo, then an individual challenging the legality of government action, arguing an infringement of his right to keep and bear arms would not invoke stringent court review of the constitutionality of the Court action. A reviewing Court would only have to determine whether the government action bore a reasonable connection to achieving a legitimate State or Federal objective, nothing more. And That is an easy test to meet.Thus, if the Heller Court had not dealt with the underlying issue at the heart of the case—the case would have been decided much differently. The District of Columbia’s total ban on handguns would be ruled legal and Constitutional, as would the government’s requirement that all firearms be disassembled and not available for immediate self-defense use, even in the confines of one’s home. This is tantamount to denying a right to armed self-defense—period.Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito determined that they would not let the opportunity to decide the paramount Second Amendment issue pass. And, given the indomitability of Scalia’s will, and through the power and tenacity of his spirit, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy, reluctantly went along. And, so, the Court majority ruled that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right unconnected with one’s service in a militia.But Justice Scalia is no longer with us. Can Justices Thomas and Alito take up the slack? Bruen likely won’t be the next blockbuster case supporting the right of the people to keep and bear arms to the extent that Heller is. And, a decision on the merits, unlike the New York Gun Transport case, will be forthcoming. The New York Government cannot amend the gun licensing scheme in a manner that would keep the entire structure intact as it did in the Gun Transport case.For “may issue” is really at the heart of New York’s licensing regime. If “may issue” goes, the entire New York handgun licensing structure comes crashing down._________________________________________

WHY ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT FORCES ABHOR AND FEAR HELLER

PART SEVEN

The U.S. Supreme Court, knows that the driving mechanism of the right of the people to keep and bear arms rests on the assumption, taken as axiomatic, self-evident true, that the right is grounded on the natural, fundamental right of armed self-defense that itself is inextricably bound to the basic right of self-preservation and personal selfhood, i.e., personal autonomy. The right exists inherently in each person as an individual Soul, as the Divine Creator intended.If the Second Amendment were to be treated as a “collective right,” that is tantamount to saying there is no right at all. The right would be nugatory, because right would belong solely to the State, not to the person.The framers of the Constitution couldn’t have meant that. They didn’t put pen to paper just to waste ink. Moreover, such an interpretation would conflict with the very import of the Bill of Rights, essentially deflating the import of the entirety of it. For, without a personal right of armed self-defense, man is vulnerable to attack from predatory beast, which is bad; and from predatory man, which is worse; and from the predatory government, which is worst of all.So, in Heller, Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito took that opportunity—when it finally came around—to pointedly and decisively hold that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right, unconnected with one’s service in a militia. This of, course, is plain from the text of the Second Amendment but since many courts and scholars choose to ignore it, pretending that the language of the Second Amendment doesn’t mean what it says, the High Court made the point clear, so that no one can conveniently obfuscate the meaning of the language.Note: the issue as to the meaning of the nature of the right of the people to keep and bear arms was never before the Heller Court. The only two issues before the Court were whether:“the total ban on handguns under D.C. Code §§ 7-2501.01(12), 7-2502.01(a), 7-2502.02(a)(4), as well as the requirement under D.C. Code § 7-2507.02 that firearms be kept nonfunctional, violated exercise of the constitutional right of the people to keep and bear arms.”But, Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito knew that striking down these Statutes would do little to constrain a government that abhors civilian citizen exercise of the Second Amendment right, unless the High Court made clear that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right, and not a privilege to be bestowed on a person by government prior to exercising the right.The District of Columbia would continue to enact new laws that did much the same thing as the old laws. Anti-Second Amendment Governments would have to exercise more discretion and creativity in denying Americans their God-given right.Once the right is understood clearly, succinctly, and unambiguously, to be an individual natural right, rather than a Government bestowed privilege, it is easy for reviewing courts to ascertain whether government action constrain exercise of the core individual right.Of course that should happen but didn’t happen. The recent New Jersey bill, for one, is evidence of rabid disdain of many in Government toward the Second Amendment. It also demonstrates the tenacity of Anti-Second Amendment in continuing to drum up more and more unconstitutional codes, regulations, ordinances, and statutes despite of and in spite of the clear pronouncement in Heller. Resistance to Heller is obdurate.Still, Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito had held out the hope that a clear and categorical pronouncement on the import of the Second Amendment would constrain resistant vocal forces in Government. And, in fact Anti-Second Amendment Courts cannot dismiss the salient holding of Heller out-of-hand, but must remark on it, even as they strain to uphold unconstitutional gun laws, as they continually do.Be that as it may—At least in Heller, with the idea that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is a collective right now, finally, laid to rest—and not to be denied out-of-hand the Heller Court could deal effectively with the issue at bar in Heller. Justice Scalia, writing for the majority, said,“We turn finally to the law at issue here. As we have said, the law totally bans handgun possession in the home. It also requires that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock at all times, rendering it inoperable.” But, the impact of Heller on Bruen may be minimal. Even if the High Court finds the New York City Rule to be unconstitutional and strikes it down, this only amounts to a finding simply that the decision on the Plaintiff Petitioners’ applications for an unrestricted concealed handgun carry license was unconstitutional. An answer to the “narrow question” as reframed, only requires that; nothing more.At best, the High Court can, consistent with the rephrasing of the question on review, find the City’s procedures for determining whether an applicant meets the stringent requirements of ‘atypicality’ to be inadequate.If that is to happen, a remand of the case to the trial court would require the trial court to strike down the procedures now in place in New York City, and instruct the Government to promulgate new procedures for handling the licensing of concealed handgun carry licenses. This, unsurprisingly, is what the Respondents have requested. It would be a satisfactory win for them. For the constitutionality of atypicality would go unanswered: The handgun licensing structure of New York would remain intact; and the core issue the Petitioners wanted decided—an unqualified right of armed self-defense outside the home—would remain unresolved.And the redrafting of New York City’s “may issue” procedures would likely be no better than the ones currently in place, because the NYPD License Division would still retain authority to grant or reject applications: an inherently subjective judgment call.Moreover, the ramifications of “may issue” procedures only impact New York—consistent with the issue as restated. Other “may issue” jurisdictions can proceed as they always have.Anyone who questions “may issue” procedures in other jurisdictions would have to file their own challenges. This would necessitate another appeal, by another petitioner, to the High Court, requesting review of another “may issue” procedure of that other Anti-Second Amendment jurisdiction, assuming relief from a lower court is not forthcoming.The ensuing problems for Americans who simply seek to exercise their God-given right to keep and bear arms are endless and intractable. And the Court is not likely to take up a similar issue, leaving forever open the right of armed self-defense.But the most critical point to be made is one that no one else, to our knowledge has even considered. It is that—The right of the people to keep and bear arms tacitly embraces the right of self-defense which entails the right of personal autonomy——the quintessential right upon which the sanctity and inviolability of one’s own Soul depends.The framers of the Constitution took that most basic of natural rights to be self-evident true. They took this fact to be so obvious that express mention of it was deemed unnecessary—even by the Antifederalist framers who demanded that several of the salient natural rights be codified.Thus, the Second Amendment expressly asserts and emphasizes only the need for the people to always be armed and at the ready to secure a free State, against incursion of tyranny of Government. It is for this reason that the people remain armed that the sanctity of their Selfhood can be free from Government intrusion and free from Government impediment: untouched, unsoiled, untrampled, undiminished.Having successfully fought off one tyrannical government, the founders of the Republic had dire concerns of any strong centralized government. Even with the checks and balances of the Federal Government they constructed, they knew that this Government, too, had within the seeds of it, the danger of tyranny—an unavoidable fact of the worst of human nature. An armed citizenry was the ultimate preventive medicine against that.But, if armed defense is contained and constrained within the confines of one’s home, then the implicit message is that no American has the unalienable right to employ defensive arms against tyranny of Government, for the structures of Government power exist outside one’s home.And containment of the Second Amendment and the panoply of other Rights of the Bill of Rights is just how Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists presently running the show in Government and throughout the Country intend to keep it at least for the time being, until such time as they consolidate enough control and power to erase all of it.___________________________________

DON’T EXPECT BRUEN TO BE THE DECISIVE PRONOUNCEMENT OF ONE’S SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHT AS HELLER AND MCDONALD PROVIDED

PART EIGHT

The issue before the High Court, as reformulated, in Bruen, requires the Court only to determine whether the City’s rules for granting concealed carry handgun licenses are arbitrary and capricious.The Court thus leaves undecided the principal issue that the Petitioner wanted the Court to review, namely whether the right of armed self-defense extends beyond the confines of one’s home, making clear what the Heller Court didn’t rule on: the expansiveness of armed self-defense—beyond the confines of the home—as the founders of a free Republic understood the natural right.After all, what is one to make of saying a person has a right to armed self-defense in some places but not others, other than to reaffirm the right of Government to continue to place unconstitutional restrictions the on exercise of the right of armed self-defense. The idea is absurd on its face, and negatively implicates the very notion of self-defense, armed or otherwise.Of course, Justices Alito and Thomas could write concurring opinions taking the Court to task for not ruling on the most important issue, whether armed self-defense extends everywhere; and probably will do this if one or the other Justice is not assigned to draft the majority opinion. But a concurrence would amount to dicta only, not a Court ruling.The High Court will most likely confine its ruling, or rulings, to addressing New York City’s “may issue” procedure, which is the way Chief Justice Roberts and the liberal wing of the Court had the issue restructured and that is what the Respondents wanted.This smacks of a “cop-out.” And we have seen this before, in the Court’s handling of the previous New York City Gun Transport case. That is what the Respondent City had in fact requested in oral argument. If the City gets that much, then they essentially win, and anti-Second Amendment advocates will breathe a collective sigh of relief. For, the salient issue, as to whether the right of the people to carry firearms for self-defense outside one’s home, which Heller didn’t address and, in fact, painfully avoided—as Roberts and Kennedy likely insisted upon—remained unexamined.And, this would be just as Roberts and the liberal wing of the Court would want to continue to leave it, as this would keep the perceived “damage” ofHeller and McDonald within rigid, narrowly defined contours.Anti-Second Amendment Courts and governments will continue operating as they have been operating all along: pretending Heller and McDonald never existed, and continually pressing for more and more repugnant, restrictive, repressive firearms' laws. And as those seminal Second Amendment cases have routinely been ignored, now one would add Bruen.This must have vexed Justice Scalia. The Chief Justice, John Roberts and Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, compelled Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito to soften the impact of Heller, which, at its core made clear that the right of the people to keep and bear arms rests well beyond the lawful ability of Government to abrogate. But tension would remain between the categorical natural right of the people to own and possess firearms and the desire of State Governments to exercise their own police powers to constrain and restrict the right to the point that the right would cease to exist. And, the Federal Government, for its part, would have its own reason to erase the idea of a right of the people to keep and bear arms that rests beyond the lawful power of that Federal Government to erase, modify, abrogate, dismiss, or simply ignore. For an armed citizenry would, in its very existence threaten tyranny. And that is something the Federal Government has always been uneasy with, and all the more so now, with Counterrevolutionary Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists hell-bent on disassembling a free Constitutional Republic and independent, sovereign nation-state that it may be successfully merged into a supra-national, transnational governmental construct.Did the late Justice Antonin Scalia surmise this? Did he see this coming? Did he attempt to prevent it? And did powerful, ruthless forces, beholding to no nation and to no set of laws recognize this, and initiate plans to prevent anyone and anything that might thwart their plans for a new political, social, economic, financial, cultural, and juridical governmental construct: a new world order. In such a scheme the concept of the nation-state is archaic, serving no functional purpose. And the idea of a people as sole sovereign ruling body over Government is particularly dangerous and abhorrent. _________________________________

THE HELLER CASE ILLUSTRATES THE TENSION AT WORK TODAY IN AMERICA, BETWEEN TRUE PATRIOTS WHO WISH TO PRESERVE THE NATION AS A FREE REPUBLIC AND THE TRAITORS INTENT ON DEMOLISHING ALL OF IT

PART NINE

In the last paragraph of the Heller majority opinion, one sees the results of the demand placed on Justice Scalia. Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy compelled Scalia to expressly assert the right of States to exert control over the right of the people to keep and bear arms.There is manifest tension here between the right and of the individual to retain sole and absolute possession and control over and enjoyment of use in his firearms as his personal property and the State's opposition to the individual's absolute authority over his personal property rights in his firearms. The State insists on placing constraints on the exercise of the citizen's control over his own firearms, and the citizen insists on repulsing the State. Scalia was forced to make allowance for Government to constrain what is an irrefutable, absolute right. He was compelled to throw a bone to the Anti-Second Amendment Marxists and Globalists by making explicit the reference to “gun violence, they insisted on.But one also sees Scalia’s intention to have the last word, both alluding to and denying that the Second Amendment will not be made extinct—at least not on Scalia’s watch. The pity that this eminent, jurist, who had demonstrated true reverence for our Nation’s Bill of Rights would have no hand in penning an opinion in Bruen. That Justice Scalia is no longer with us, Americans are all the worst without him.For the danger of tyranny of Government is most acute today, and there is no greater need for an armed citizenry today, to thwart tyranny. And Justice Scalia knew this well. He ended the Heller majority opinion with these words: “We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country, and we take seriously the concerns raised by the many amici who believe that prohibition of handgun ownership is a solution. The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns [citation omitted]. But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home. Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.”Unfortunately for us Americans, the Second Amendment could very well go extinct given the current unhealthy climate in this Country, deliberately worsened through Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist provocation, driving the Country to a Civil War.Retired Justice John Paul Stevens and Justice Stephen Breyer responded directly to Justice Scalia’s closing remarks in Heller. They caustically remonstrated against him, provoking him by asserting erroneously and absurdly that, to call the right of the people to keep and bear arms an individual right, is to have the Court create a right that doesn’t exist in the Bill of Rights. Really?And, Stevens and Breyer further insulted the late Justice by remarking that it is for Government to define the rights that the people have through the policy choices that Government makes. Justice Stevens and Breyer invoked the tired erroneous claim that whatever right to keep and bear arms exists in the Second Amendment,that right is a collective right, which is to say, a Government sanctioned privilege. In so saying they rebuked Justice Scalia, and Justices Thomas and Alito, casually dismissing out-of-hand, the salient, paramount holding of Heller.In their joined Dissent, Stevens and Breyer write,“Untiltoday, it has been understood that legislatures may regulate the civilian use and misuse of firearms so long as they do not interfere with the preservation of a well-regulated militia. The Court's announcement of a new constitutional right to own and use firearms for private purposes upsets that settled understanding, but leaves for future cases the formidable task of defining the scope of permissible regulations. Today judicial craftsmen have confidently asserted that a policy choice that denies a ‘law-abiding, responsible citize[n]’ the right to keep and use weapons in the home for self-defense is ‘off the table.’ Given the presumption that most citizens are law abiding, and the reality that the need to defend oneself may suddenly arise in a host of locations outside the home, fear that the District's policy choice may well be just the first of an unknown number of dominoes to be knocked off the table.”“I do not know whether today's decision will increase the labor of federal judges to the ‘breaking point’ envisioned by Justice Cardozo, but it will surely give rise to a far more active judicial role in making vitally important national policy decisions than was envisioned at any time in the 18th, 19th, or 20th centuries.” Note, that Breyer, who still serves on the High Court, asserts his fear, in Heller, that the Court might actually proclaim that armed self-defense does exist outside the realm of one’s home.If Justice Scalia were still alive and serving on the Court, he would indeed make clear, in Bruen, that the right of armed self-defense outside the home is within the core meaning of the language of the Second Amendment. But, with Scalia gone, the Bruen case—that would have become the third seminal Second Amendment case—creating a triumphant Second Amendment Triumvirate of seminal cases, sanctifying the Bill of Rights, will not be.The Destroyers, Destructors, and Defilers of our Republic will continue pressing to wear down the American psyche and spirit.The Bruen rulings will likely amount to little more than a bee sting to the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists, having little negative impact on New York, and no impact on Anti-Second Amendment Governments across the Nation and no discernible impact on Anti-Second Amendment forces in the Federal Government.The “atypicality” requirement will remain. Just the procedures in granting concealed handgun carry licenses in New York City would change.And nothing would change for other Anti-Second Amendment jurisdictions as they will retain their own “atypicality” requirements unless those procedures are successfully challenged in their own Courts of competent jurisdiction.All the problems attendant to the Federal and State Governments’ refusal to recognize the sanctity and inviolability of the right of the people to keep and bear arms will remain unscathed.And, from what we gather coming out of Biden’s maw and that of the illustrious Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist Governor of California, Gavin Newsom, of late, the seeming impenetrable castle walls assiduously built by the Heller and McDonald rulings and reasoning, remain under siege, and in danger of successful breach at the first opportunity._____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

12/2/21 12/2/21

TYRANNY, FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, AND THE ARMED CITIZEN

ARMED SELF-DEFENSE AS A BASIC HUMAN RIGHT

PART ONE

Is armed self-defense a basic human right? That is the crux of an ongoing debate for many people in the United States. It shouldn’t be but it is.The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution makes clear that armed self-defense is a fundamental human right. If anyone harbors doubt about that, the United States Supreme Court settled the question in 2008, in the seminal Second Amendment case, Heller vs. District of Columbia.The late eminent Associate Justice, Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, opined “the inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right.”This means armed self-defense is not to be perceived as a thing apart from the broader notion of self-defense, but, rather, is subsumed in it. The sole issue in Heller was “whether a District of Columbia prohibition on the possession of usable handguns in the home violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution.”In ruling that an outright ban on the use of a handgun for self-defense in one’s home does violate the core of the Second Amendment right, the majority also held that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right unconnected with one’s service in a militia. This ruling is consistent with and is implied in the Court’s ruling on the salient issue.Moreover, the High Court made patently clear that Government didn’t create the right of armed self-defense but simply codified it, for the right of armed self-defense exists intrinsically in one’s being.The Court said,“Putting all of these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation. This meaning is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment. We look to this because it has always been widely understood that the Second Amendment like the First and Fourth Amendments codified a pre-existing right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it ‘shall not be infringed.’”The recent Kyle Rittenhouse case is a textbook study of the utility of a firearm in effective defense of self against aggressive predatory attack.But this idea doesn’t sit well with Anti-Second Amendment proponents:“Gun rights are not human rights.”So says “democracy and human rights advocate,” Rukmani Bhatia who had served in the Obama Administration.Her assertion is posited not as a thesis to be proved but as an assumption to be accepted as self-evident, true, notwithstanding the plain meaning of the Second Amendment and the High Court’s rulings in Heller.No matter——Bhatia makes the assertion in a “Report” published by the George Soros funding Marxist think tank, “Center for American Progress,” on August 12, 2020.The Report is titled, “Untangling the Gun Lobby’s Web of Self-Defense and Human Rights,” and is subtitled, “Peddling False Rights, Profiting Off Fear.” Bhatia writes, in pertinent part,“Today, alongside this rights-based narrative, a parallel narrative exists that is perpetuated by the U.S. gun industry as part of a multifaceted effort to increase gun sales. This so-called gun-rights narrative manipulates the ideals of human rights to establish not only an inalienable right to life but also an unfettered right to armed self-defense to protect oneself from any perceived threat of harm. This narrative hinges on fear and the need to defend oneself and loved ones from unknown but ever-present threats through whatever means necessary and without regard to the rights of others. It is grounded by the false claim that the most effective means of self-preservation involves using a firearm.”From her remarks, dubious and outlandish as they are, one detects a note of irritation and frustration, borne of a deep-seated ethical or aesthetic abhorrence of guns and of the citizen’s right to keep and bear them. But there is more to be gleaned from this account.The Marxist antagonism directed to armed self-defense, as reflected in Bhatia’s “Report,” hides a sinister agenda.It is an agenda at loggerheads with the sanctity and inviolability of personal selfhood and one inconsistent with the preservation of the United States as a free Constitutional Republic.Grounded on the tenets and precepts of Collectivism (See e.g., Arbalest Quarrel article on the differences between Collectivism and Individualism), the Marxist intends to thrust their vision of reality on the entire Nation. Most Americans find that vision disagreeable if not thoroughly reprehensible and repugnant.The Marxist isn't unaware of this and resorts to artifice and chicanery to seduce the polity. The Marxist relies on the legacy Press and social media to assist in making it palatable to the public policy goals designed to transform a free Republic into a Marxist Dictatorship.Marxists mask their disdain for the dignity of man by disingenuously claiming to venerate it.At the outset of her Center for American Progress Report, Bhatia cites Article 1 of “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights” (“UDHR”) a document crafted by the United Nations, where, citing Article 1 of the UDHR and then expanding on the sentiments of it, Bhatia writes,“Every human life has inherent value and dignity, and every person has the right to life, liberty, and personal security. These truths are codified in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The UDHR was historic, with nations coming together to explicitly recognize the need to protect and preserve these fundamental rights, structuring constitutions to explicitly defend their citizens’ human rights, and particularly their rights to life, freedom, and security. The protection of human rights continues to be a defining pillar to secure a stable, peaceful liberal world order. But in the United States, some groups—such as the gun lobby—are seizing upon this rights-based narrative to justify, dangerously, the right to bear, carry, and use firearms.”The United Nations says this about the development of the UDHR:“Drafted by representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world, the Declaration was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 (General Assembly resolution 217 A) as a common standard of achievements for all peoples and all nations. It sets out, fundamental human rights to be universally protected and. . . is widely recognized as having inspired, and paved the way for, the adoption of more than seventy human rights treaties, applied today on a permanent basis at global and regional levels. . . .” Extolling the sentiments of the UDHR, as Rukmani Bhatia does in her Center for Progress Report, is all well and good. But how is one expected to effectively confront an aggressive, vicious attack that emanates from the predatory beast, predatory man, or the tyrannical, predatory Government if not through armed self-defense? The Marxist, Bhatia, doesn’t say, which begs the very question at issue in her Report. Is Bhatia not aware of this? Perhaps, she is aware of this but consciously chooses to slither around it, hoping no one perceives the gaping hole that she has left open in her Report.In an attempt to avoid dealing with the question, head-on, Marxists, like Bhatia, simply take the easy way out. They deny the essence of the problem, claiming, as Bhatia does, and as she argues, that the threat of harm isn’t real, was never real, but is and always was grounded in an unwarranted fear of harm.But the threat is real, and the fear isn’t unwarranted, and Americans are witnessing all of it. And it is painfully evident through the inaction and empty posturing of effete and impotent Federal and State Governments to the harm generated.Either the Marxist-controlled Federal Government and similar Marxist-controlled State and local Governments are simply inept and incompetent and, so, wholly unable to deal with the harm, or they welcome, even encourage, the attendant harms to the citizen and society alike. Likely it is a combination of both.The framers of the United States Constitution had the answer to the threat of harm caused by predatory beast, predatory man, or predatory Government, an unwelcome one for these Marxists, to be sure, as they aim to break apart American society and culture so that they can rebuild society in accordance with the strictures of Marxism.The answer rests in the Nation’s Bill of Rights (BOR), specifically in the citizen's exercise of his Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. This, more than anything else, is the answer to the bedlam and mayhem wrought by those that seek the Country’s undoing. Small wonder, then, that these Marxists desire to destroy the Right._______________________________________________

THE UNITED NATIONS IGNORES ARMED SELF-DEFENSE AS A BASIC HUMAN RIGHT; THE UNITED STATES EMBRACES IT

PART TWO

On December 10, 1948, the United Nations crafted a document, titled “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The document is a litany of 30 Rights (“Articles”) that ostensibly proclaims the dignity of the human being and his right to life, liberty, and security.The Preamble of the United Nations’ UDHR sets forth: “Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,Now, therefore,The General Assembly,Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.” These are all noble sentiments, as articulated, of course. But there is a major problem the UDHR fails to address: How is a human being supposed to secure these lofty ideals for him or herself? The drafters of the United Nations’ UDHR fail to say.In the litany of over two dozen fundamental rights set forth in the UDHR’s “Articles,” there is no mention whatsoever of a right of armed self-defense. In fact, there is no mention in the UDHR of a right of self-defense, armed or otherwise.By failing to acknowledge self-defense, and its corollary armed self-defense, as basic human rights, the United Nations’ UDHR undercuts “the inherent dignity and . . . equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family” that it claims pompously to venerate.The UDHR is intentionally deceptive; a ploy of international Marxism and Neoliberal Globalism. It is designed to seduce nations into forsaking their independence and sovereignty, reducing both nation and population to misery and servitude, all the while claiming to promote the “equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family.” But note: even in this seemingly clear, unambiguous exposition, there is a sinister uncurrent. The UDHR speaks of purported inalienable rights to be enjoyed by the human family in a group capacity, that is to say, as a collective. There is no suggestion, no intimation these rights are to be enjoyed by human beings in an individual capacity.

WHERE ARMED SELF-DEFENSE IS ABSENT, TYRANNY OF GOVERNMENT IS UNAVOIDABLE

The United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“UDHR”) mentions, in its Preamble, that “it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law.”The American public hears much about the importance of “the Rule of Law” from Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists. The EU also makes much use of this phrase, as does the UN in reference to human rights as noted supra.Supposedly Government’s application of “the Rule of Law” operates as a hedge against encroaching tyranny. But does it? Vainglorious are those who make constant reference to it—U.S. politicians in particular. But, what does ‘rule of law’ really mean? The appeal to it is subterfuge, dissembly.In the absence of a useful definition, the expression, ‘Rule of Law’ is vacuous. And, that is just the way politicians want to keep it. Don’t ask them to define the expression. They have no idea what it means and would be thunderstruck if anyone were to ask them to provide a definition. A declaration of human rights that avails itself of the words “Rule of Law” as the primary or sole check against the tyranny of Government is devoid of substance.The UN’s UDHR is deceptive. The claim of sanctifying human rights is belied by the emptiness of the gesture. How are human rights to be actualized or, if need be, how are they to be vindicated? In the “Rule of Law?” Really? How is one to understand this “Rule of Law?” And, from whom is one to receive “Rule of Law” relief from tyranny? From that very Government that imposes tyranny on the populace?Yet, the United Nation’s UDHR relies on the ‘Rule of Law’ as the check on tyranny. That is all one obtains from the UDHR; that is all the UN delivers to “the human family” that it claims to care so deeply about.The United States’ BOR, unlike the UDHR, doesn't expect the citizen to place his reliance on arcane nomenclature to provide a check on the tyranny of Government. A check on the tyranny of Government rests in the physicality of the armed citizenry, not on empty pompous verbiage.The framers of the Constitution wouldn’t waste ink on ‘Rule of Law’ when preparing the Bill of Rights. The framers of the BOR did not expect the ‘Rule of Law’ to protect them from the tyranny of George III of England. They placed their faith in the force of arms, not in arcane, abstruse concepts to release them from tyranny. And they would place the future security of a free Republic in nothing less than dint of arms.The only functional check against the tyranny of Government is the physicality of “armed self-defense.” Armed self-defense is what worries, even terrifies, the Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist, and with good reason. For the aim of these internationalists is to create a top-down autocratic Government, that is to say, “Tyranny.” But Tyranny is not able to gain a foothold in a nation where the citizenry is armed.The Tyrant fears Tyrannicide at the hands of the armed Citizenry and, so, demands that the Citizenry surrender its arms to the Tyrant. The Citizenry fears Democide at the hands of the Tyrant's agents, and, so, refuses to surrender its arms to the Tyrant.The United States, as a free Republic, must never forsake the sacred right embodied in the Second Amendment. To do so would be tantamount to the destruction of the Republic and enslavement of the populace.The American people must never for one moment trust the Government or its propagandists who proclaim that for the public harmony, safety, and order it is in the best interests of the polity to surrender its firearms. The day the citizen does so will be the day the citizen should be prepared to sacrifice his autonomy, his dignity, his soul, and his life.___________________________________________

THE CITIZEN MUST BE EVER ON GUARD OF GOVERNMENT THAT PROMISES HARMONY, SAFETY, AND TRANQUILITY IF HE BUT SURRENDER ALL ARMS TO THE STATE

PART THREE

Unlike the United Nations that doesn’t mention a natural right of armed self-defense in its Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), our Nation embraces it.The States ratified the Nation’s Bill of Rights (BOR) on December 15, 1791.The BOR predates the UDHR by over one hundred and fifty years even as the UN heralds its own UDHR as “a milestone.” In codifying the right of armed self-defense in the BOR, the Framers of it at once proclaimed the sanctity of Personal Selfhood and provided a rationale for it: the need for the citizen to remain wary of the tyranny of Government.The Second Amendment provides both a stark warning to the Government and a categorical prohibition on Government apropos of it.The people need not and must not abide by the tyranny of Government, and Government is prohibited from tampering with this perfect fail-safe mechanism by which the American people may effectively resist the inception of tyranny.The language of the Second Amendment to thwart tyranny is self-executing. In fact, the clearest indication of the Government’s slide into tyranny is through the unlawful attempt to eradicate the American citizenry’s exercise of the right embodied in it.The only reason the Government would dare to take such action to eradicate the exercise of the right of armed self-defense would be to preclude the citizenry from exercising the means by which it is well capable of repelling the insinuation of tyranny on the citizenry.The danger of ever-present tyranny is manifest in the prefatory clause of the Second Amendment—pointing to “a well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State.” And the subsequent independent clause of the Second Amendment provides the ultimate fail-safe mechanism of which the citizen shall avail himself if Government devolves into tyranny: “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”The framers of the Bill of Rights recognized that man cannot secure his life, safety, and well-being from the predatory beast, predatory man, or predatory government in the absence of an effective means to do so—as only a firearm provides.Superficially, the United Nations’ UDHR and the BOR may seem similar, as both documents point to and allude, in their language, to the higher aspirations and Rights of man.But, on the crucial matter of self-defense, the principal difference between the two is laid bare.The United Nations doesn’t presume or countenance individuals as having the wherewithal or even the right and responsibility to provide for the defense of Self.The United Nations only makes reference to ‘self-defense’ in its Charter, signed on June 26, 1945. And in its Charter, self-defense is referenced only in one of its Articles, and, then, only in relation to the rights of nations, not in respect to the populations of those nations.Article 51 of the UN Charter says,“Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.”Self-defense remains a prerogative and responsibility of the UN apropos of nations, whether in an individual or collective capacity. The UN does not recognize “Self-defense” as a right intrinsic to individual human beings, whether in an individual or in a collective capacity.Moreover, the rights promulgated in the UDHR, noble aspirations though they may appear to be, as articulated, are understood by their crafters, to be man-made constructs. Thus, they do not even operate in the UDHR as true fundamental rights. The suggestion is mere pretense. And that is another major failing with the UDHR. Fundamental Rights are Natural preexistent Rights—existing intrinsically in man. They aren’t creations of man.The “Articles” qua Rights, delineated in the UDHR, are considered mutable and limitable. They are not to be perceived as—and were never intended to be perceived as—independent of the dictates of the United Nations, but were, in their creation, considered subordinate to the UN's dictates.This is evident from a perusal of Clauses 2 and 3 of Article 29 of the UDHR:“In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.”“These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.”Article 29 demonstrates the vacuity of the entire enterprise.Unlike the Rights codified in the U.S. Constitution’s BOR, the Rights delineated in the UDHR remain subordinate to the crafters of it, who retain ultimate and exclusive authority over it: to keep it, modify it, or erase it, as they wish.Yet, a declaration of purported human rights that cannot stand on its own, independent of the sanctioning authority that created it, is an edifice built on sand.The Bill of Rights, unlike the UDHR, is the genuine article, not a vacuous simulacrum of noble aspirations.The Nation’s Bill of Rights is to be understood as a codification of natural law rights, not man-made conventions. That point is significant.The framers took as axiomatic that natural law rights are fundamental, unalienable, immutable, and illimitable. As such, they are not lawfully subject to modification, abrogation, or abandonment by the Government; nor can Government perfunctorily dismiss them.The implication of this is clear: ultimate power, authority, and sovereignty rest solely in the American people, not in the Federal Government.Any attempt by the Government to limit, abrogate, or deny to the American people the unalienable exercise of their fundamental Rights amounts to an unlawful intrusion on and unlawful usurpation of power belonging solely to the American people, and an unlawful encroachment on the sovereignty of the people over Government.An assault by the Government on the sovereignty of the American people over Government constitutes Tyranny of Government. Tyranny of Government is Treachery of Government. And, Treachery of Government is Treason by Government directed against its own people.Armed self-defense is the best hedge against the most serious danger to a free man: the predatory, tyrannical Government. In dicta, the Heller majority acknowledged this, citing for support, The Federalist 29: “when able-bodied men of a nation are trained in arms and organized, they are better able to resist tyranny.”Since the Marxist vision of Government and the citizen’s relationship to it requires subordination of the will of the citizen to Government, Marxists abhor the very notion of the “armed citizen.”Not by accident, then, is there any mention of “self-defense,”—armed or otherwise—in the UDHR. A laundry list of Rights (“Articles”) never so much as alludes to one’s unalienable right of armed self-defense or even of a general right of self-defense.But, if a man isn’t allowed the exercise of the fundamental right of armed self-defense—if in fact, the very notion of self-defense is not to be perceived of as a basic human right—wherein, then, shall a man look to secure the “inherent value and dignity” of his life that the UN crafters of the UDHR talk so floridly about? In Government? In the new “liberal world order” qua “new world order” that Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists proclaim to be a good thing? Please!The American people must resist subtle and overt coercion by these Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists who urge them to forsake their elemental right of armed self-defense. To do so will imperil both their own lives and well-being and that of a free Constitutional Republic.______________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

11/24/21 11/24/21

THE RIGHT TO DISSENT AND THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS ARE A BULWARK AGAINST TYRANNY

Americans remain at the moment privileged to celebrate Thanksgiving, Christmas, Independence Day, Labor Day, and other Holidays. But, for how much longer.A year ago July, Independence day we wrote of the dire threats to our Nation, coming from within.“With Independence Day only days away, this Country can hardly be in a celebratory spirit, as the very words, ‘nationalism’ and ‘patriotism’ are treated like obscenities.We witness two-legged predators laying waste the Land, destroying property, intimidating innocent Americans, causing bedlam and mayhem. The police, under fire, are ordered to stand down. Government cowers. Law and Order breaks down everywhere. The seditious Press and Radical Left members of Congress, along with Radical Left State Governors and City Mayors give their blessing to the perpetrators of this violence.” See also our sister article, posted a few days earlier. Has anything changed, almost seventeen months later? Yes, the threat to our Nation has only grown direr.The Trotting Horse of American Marxism and Neoliberal Globalism is now running at full gallop. It is charging directly toward a formidable defense to be sure—the Bill of Rights. But it is determined to break through, destroying the Constitution of the United States, annihilating a free Republic, subjugating a free and sovereign people.Evidence for this is everywhere, including, inter alia:

Government acquiescence to violent rioting, and looting in the Nation’s cities
A systematic plan to indoctrinate the Nation’s youth with “Critical Race Theory”
Constraints on the exercise of Free Speech/Intolerance toward Dissent
Violations of Due Process and Equal Protection Guarantees
Violations of the Right Against Unreasonable Searches and Seizures
Unlawful Government orders and mandates, such as mandatory COVID Vaccinations
Failure of Government to Enforce the Nation’s Immigration Laws
Debilitation of the Military: Purging of the Ranks, Politicization of Upper Echelons, Creating Dissension, and Destroying morale
Consolidation of Governmental power in a single Branch
Expanding Federal Government power over the people and the States
Emasculation of State and Community Police Forces
Politicization and Corruption of Executive Branch Departments
Deliberate Destruction of the Nation’s Economy
Collusion between the Government and the Press to Distort News and to indoctrinate the public
The defacing, destroying, and removing of national monuments
Denigration of the American Flag and other national emblems
Belittlement of the notion of “Citizen of the United States”
Ennoblement of Marxist Lawbreakers and Illegal Aliens

And most ominously,

Concerted Attacks on Civilian Possession of firearms and of the inherent, natural Right of Armed Self-defense.

THE ERA OF “HYBRID WARFARE”

The Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist forces that dare to crush both the institutions of our Nation and the spirit of our people, are engaging in a new, sophisticated multilayered stratagem. It has a name. It is called, “Hybrid Warfare.” This is an expression that entered the political and military lexicon in 2008.“In the twenty-first century, wars are not declared or waged conventionally; instead, conflicts are instigated by clandestine agents using military, non-military, media, cyber tools, information operations, NGOs, nonstate actors, intelligence agencies, economic tools, propaganda, ambiguity, terrorism, and insurgency or rebel movements. In hybrid warfare, the lines between peacetime and wartime and between combatants and civilians are blurred. Further, systemic aggression is imposed on the targeted state using gray zones, nonlinear warfare, unrestricted warfare, unconventional warfare, and color revolutions to avoid attribution and possible retribution against the aggressor.The threat posed by hybrid warfare is real. hybrid warfare employs a wide array of power tools, including: political, economic, military, asymmetric, civil. Additionally, it includes informational tools such as: diplomacy, terrorism, proxies, and economic attacks to persuade populations or to divide societies. hybrid warfare targets the vulnerabilities of a society and system while deliberately exploiting ambiguity to avoid detection. It is usually detected only when it is fully functional and capable of inflicting harm. Some researchers believe that lawfare (in which law is used as a tool of aggression) is also a branch of hybrid warfare. John J. McCuen, in his 2008 paper ‘Hybrid Wars,’ describes hybrid warfare as ‘spectrum wars with both physical and conceptual dimensions: the former, a struggle against an armed enemy and the latter, a wider struggle for control and support of the combat zone's indigenous population, the support of the home fronts of the intervening nations, and the support of the international community.’ McCuen sees hybrid warfare as using a variety of tools to persuade the domestic population of a targeted state.” ~The Rise Of Hybrid Warfare, 10 Notre Dame J. Int'l & Comp. L. 173 (2020), by Waseem Ahmad Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court of Pakistan.Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists, are using hybrid warfare against Americans. Be cognizant of it: what it is; how and where it is employed against our Nation and its people; and its impact on the Nation and on the people. Its effects are both subtle and lucid.The application of hybrid warfare is subtle where it attacks the mind, psyche, and spirit of the American people.It is lucid where it attacks the tangible infrastructure of our towns and cities along with the intangible fundamental institutions of the Country, the very fabric of our society. These fundamental institutions include education; health; law; business and finance; and family and religion.It is all under attack.But the most insidious attack against the American citizen is the subtle—the attack on the psyche of the American people.The Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists have attacked the very core of the American psyche in its attack on natural law rights:The most fundamental Natural Law Right—the Right of Self-defense— includes the Reciprocal Natural Law Responsibility of Self-defense.Armed Self-defense provides the best means available to protect one’s physical being and that of one’s family.The idea of “Self-defense,” generally, and “Armed Self-defense, especially, embody the concept of the sanctity and inviolability of Self.The Right of Free Speech also goes to the sanctity of one’s Selfhood. The Right of Dissent is intrinsic to Selfhood.The unalienable, immutable, illimitable right of the individual to be individual means Government cannot lawfully impinge upon or encroach on one’s Selfhood.The sanctity and inviolability of Self are at the core of what it means to be an American. The framework of our Constitution is grounded on that sacred, inviolate, Truth. It is the single source of our Nation’s power and success.The Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists know this to be so, and they are chiseling away at all of it. They intend to destroy the Soul of the American citizen. To effectuate this it is necessary to destroy the exercise of armed self-defense and exercise of free expression.If the Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists defeat the exercise of armed self-defense and the exercise of free expression, they have succeeded to defeat the two salient avenues of resistance to their iron will.For, if one is prevented from exercising one’s freedom of speech—the freedom to dissent, the freedom to exercise independence of thought—one’s mind, spirit, and soul is damaged.And, if one is prevented from exercising his freedom to bear arms—one’s right of defense against a predatory beast, predatory man, or predatory government—then the safety and well-being of one’s physical Self are imperiled.The two most basic rights—the right of self-protection and independence of thought—go together.To lose the one is to lose the other.Autonomy of Selfhood is impossible where the individual is helpless—physically, psychically, mentally, intellectually, spiritually.The Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists intend to cripple mind, spirit, and soul, and they are doing this through the propagation of disinformation, misinformation, and psychological conditioning.Control of government and the Press and social media provide them with powerful mechanisms to accomplish this.Americans must do what is necessary to see that these ruthless, jealous, rapacious forces do not succeed.______________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

11/19/21 11/19/21

THE RIGHT OF SELF-DEFENSE WAS ON TRIAL IN THE RITTENHOUSE CASE; AND THIS TIME WE THE PEOPLE, WON!

A couple of days prior to the jury’s decision in the Rittenhouse case, the New York Times posted an editorial, titled, “The Truth About Kyle Rittenhouse’s Gun,” by Times Opinion Columnist, Farhad Manjoo. In part, the Columnist said this,“I’ve spent the past couple of weeks riveted by the murder trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, the white teenager who shot and killed two people and injured a third during a night of Black Lives Matter protests and civil unrest in Kenosha, Wis., last year.It was a turbulent case. For many days the prosecution was on the ropes — some of the state’s witnesses seemed to bolster the defense’s case that Rittenhouse acted in self-defense. But on Monday, the lead prosecutor, Thomas Binger, offered a meticulously documented closing argument that deftly summarized all the ways Rittenhouse acted unlawfully. That’s because it cleverly unraveled some of the foundational tenets of gun advocacy: That guns are effective and necessary weapons of self-defense. That without them, lawlessness and tyranny would prevail. And that in the right hands — in the hands of the “good guys” — guns promote public safety rather than destroy it.In the Rittenhouse case, none of that was true. At every turn that night, Rittenhouse’s AR-15-style semiautomatic rifle made things worse, ratcheting up danger rather than quelling it. The gun transformed situations that might have ended in black eyes and broken bones into ones that ended with corpses in the street. And Rittenhouse’s gun was not just a danger to rival protesters. According to his own defense, the gun posed a grave threat to Rittenhouse himself — he said he feared being overpowered and then shot with his own weapon.This is self-defense as circular reasoning: Rittenhouse says he carried a rifle in order to guarantee his safety during a violent protest. He was forced to shoot at four people when his life and the lives of other people were threatened, he says. What was he protecting everyone from? The gun strapped to his own body, the one he’d brought to keep everyone safe.” ~ Portions of an article from an Editorial appearing in The New York Times, on November 17, 2021, titled “The Truth About Kyle Rittenhouse’s Gun,” by Times Opinion Columnist, Farhad Manjoo.Well, the jury in the Rittenhouse case just blew this absurd New York Times editorial out of the water.At the core of the Second Amendment rests the right of self-defense. This isn’t a supposition. This isn’t theory. This isn’t opinion. And it certainly isn’t a mere fervent wish. Self-defense is at the heart of the inviolability of personhood; the sanctity of mind, body, and spirit.No other Nation on Earth, but the United States, talks about the Right of self-defense as a fundamental, unalienable, natural law right, and truly means it; has etched it in stone in its Constitution.What does the International Community have to say about this? Read all the documents you will, disseminated by the UN and the EU. They all go on about human dignity and the right to life, sure. But you will struggle to find one that even mentions the right of “self-defense.”You won’t see it. You won’t find it. It doesn’t exist. But, then, are not the words, “right to life” and “human dignity” vacuous in the absence of the inherent, natural, God-given right of self-defense to secure one’s life? And isn’t individual responsibility an important component in that equation?The Right of self-defense is embedded in the right of the people to keep and bear arms.A firearm is the best means of self-protection and has, for centuries, been thus.The right of the people to keep and bear arms is merely a reiteration of and reminder to Government that the Right of the people to keep and bear arms means the Right of self-defense, be it employment of self-defense against attack by beast, person, or the tyranny of Government.Make no mistake—the most cherished right of every human being was on trial in the Rittenhouse case: The right of self-defense.The seditious Press will play the outcome of this case as it has from the outset; as the aforementioned splice from The New York Times editorial presents—that the Rittenhouse case is about guns and the need to place further constraints on the Right to keep and bear them.That has been the messaging droning on, all along: guns promote lawlessness; guns threaten public safety and order; guns don’t belong in a civilized society; guns aggrandize vigilantism; and so on and so forth.But the Rittenhouse case isn’t really about guns. It never was.The case is about the inherent, natural, immutable, God-given Right of Self-Defense. And as the case proved, armed self-defense works damn well. Kyle Rittenhouse would have suffered serious injury and probable death had he not been armed. No question about it. No one seriously doubts it.A brave, young man, looking for neither glory nor condemnation, went to Kenosha, to protect the city of his father from destruction. He did that because the police couldn’t because an effete State Government wouldn’t let the police fulfill its main function; its official mandate: to protect the community it serves.The people themselves would have to step up, and one young man did.Many journalists and commentators will say, in the days, weeks, and months to follow, that the jury came to the wrong conclusions in each of the counts against Kyle Rittenhouse. Some, though, will admit that the case was a weak one from the start. The seditious Press will rant and rave, fume, and make excuses, and will issue dire warnings of what the outcome of this case portends for society, which undoubtedly the Press will, wittingly or not, foment.But the truth of the matter is that the case against Kyle was, from the start, not only weak, it was absurd.Video evidence alone demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that an angry mob, out for blood, intended to seriously injure or kill Kyle Rittenhouse. The mob was chasing after Kyle. Kyle wasn't chasing after them. Kyle did his level best to avoid confrontation. And that is a critical point where a person claims self-defense.The State’s case against Kyle was nonsensical from start to finish. It was an oblique attack on the inherent right of self-defense. But it was also a direct assault on civilian ownership and possession of firearms.The prosecution argued that, if a person has a right to self-defense, Kyle certainly didn’t because he didn’t play fair: he brought a gun to a knife fight, notwithstanding that one of the attackers did bring and did point a loaded handgun at Kyle.But the prosecutors never charged that third attacker, Grosskreutz, for unlawfully carrying a concealed weapon. Strange that.The prosecutors created a story that Kyle, by carrying a rifle that night in Kenosha, was looking for trouble. The State constantly used a buzzword, “active shooter” to describe Kyle.The prosecutors employed rhetoric instead of reason to entice, seduce, and mislead the jury. It didn’t work. The jury saw through the sham. They were never taken in by it.And, fortunately, justice was served. The jury obeyed the instructions as given them by the Judge. The jury wasn’t deluded by Biden’s insulting and ludicrous and false assertion that Kyle is a “white supremacist” or by claims that the Rittenhouse case is all about vigilantism—as if any of that would or should have bearing on the case, anyway.But let’s cut to the chase. This case was and is about one thing: the right of self-defense, and whether the employment of it was reasonable under the circumstances. Wisconsin law is clear about this:

Wis. Stat. § 939.48 Self-defense and defense of others, says this:

“A person is privileged to threaten or intentionally use force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating what the person reasonably believes to be an unlawful interference with his or her person by such other person. The actor may intentionally use only such force or threat thereof as the actor reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or terminate the interference. The actor may not intentionally use force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless the actor reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself.”The jury found that, on all Counts, Kyle Rittenhouse complied with the Wisconsin law of self-defense. He never shot to kill. He shot to stop aggressive attacks on life, and when the threat passed, Kyle stopped. And one should take careful note:Wisconsin law doesn’t assert or imply a limitation on the use of firearms for self-defense.On the contrary, the State Supreme Court of Wisconsin reiterated the right of armed self-defense.In the recent case, State vs. Roundtree, 395 Wis. 2d 94, 952 N.W.2d 765 (2021) the Court opined that “the core right identified in Heller, is ‘the right of a law-abiding, responsible citizen to possess and carry a weapon for self-defense. . . .’”See also State vs. Christen, 396 Wis. 2d. 705, 958 N.W.2d 746 (Wis. 2021), and note, once the defendant successfully raises the self-defense privilege, the State has the burden to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt at trial. And that standard is a difficult one for the State to overcome. Moreover, if the State cannot meet the standard of proof, then the privilege automatically applies to any crime based on the conduct directed to the criminal charges. “Wisconsin has codified the privilege of self-defense. § 939.48(1) (‘A person is privileged to threaten or intentionally use force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating what the person reasonably believes to be an unlawful interference with his or her person by such other person.’). This self-defense privilege extends further in the context of the home where the privilege may include the presumptive right to use deadly force. See § 939.48(1m)(ar). When a defendant successfully raises the self-defense privilege, the State has the burden to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt at trial. State v. Head, 2002 WI 99, ¶106, 255 Wis. 2d 194, 648 N.W.2d 413. If the State cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt at trial that the defendant did not act in self-defense then the self-defense privilege serves as ‘a defense to prosecution for any crime based on that conduct.’ § 939.45.” The jury, in the Rittenhouse case, obviously determined the prosecution failed to overcome the self-defense privilege in each of the charges brought against Kyle Rittenhouse involving the use of his weapon for self-defense. Hence, all the charges related to the use of his weapon for self-defense automatically drop.The Press will, no doubt, have a field day with this turn of events. Let us hope the U.S. Supreme Court in Bruen, will recognize and make abundantly clear the right of armed self-defense doesn’t stop at the doorstep of one’s home.______________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

11/17/21 11/17/21

IN THE ABSENCE OF FREE EXPRESSION AND FORCE OF ARMS A FREE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC CANNOT LONG STAND

MULTISERIES ARTICLE

THE GOAL OF A TYRANNICAL AMERICAN GOVERNMENT: DIVIDE AND SILENCE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND DISARM THE CITIZENRY

PART ONE

A VIGOROUS SEDITIOUS PRESS AND ROGUE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ACCELERATE THE NEO-MARXIST PLAYBOOK

“We live in an insane society in which people have agreed that certain behaviors qualify as sane and, so long as you follow those behaviors, you will escape scrutiny.Wisdom and experience, which are cousins, tell me there are certain beliefs I need to carry humbly and hold loosely, while others are more objectively true. Rain is wet. Open-mindedness to counter-arguments might appear more diplomatic, but you don’t really mean it because, come on, water is wet.‘The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.’ George Orwell, 1984But what if they tell you water isn’t? What if they tell you it isn’t and mean it?Here, then, is our situation, our conundrum, and no, none of this is hypothetical, not one syllable:What if you know what you see with your own eyes but others insist you don’t see it, including some you once trusted? What if they tell you that you have some condition, some mental problem that causes you to overreact and start to see things that aren’t there (or not see things that are)?” ~From a sermon by Mike Rumley-wellsAre the Harris-Biden Administration and the Pelosi-Schumer-Controlled Congress stark, raving mad? And, is the legacy Press abetting an insane Federal Government?To look at the policies of this Administration and the bills of Congress, and the effects of these policies and Congressional bills on our Nation and on our people, a rational mind would think so. But with a Government whose intent it is to destroy the United States of America as an independent sovereign Nation and a free Constitutional Republic, and whose actions demonstrate the expansiveness and intensity of effort to accomplish that goal, what recourse does a sane mind have in a Nation whose Government claims a need to destroy the Nation in order to save it? The Government has waged a war on the minds of Americans, begun in earnest, at the turn of the 21st Century. A short span of societal order returned to the country between 2016 and 2020. That was when the public, having had enough of the destruction of the economy and of our National Security wrought by the Bush and Obama Administrations, voted for a change to set the Country back on course, to allow it to operate in a manner consistent with the U.S. Constitution, not against it. The Nation voted for Donald Trump, who sought to Make America Great Again. And he commenced to do just that, to strengthen our Nation and to proclaim to the world that the United States still existed and intended to continue to exist as a sovereign, independent Nation, in accordance with the tenets, precepts, and principles of Individualism as the framers of the Constitution intended. The framers' design is antithetical to that of present-day Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists. They don't wish for the Nation to remain a free Constitutional Republic at all. Their belief system is grounded and structured on the tenets, precepts, and principles of Collectivism, as exemplified in Communist China and as is coming to fruition in the Countries of the EU. Collectivism is the antithesis of Individualism. See article in Mises:“From the viewpoint of Marx and Engels, the individual was a negligible thing in the eyes of the nation. Marx and Engels denied that the individual played a role in historical evolution. According to them, history goes its own way. The material productive forces go their own way, developing independently of the wills of individuals. And historical events come with the inevitability of a law of nature. The material productive forces work like a director in an opera; they must have a substitute available in case of a problem, as the opera director must have a substitute if the singer gets sick. According to this idea, Napoleon and Dante, for instance, were unimportant—if they had not appeared to take their own special place in history, someone else would have appeared on stage to fill their shoes.” These Anti-American forces seek to transform our Nation into a Collectivist society for its eventual inclusion into a new world order, sans national borders and nation-states. And, for us, in America, that would mean oppression, repression, and poverty, drawing this Nation down to the horrific standards of living existent in most of the world. That would be the price Americans would be required to pay for a Collectivist world governed by the tri-Satanic precepts of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion—an ambitious project of the UN, first instituted in the EU, and planned for in the U.S. And now that the puppet-masters of a new world order had succeeded in machinating an election outcome that would place a corrupt, senile charlatan in the Oval Office, and had consolidated their power in Congress, they could return to their original game plan, moving rapidly ahead to make up for lost time, having failed, originally, to place their stooge, Hillary Clinton, in Office in 2017.Two Branches of this Government, along with the Legacy Press, have successfully conditioned a small section of America to adopt a new way of thinking, to inculcate a new social, political, and economic dogma—a dogma that even comes with its own religion: The Cult of the State—the State (the Government) as God.To accept this new dogma, the American citizen must forsake everything he or she had previously learned and inculcated. One must accept the new dogma fully, and completely—in body, mind, and soul. This new dogma requires one to disavow past core ethical values. The American citizen must disavow his or her heritage, and history, and pride in one's Country, and in the National ethos—forsake all those tenets, precepts, and principles grounded on the sanctity, autonomy, and inviolability of the individual, and on the indomitability of the human spirit. The Cult of the State requires one to disavow the importance of family. One must disavow belief and faith in the Divine, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, benevolent, and morally perfect Creator, the one perfect God, upon which a great Nation was founded, upon which the Nation and its people have prospered; upon which the import of human life and dignity have been exalted; and upon which the promise of the soul’s immortality, and of life, peace, salvation, and happiness, everlasting in God, alone rest.But all of that must go. The Cult of the State demands it. And Truth and Sanity, too, must go by the board. So, then, what does one do; what can one do? Succumb willingly to psychosis? Some Americans have. Most have not. But many are buckling under, hoping the “Thought Police” won’t see them, won't harass them. But, what then? Is capitulation to the Cult of the State the answer? Accept our fate? But, then, is this TO BE our fate—is it to be the destiny of our people, of our Country, a free Constitutional Republic? Must Americans now face the fact, accept the fact as propagated by the media, that a once-powerful, and happy, and healthy, and successful Nation that once existed, should exist no more? And is this not predicated on the notion that Americans should sacrifice what is in their best interests and in the best interests of the Nation to the Greater Collective good of the whole? And, what does the expression 'Collective Good of the whole' mean that Americans should surrender their interests to it? Is that notion not based on utilitarianism?But, then, who defines 'utility.' Is that not the State? And, is it not, then, to the State, alone, whom the American citizen must assent to entrust all of morality and ethics? Is it not, then, to the State, alone, whom the American citizen must assent to assign the meaning of “the Good?” And, is not the whole of morality and ethics—“the Good”—bound up in, inextricably tied to the notion of “the Collective as the Supreme Good?” Is not the Collective, then, God?And, one does not need ask, cannot ask who or what controls “the Collective?” God IS the Collective. The Collective is its own “ Controller,” and the Controller of life and liberty IS the State. And what is “the State?” The State IS Government. They are one and the same.But, is the State qua Government, not that monstrous entity the Founders of our Republic had, with good reason, to dread? And, had the Founders not carefully thought to design a central, “Federal,” Government” in a manner to constrain its worst tendencies and excesses, so that it would not become the Lord and Master over its true Master, the American people? But, if the State, if this State, THIS Federal Government, cannot be constrained and restrained, and will not allow itself to be constrained and restrained by the people, then the monster the Founders had sought to contain in a carefully constructed cage of Three Co-Equal Branches, would be let loose. And, with the aid of technology and a willingness to pervert the U.S. Constitution, Americans are now witnessing the dreaded power of Government, the Founders' worst fears realized. The carefully constructed cage to contain the Beast has failed. A new era in our Country has commenced. Having been infected from the virus of the EU that is infecting all of western civilization, the Cult of the State, a world Government is taking shape. The Founders who had fervently sought to contain this creature, a thing they knew could never be tamed, and so must always remain caged, is now loose, running rampant across America, devouring this Country and all of western civilization.It is the State, as a massive Collective, a worldwide Government that defines “the Good,” a thing bound up in, inextricably tied to the Collective and where the State has the power to define “the Good,” the State takes on itself the mantle of Deity—the Cult of the State (a world Government) commences, Tyranny writ large.Had the founders of our Republic thought that caving in, acceding to tyranny would be the best, most propitious, or, at least, the most pragmatic course of action, then this Country, the United States, a free Constitutional Republic—a Country where the people, NOT Government, is sovereign—would never have existed. Tyrants make very jealous masters. The lust for power is overwhelming but it is ultimately nihilistic, carrying within itself the seeds of its own destruction, but, in the process, bringing everyone and everything down with it; complete Chaos, Armageddon.

THE CENSORING OF FREE SPEECH

Unfortunately, the framers of the Constitution thought, or hoped, that, at the end of the day, a free Press would sound a clarion bell, warning the people about the rise of tyranny in their midst if Government contained in its carefully constructed container, remained quiet, and conformed to the will of the people to whom and for whom it was created. That didn't happen. That hasn't happened.Tyranny did arise, but the Press never warned the public of it. The Press never sounded an alarm to the public. Rather, the Press capitulated to the Tyrant of Government. But, unlike the Tyrants of the past, this new Tyrant is sophisticated. It lurks, silently, unseen, but is omnipresent. The U.S. Constitution means nothing to this Tyrant. This Tyrant has broken through the Cage (the Three Branch System of Government) and lurks outside its Cage, unseen, its harmful effects felt throughout the Nation.The Constitution of the United States is, for this Tyrant, only a temporary hindrance, a minor annoyance. And the intent of this Tyrant is much more ambitious than control of one Country. This Tyrant has greater ambitions, worldwide ambitions to consolidate all political, social, economic, juridical power in itself. The vast intellectual, military, technological, industrial, and scientific resources of the United States upon which this Tyrant feeds, allows it to grow unchecked. It is difficult to see this Tyrant, except in the faces of the so-called “Open Government” it projects to the public and in the gargantuan awfulness of its effects on the citizenry of the United States and on the Nation's institutions and on its cultural roots. This Tyranny has a name: “Inverted Totalitarianism,” an expression coined by the political philosopher, Sheldon Wolin. The expression, “Inverted Totalitarianism,” is an apt one to describe Tyranny of Government worldwide, but if Wolin suspected that this Inverted Totalitarianism would or could extend beyond the confines of the United States, affecting institutional, cultural, juridical structures beyond the geopolitical, financial, and economic of those forces and powers operating secretly in the United States—capturing the whole of western civilization, societally—he did not, apparently say. But the possibility is logically consistent with his concept. And it has come to pass. And a Free Press does not carry the message, doesn't sound the alarm, doesn't warn the public, for the Press itself has been taken over by the Tyrants of this Inverted Totalitarian structure that has embraced the United States and the nations of the EU and the Commonwealth nations. The separate parts desire to be merged into a whole.The United States, though, has something that the other western nation-states do not: A Bill of Rights, a TRUE Bill of Rights, a set of natural law, beyond the control of Government because Government is not the creator of natural law. The right of free speech, the right to dissent, is bound up in autonomy of Self, the Right of the Individual TO BE Individual. It was the hope of the founders that a free Press, as a component of free Speech, would serve as a vehicle to give voice to the many members of the public but the Press failed to carry the message. So, the people must carry the message themselves, and the Government cannot lawfully constrain that Right. But, how long will free speech—the right of dissent—last? Already speech is censored. Dissent is roundly condemned and callously, perfunctorily squashed. The Government, itself, and through its actors, the major social media companies and major technology companies, operate with impunity outside the bounds of law. The Government has the power to do so, but not the right to do so. The Constitution is failing to constrain Government.That leaves one Ace in the Hole: the armed citizen: the last and best hope for a free State and a free and sovereign People. The framers of the Constitution planned well. At the moment, the Government and the Press haven’t instituted measures to inflict a fatal blow on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. They can't; at least not at this point. The puppet-masters realize it would be suicidal for them to do so; to try; not at this particular juncture. But, the time is getting closer when they will attempt a fatal blow on the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms. And these Tyrants will have no choice. The concept of a citizen army of the common people is not compatible with tyranny, especially the ambitious tyranny that the puppet-masters sitting at the top of the pyramid have in mind for Americans, and for the populations of western Europe, and for the populations of the rest of the world. For a comprehensive, insightful, analytical overview of the import and importance of an armed citizenry composed of the common people—today comprising tens of millions of average Americans—see Stephen Halbrook's essay, titled, “The Right of the People or the Power of the States,” subtitled, “Bearing Arms, Arming Militias, and the Second Amendment.”The Government is still marshaling its forces; testing the will of the people. And, with the help of the Press, the Government hopes the resolve of the people will soften, weaken—to the point where Tyranny can, at long last, strike the fatal blow against liberty, and, with the quashing of liberty—destroy the American spirit. The legacy newspapers, in league with the Government, at the behest of the puppet-masters, are whittling away at the peoples’ resolve. How are they doing this and why did it happen? Had the major newspapers been the enemy of the people all along and the people simply failed to notice this? Had the framers of the Constitution placed too much belief in the ability of a free Press to resist the power of the Federal Government? Have the puppet-masters successfully bribed the publishers of the Legacy Press to betray the American people, the Nation, and the U.S. Constitution? Or, have publishers, editors, and reporters, simply fallen prey to the insanity of their own messaging—a belief in Marxism, Neoliberal globalism; societal Nihilism?It seems now that major legacy newspapers, including The New York Times, New York Daily News, the Jeff Bezos owned Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and USA Today never really intended to function as the honest, reliable source of news that they projected to the public, but simply pretended to function as a reliable news source and as a check on the tyranny of Government. If they ever really did have such goals, they don't any longer. Even a modicum of pretense at serious news reporting and safeguarding liberty is gone.Publishers and editors don’t encourage accurate, neutral reporting of the facts, and the Reporters for these newspapers no longer attempt to write news in the sober, neutral language that they may inform the public, engage the intellect, appeal to the rational mind.Rather, news reports aim at sensationalizing. News accounts distort the facts, omit pertinent details, embellish the facts, or blatantly lie.Serious news goes missing. These papers routinely publish stories that hide the Harris-Biden Administration failures or bizarrely twist abject failures into successes.It is clear these newspapers have intentionally colluded with the present Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist Administration and Pelosi-Schumer-Controlled Congress as they all engage in a deliberate campaign of gross deception, targeting the American people.Government policies and initiatives are designed to undermine the integrity of the Nation’s institutions and the security of the Nation; to hobble the economy, and disrupt society, and harm the health, safety, and well-being of the American people. If Government and the Press direct tax-payer resources against the American people, the Government itself becomes the enemy of the people. The Government itself has committed treason against the people.Treacherous forces in Government and in the Press were actively at work sabotaging President Trump’s attempts to secure the Country from all threats both foreign and domestic and to take care that all laws of the United States are faithfully executed. Do you see Joe Biden doing this? Is Harris-Biden Administration securing the Country from all threats both foreign and domestic and is he faithfully executing the laws of the United States? Not at all. The Country as an independent sovereign Nation is more weakened, economically, militarily, and geopolitically than at any time in the Nation's history. Joe Biden carries the title of President of the United States, but he is only nominally the Head of State. The corrupt and senile Joe Biden is merely the false projection of power of the Executive Branch of Government. His role is that of messenger boy. And it is even doubtful that he even understands the messages that he periodically relays to the public. Often inconsistent in the content of the messaging and incoherent in the delivery of the messaging, it is clear to the American citizenry and to the rest of the world, that Joe Biden is nothing more than a puppet. Joe Biden is nothing more than a stand-in, a cardboard cutout, a storefront fixture for the true decision-makers, the real policymakers, the real rulers: the secretive, powerful, inordinately wealthy, and innately ruthless powers behind the “Open Government” that the public and the rest of the world sees. The “Open Government” is merely a prop, projected onto the Nation and onto the world, nothing more. A sinister “Shadow Government,” whose existence is hinted at through its effects, is where the true power rests. And that Government is opaque, invisible, indiscernible. And its aims and goals and purposes have nothing to do with protecting the Nation and its people from harm and those aims and goals and purposes have nothing to do with serving the needs and interests of the American people. In fact, the aims, goals, and purposes of the hidden rulers, power brokers, and decision-makers are diametrically opposed to the safety and security of the United States and the well-being of its people. The hidden powers projected their puppet as a political moderate, whatever that means, and as a Grand Unifier. That was just a ruse. And many Americans were taken in by it, accepted the lies; wanted to believe the lies. And, what has occurred: a turbulent weakened America, and in every conceivable way. The American society is crumbling. And it is happening deliberately. And, even in the obvious midst of it, the puppets speak their lines to the American people, blatantly lying to the American people even as Americans see disaster in their lives. The entire society is breaking down, and it is all expected; more, it was desired planned for. It is all part of one grand design. The plan calls for the dismantling of the underpinnings of the Nation in its present form, as a Free Constitutional Republic. Only the shell, the resources, are to remain. And a new regime is to be engineered from the remains. And that remains are to be merged into a new transnational, multicultural governmental scheme. The public nominal faces of power in the Federal Government and in many of the States have provoked rather than ease tensions in society.Instead of calming tensions, these treacherous forces in both State and Federal Governments, along with the assistance of a seditious Press and of social media, have harnessed the frenetic, frenzied energies of Neo-Marxist and Anarchist agitators to disrupt and to destroy communities across America. It is precisely in vein with the puppet-masters goal of dismantling western nation-states. It continues to this day.

THE JUDICIAL STRUCTURE OF THE UNITED STATES IS ON TRIAL

The circus trial against an innocent young man, Kyle Rittenhouse, is emblematic of the attempt by the Shadow Government to manipulate the citizenry into a frenzy of self-immolation. The ludicrousness of the trial carries a message to all Americans. And the message is that we are all on trial.Every American who holds to the principles of the Founding Fathers is now treated as a potential terrorist—a Domestic Terrorist.The puppet-masters have orchestrated an elaborate campaign to destroy the Republic. Our Nation has been turned literally inside out by forces both inside Government and outside it, and both inside the Country and outside it, to create mass confusion and mass hysteria in our society.The greatest, gravest threat to forces that dare to crush our Country into submission is in the continued existence of the armed American citizen.To effectively corral a force of tens of millions of armed Americans, it is necessary to create a force of tens of millions of other Americans who have been seduced into surrendering their rights and liberties and to have them contend against each other; to waste their energies on each other. The ground of contention is a phantom Bogeyman: Race Hatred. It is all a myth, and it is nothing new. And it sprang from the mind of a lunatic, Charles Manson. But a maniac can’t convince a rational public to accept an insane delusion. Yet, an insane Government, coordinating with an insane Press, can, for they have the resources in time, and money, and organization, and they have something more: an air of sanity.Radical Marxist and anarchist riots are routinely portrayed as civilized protests. A young man who attempts to defend business property from the wanton destruction of BLM and Antifa mobs in his father’s town is condemned for doing just that. Enraged the mob turns on the man. His name is Kyle Rittenhouse. The young man retreats, attempting to avoid confrontation. And the police and National Guard are nowhere to be seen. The young man is forced to defend his life—a clear case of armed self-defense if ever there was one—all captured on film just so there is no mistake. The video recordings provide a classic example of the utility of a firearm, and of the right of a human being to defend his life. That is most dramatically in evidence where there are no police around, and a man must take responsibility for his own life, safety, and well-being. The entire confrontation between a sane, rational, responsible person defending his or her life and a rabid mob that sought to end that life, lasted a few minutes. The mob lost. But, rather than praising the man, the State Government actors condemned it, for the mob was acting under its auspices, bringing about the very destruction of the town that the Government was expected and legally obligated to guard against, but failed to do so, requiring the courageous actions of an average citizen to take up the burden upon himself.The young man’s actions were heroic: face-to-face contact with at least three people who attempted to kill him. Kyle Rittenhouse was only 17 years old at the time. At 17, Kyle would have required parental consent to enlist in the military. Yet a seasoned soldier couldn’t have performed more appropriately and bravely—and would have warranted a bronze or silver star for that bravery. The bronze star is awarded to members of the armed forces for either heroic achievement, heroic service, meritorious achievement, or meritorious service in a combat zone. The City of Kenosha, Wisconsin that night, was a combat zone. The silver star is awarded to members of the armed forces for gallantry in action against an enemy of the United States. That enemy, intent on destroying a community in America comprised an enraged, mindless mob.Kyle Rittenhouse deserves commendation for his heroic actions, not condemnation. With virtually no investigation, the Government condemns Kyle Rittenhouse. Casting the young man as the aggressor, despite clear video evidence establishing the contrary, the Government utilizes Rittenhouse as a vehicle to attack civilian possession of firearms and to attack the very principle of self-defense.Within forty-eight hours the City charges Kyle with the most serious crimes imaginable under Wisconsin law: attempted First-degree intentional homicide; First-degree reckless homicide; First-degree recklessly endangering safety; and, just for good measure, Kyle was charged with “use of a dangerous weapon,” which, as The New York Times pronounces, with obvious glee, “extends the maximum sentence for crimes committed while possessing, using or threatening to use a dangerous weapon. The criminal complaint invokes this provision for all five felony counts; in each case, it could add up to five years to the prison sentence for that count, if Mr. Rittenhouse is convicted.”But Kyle didn’t receive a military award because he was too young to serve in the military and he wasn’t, ostensibly, in combat with an enemy, because radical, rabid Marxists and Anarchists do not fall within the legal definition of ‘enemy of the United States,’ even thought these rabid Marxists and Anarchists who have made clear their intention to tear down society, all of it, are just that: enemies of the United States. But, that is not how the puppet Harris-Biden Administration portrays them, for they, like the titular Head of State, are playing their roles, as the script requires, and it isn't necessary that these minor players know that. And, the Shadow Government puppet-masters intend to protect these players, the mob of Marxists and Anarchists who, perhaps, unbeknownst to them, are working against their own interests or what they think is to arise from the ashes of society's destruction: a Utopian Collectivist Communist State, that will usher in a new era of peace and contentment for the populations of the world, all living together in harmony. It is silly, even nonsensical, in the very conception of it. But, the puppet-masters utilize that myth for it furthers their goal that requires destabilization of all the institutions of society, none more important than the judicial structure of the United States. In a topsy-turvy world, those who would destroy society, the mobs that comprise the Neo-Marxist mobs, are protected, even heralded, while those Americans who attempt to preserve and protect their communities and who seek to preserve a free Constitutional Republic, consistent with the framer's intentions are treated as anachronistic, reactionary elements, to be treated with scorn. So, it is that a young man, Kyle Rittenhouse, has become a standard-bearer for those Americans who wish to preserve the Nation in the form the Founders created for it: a free Constitutional Republic. This young man never intended to be a standard-bearer; never wanted to be one, and never would have been one, if the mob had never come to Kenosha, Wisconsin in the first place. Kyle Rittenhouse simply wanted to protect his community and so became the standard-bearer for the preservation of a way of life that the puppet-masters intend to upend.It is the angry mob that the public sees the Press and, President Joe, and the State Prosecutors defending and, in so doing, the public sees firsthand the abject absurdity of the Government's position and the audacity of its goal: to undercut the fundamental right of armed self-defense. The right of armed self-defense—defense of Self through the most effective means available, a firearm—is inextricably bound up with the right of defense.By undercutting the fundamental right of armed self-defense, the Destructors of a free Constitutional Republic have made abundantly clear their desire to undermine the more inclusive natural law right of defense of self. And the natural law right of Defense of Self—self-defense—is itself inextricably tied to the most inclusive natural law right of all: the natural law right of autonomy of Selfhood; the sanctity and inviolability of the Soul and Spirit.The prosecution of Kyle Rittenhouse made a mockery of our sacred rights, and, in so doing, tarnished the entire System of Justice. But the jury, fortunately, saw through the façade manufactured by the prosecutors; a fairy tale story created out of whole cloth: that of an aggressive “active shooter” waging aggressive war on innocent protestors, peacefully protesting for racial justice.At the end of the day, true Justice did prevail in the case. It was a major case, to be sure. But it is only one case. Two Branches of the Federal Government are teetering; at the moment the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists have control over both, the Legislative Branch and the Executive Branch. Only the Third Branch, the Judiciary has a modicum of independence, but with a few individuals on the U.S. Supreme Court and with those in control of the first Two Branches seeking to transform the Third, to bring it and the other Two under one banner, natural law rights are in danger of toppling.On the law of armed self-defense, outside the home, the U.S. Supreme Court can deal squarely with it, as it impacts the Country, as the issue was originally framed. But the Court can narrow its focus to New York. Since the Roberts’ Court reframed the issue. The Court may leave unsettled the broader issue of the right of armed self-defense outside the home, open, even as the illimitability of the exercise of that Right is implied in the language of the Second Amendment.Hopefully, in light of the Rittenhouse case, the High Court will, address the need for clear instructions to State and Local Governments, and to the courts, that the right of the people to keep and bear arms does not stop at the doorstep of one’s home.___________________________________________________And just so you know, the humanoid creatures whom Kyle Rittenhouse shot in defense of his life, were upstanding citizens, who, according to Snopes deserve “martyrdom,” even as this Leftist website felt obliged to acknowledge that the individuals whom Kyle shot were convicted felons, whose felonies involved crimes of violence. The left-leaning website Snopes, says:“And though the rumors about the shooting victims varied in severity and nature, many alleged this: Huber was a known offender of domestic violence and rapist; Rosenbaum had sexually abused children; Grosskreutz had been arrested on suspicion of multiple crimes, including felony burglary, and all three victims were convicted felons. Based on court records and inmate rosters, aspects of those claims were indeed accurate, while others were outright false.”The website Snopes doesn’t bother to explain what those claims about these three convicted felons are false but wants everyone to know, as it further states, that:“No evidence showed the victims’ histories had anything to do with the protest, which began as a peaceful showing of people against racism by U.S. law enforcement after a white police officer days prior shot and wounded a Black man, Jacob Blake, who is now paralyzed from the waist down.” And it all “began as a peaceful showing of people against racism”—and ended up like what, exactly? Snopes’ writers don’t say. And that was the intent all along—peaceful protest? Sure!And, about Jacob Blake—he, too, is a real gem. As the New York Post reports,“Blake is accused in the criminal complaint, which was obtained by The Post, of breaking into the home of a woman he knew and sexually assaulting her. . . . Police filed charges against him for felony sexual assault, trespassing and domestic abuse in July when a warrant was issued for his arrest.”Curiously, of the ostensible “victims” of shootings—violent felons all—no one bothers to mention that Kyle, himself, has no police record. Odd that, isn’t it? The Press, though, plays Kyle as the “Bad Guy.” But, really, he is just the “Fall Guy,” here. But, Rosenbaum was a peach.By the way, one of the supposed victims, Gaige Grosskreutz, who pointed a loaded gun at Kyle’s head was never charged with any crime for his part. The website, Wisconsin Right Now, reports,“During dramatic testimony in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial, Gaige Grosskreutz, the only man who survived being shot by Rittenhouse, testified he was pointing his gun at Rittenhouse and advancing on him when Rittenhouse shot him.”“Grosskreutz also admitted that he was carrying a gun, at times stuck into the back of his waist, that night even though his concealed carry permit was expired. It’s illegal to carry a gun concealed in Wisconsin without a permit, but Grosskreutz was never charged with that offense. He said he frequently carried guns at protests because he believes in the Second Amendment.”It is a curious thing that Grosskreutz, a serial criminal, and convicted felon would claim a right to carry a gun at a protest because he believes in the Second Amendment. Apparently, Grosskreutz doesn’t believe that same right extends to another person, namely a person who would have the audacity to protect himself with a firearm when faced with the imminent threat from Grosskreutz, himself.Under direct examination, as a prosecution witness, Grosskreutz projected a picture of himself as a real stand-up guy. 5Chicago news reports,“ ‘I thought the defendant was an active shooter,’ the 27-year-old Grosskreutz said. Asked what was going through his mind as he got closer to the 17-year-old Rittenhouse, he said, ‘That I was going to die.’Rittenhouse shot Grosskreutz in the arm, tearing away much of his bicep — or ‘vaporized’ it, as the witness put it.Rittenhouse, now 18, is on trial on charges of killing two men and wounding Grosskreutz. The one-time police youth cadet from Antioch, Illinois, had gone to Kenosha with an AR-style semi-automatic rifle and a medical kit in what he said was an effort to safeguard property from the violent demonstrations that broke out over the shooting of Jacob Blake, a Black man, by a white Kenosha police officer.Prosecutors have portrayed Rittenhouse as the instigator of the bloodshed. His lawyers have argued that he acted in self-defense. He could get life in prison if convicted of the most serious charges against him.Under questioning from the prosecution, Grosskreutz said he had his hands raised as he closed in on Rittenhouse and didn’t intend to shoot the young man. Prosecutor Thomas Binger asked Grosskreutz why he didn’t shoot first.‘That’s not the kind of person that I am. That’s not why I was out there,’ he said. ‘It’s not who I am. And definitely not somebody I would want to become.’”That was under Direct examination.“But during cross-examination, Rittenhouse defense attorney Corey Chirafisi asked: ‘It wasn’t until you pointed your gun at him, advanced on him . . . that he fired, right?’‘Correct,’ Grosskreutz replied. The defense also presented a photo showing Grosskreutz pointing the gun at Rittenhouse, who was on the ground with his rifle pointed up at Grosskreutz.Wisconsin municipal code prohibits the carrying of a concealed weapon.And it should be noted, that, unlike Grosskreutz, Kyle Rittenhouse wasn’t carrying a firearm concealed. But Rittenhouse was charged initially with carrying a firearm when it was perfectly legal for him to do so. Yet Grosskreutz, for his part, was carrying a handgun concealed. There was no question about it, and he admitted as much. Grosskreutz had broken Wisconsin law. But he was never charged with a crime for doing so. The administration of Justice is broken on that score, but the puppet-masters intended to protect him because he was a worthwhile pawn in a game of destabilizing American society, planned for, orchestrated, and executed by the puppet-masters of the Shadow Government.

Sec. 50-32 Carrying concealed weapons prohibited; certain weapons prohibited.

Concealed weapons prohibited.(1) Prohibition. No person shall, within the city, wear or in any manner carry under his clothes or conceal upon or about his person any weapons or dangerous weapon, provided this subsection shall not apply to a peace officer or such persons as may be authorized to carry such weapons.(2) Dangerous weapon defined. The term ‘dangerous weapon’ means any firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, or any device designed as a weapon and capable of producing death or great bodily harm, or any other device or instrumentality which, in the manner it is used or intended to be used, is calculated or likely to produce death or great bodily harm.And the Wisconsin Criminal Code mandates charges against Grosskreutz as follows:941.20. Endangering safety by use of dangerous weapon.(1) Whoever does any of the following is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor:(a) Endangers another’s safety by the negligent operation or handling of a dangerous weapon.And isn’t there concrete, convincing, undisputed, evidence to support a showing that Grosskreutz assaulted Rittenhouse with a deadly weapon with a clear intent to kill Kyle Rittenhouse? See Fells vs. State, 65 Wis. 2d 525 (Wis. 1974).The Supreme Court of Wisconsin opined,“There is a general legal presumption that a person intends the natural and probable consequences of his acts. Where the act is assault with a deadly weapon, the presumption is that the person intended to kill. In Austin v. State this court approved the following jury instruction which was used in the instant case:‘Wis J I—Criminal, Part II, 1105, states and we approve the following as an accurate statement of the law:“ ‘. . . . If one person (assaults another violently with a dangerous weapon, likely to kill), . . . then when there are no circumstances to prevent or rebut the presumption, the legal and natural presumption is that death was intended.’”Wasn't it clear from the video evidence and from Grosskreutz's own admissions in open Court that in pointing a gun at Kyle Rittenhouse's head, the legal and natural presumption is that Grosskreutz intended to kill Kyle Rittenhouse? And, given that natural presumption from the evidence and testimony of Grosskreutz, two inferences can and ought to be made: one, that Grosskreutz intended to kill Rittenhouse, and Kyle Rittenhouse had reasonably concluded that Grosskreutz intended to do just that. Yet, the State never charged Grosskreutz with the attempted murder of Kyle Rittenhouse. Didn't the prosecutors know the import of Wisconsin law on a natural presumption of death if a person assaults another person with a dangerous weapon? Of course, they did. Yet the State charged Kyle Rittenhouse with attempted first-degree intentional homicide in shooting Gaige Grosskreutz. But, the State never charged Gaige Grosskreutz with the same crime for pointing a loaded, concealed handgun at Kyle Rittenhouse. Why is that? Did it have to do with the fact that Kyle Rittenhouse happened to shoot Grosskreutz before he shot Kyle? But, if Kyle Grosskreutz had gotten the upper hand, likely Kyle would have been seriously injured or, worse, dead. And, given that Wisconsin law makes clear a presumption that Grosskreutz intended to kill Kyle, as Kyle never aimed and shot his rifle at Grosskreutz until Grosskreutz aimed his handgun at Kyle Rittenhouse, as testimony in Court proved, Grosskreutz should, at the outset, have been charged with the very crime that the State charged Kyle with, and Kyle should never have been charged at all as his claim of justified self-defense would be implied, and moot, based on video evidence proved and the State's own interview of Grosskreutz would have certainly borne out. But, so it goes in a Government gone mad. Innocent people are charged with a crime because they represent America as the framers of the Constitution intended. Imagine that! But, Americans are now living in an America that the puppet-masters intend to destroy.Marxist and Anarchist agitators will be and are routinely protected by the Government, both by the Federal Government and by friendly “Blue” State and Municipal Governments. They are either let free from detention without the need to post bail, regardless of the heinousness of the arrest warrant and regardless of the inherent danger they pose to society or they fail to be charged with a crime, at all.But, then these sociopathic Marxists and Anarchists, including outright psychopathic freaks, bent on destroying life and property are given free rein to indulge their dangerous urges passions. Maybe they are on the active payroll of the Federal Government or secretive contractors of the Government; maybe not. It doesn’t matter.The present rogue, treacherous Administration, along with an equally treacherous Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist-Controlled Congress intend to dismantle a free Constitutional Republic. That much is clear. It is also clear that a radical, rabid mob, assists in that effort.And, this concerted, elaborate, multi-layered plan—really a decades-long, project, with its origins going back centuries, as a response by the Central Banking empire builders in Great Britain to the overthrow of British rule by the American colonies through the successful American Revolution of 1776—involves an extraordinary cast of characters. There are the present-day powerful, wealthy, shadowy puppet-masters, themselves that would certainly include the descendants of the original Rothschild Banking clan, the creators of the Central Banking system that has infected the major nation-states around the world, along with wealthy industrialists and the nouveau riche technology Billionaire class who have joined the conspiracy to overthrow the present political western nation-state system. Next, there are the public faces of the puppet-masters, the messengers who deliver the obfuscations, deflections, diversions, double-talk, and outright lies and fluff, to hide the true objectives of the puppet-masters and to explain away evident policy “failures” as due to unforeseen events, unfortunate happenstances, anomalies, or that embrace a flurry of factors that rest beyond the power of the “Open Government” to navigate, to deal with, or compensate for. In some cases, these “Open Government” puppets will baldly, blatantly, arrogantly lie to the American public, denying the truth of something that cannot reasonably, rationally be denied. For example, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Alejandro Mayorkas will deny that there is no Open Borders policy and that the Southern Border of the United States, isn't open, notwithstanding video footage demonstrating that the Southern Border is wide open; that thousands of illegal aliens are streaming through the Border every month, and that, since the beginning of the year, close to two million more illegal aliens walked through the Southern Border and are residing in the United States. Sometimes “Open Government” puppets, like Jen Psaki, will perfunctorily dismiss out-of-hand outright inconsistencies in policies. Once, when Fox News Reporter Peter Doocy questioned the Harris-Biden Administration's draconian COVID vaccination requirement for citizens but no COVID vaccination requirement for migrants at the border, Jen Psaki responded at once blithely and curtly, “that's correct,” and moved on to another reporter before Peter Doocy could ask a follow-up. The “Open Government” stooges will often pass off incontrovertible failures as roaring successes. Case in point, the “Grand Unifier,” Joe Biden, insists that the disastrous withdrawal of Afghanistan was “an extraordinary success.” And, the “Open Government” puppet, Merrick Garland, Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney General has the gall, during a Congressional hearing of the Judiciary Committee, to callously lie to Congressional Republicans that the DOJ/FBI isn't “tagging,” American parents, treating Americans as terrorists for purpose of blatant harassment. The number of instances of callous, caustic, contemptuous, and cavalier behavior toward Americans, exhibited by the Shadow/Dark Government puppet-masters through their toadies in the “Open Government” is now so prevalent and so perverse that a reasonable person cannot help but infer that there the puppet-masters can drop the “Open Government” pretense facade. This marks an important turning point for our Country. The puppet-masters have, in recent months, felt confident that they have consolidated the necessary threshold of power over the Country that they need not bother wasting further time devising strategies to mislead or to placate the public. In any event, the use of such strategies would prove futile. The public is well aware that the Government no longer considers itself to be a servant of the people and so has made clear enough that it no longer needs to answer to the people and that pretending to do so would only serve to make foster further anger among the electorate. The transformation of the Country toward Collectivist totalitarianism cannot be rationally denied and the timetable for doing so is back on track and moving apace. The puppet-masters have captured much of the ground previously lost during the Trump years. The worst that can be said about those lost years from the standpoint of the puppet-masters, is that the entire Nation is now well aware of the game. It is no longer a matter of suspicion. The goal of the puppet-masters, to dismantle a free Constitutional Republic, to merge the remains of the Country into a mammoth political, social, economic, juridical, multicultural, transnational governmental scheme is now beyond plausible deniability as a mere conspiracy theory. In fact, the expression, “new world order,” a short descriptor of the agenda, is no longer denied, shrugged off, or treated with levity by the puppet-masters and their toadies. As the puppet-masters stooges in governments around the world, are themselves are regularly utilizing the expression, expressly asserting it, or clearly alluding to it in their remarks, the puppet-masters have evidently given the go-ahead to do so. So, understandably, the use of the expression by the average person uttering it is no longer treated with the customary derision and condescension. The plot to weaken and dismantle the political, social, economic, juridical, and economic systems and institutions of these nation-states, along with the history, heritage, ethos, and ethical/moral grounding of those nation-states—the substantive fabric upon which a cohesive, coherent national identity exists, without which a nation-state ceases to exist—is upon this Nation and upon all nation-states. The concept of the modern 'nation-state' has been the salient glue binding western civilization for at least 300 years, and it is rapidly coming to a close, a screeching halt as the tenets, precepts, and principles of Collectivism, grounded on a completely different societal structure is coming to fruition. The American people do not have control over, nor should they have control over, the political, social, economic, juridical, and cultural governmental, and societal structures adopted by other populations. But, by the same token, we should not be strapped into another socio/political system. But, as the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist agenda requires the dissolution of all nation-states, the fate of ours logically is implicated.Must an adult rely on a child to blurt out the truth? Must an adult be afraid to openly defy a renegade Government, when doing so requires merely that an adult assert the “naked” truth of what he knows to be true? Must he play along with everyone else and deny the emperor is wearing clothes when he knows the emperor is not? Is the tale of the Emperor Has No Clothes merely a child's parable, for a child? Is this not an important question, especially today. Is not the public being told that the Emperor has no clothes?Well, consider, everyone knows that there are two sexes: male and female. Is that not true? And, if not, if there are more than two genders, then how many, in fact, are there?One site now posits 81. Is that a joke? Is it part of a comedy routine? Can a comedian even joke about that sort of thing today?Think back 20 years ago. Would such an idea be not only perverse but so incongruous, as to be of no use even for a comedy routine? Yet, today, the concept of gender is not merely a matter for academic discussion. Its impact is felt in society. It has even infected our public schools.And, quibbling about whether the term 'gender' is or is not equivalent to 'sex' is missing the point. The import behind the attempt is what is important here. The Intent is to confuse the mind. And, why is that?The Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist goal is to dismantle the Republic. To accomplish that task it is necessary to disrupt the underpinnings of our society. That society is predicated on the tenets, precepts, and principles of Individualism and on the Judeo-Christian ethic, not the amoral tenets, precepts, and principles of Collectivism, pervading society, permeating throughout it. The manipulation of language plays an important part in the attempt to transform America into a Collectivist Dictatorship.Language offers a more emphatic and critical need for serious discussion. For political theorists and sociologists, the politic0/socio import of reshaping language is important. It is certainly important to the Destroyers of a free Constitutional Republic. It is important for the Destroyers of our Nation to change our perception of it; of its basic underpinnings. Manipulation of language becomes an important tool in the arsenal of those forces bent on dismantling a free Republic.If language is perception, and reality is built on perception, and a million people say the emperor is wearing fine apparel, when he is stark naked, is this delusion then to be taken as reality? Perhaps not; probably not. But, if a few sane people exist in a Nation that has gone insane, who claim to see the emperor as he really is, “in the buff,” and dare to say it is so, these rational individuals will not be long tolerated in a Country that has gone mad. They must play along, just as the masses have played along. But, through time, the delusion becomes more entrenched. And as more and more people seemingly “buy into” the delusion, to avoid negative repercussions for pointing out the delusion, then the distinction between reality and illusion will truly become blurred, distorted, and at some point, the intellect will not be able to tell the two apart.The few outliers must agree to play along, just as the masses have played along, pretending, at first, to see that the emperor is fully draped and in his finest apparel, and to acknowledge that it is so, lest they be targeted for special and unpleasant treatment.Perhaps, at some point in time, the world of illusion will become reality. If society's laws and mores and behaviors reflect 81 genders or 181, or what have you, then the notion of two sexes becomes an archaic concept. It has no practical significance. Compunctions of custom and consensus of opinion mandate a new order of reality, and that reality dictates thoughts and beliefs; habits, and actions. But, we are not quite there, yet. Sanity may still prevail.Many Americans are coming to perceive of imminent threat the Marxist/Globalist poses to the preservation of a free Constitutional Republic. Americans see that the Marxist/Globalist aims are not compatible with natural law rights that go unchecked. One or the other must go. The tenets, precepts, and principles of Marxism/Globalism require are incompatible with natural law rights. And so the Marxists and Globalists censor free speech and constrain free association, and undermine the right of personal autonomy, and the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, and restrict one’s control over one’s own personal property.And Americans are also coming to see that the Marxists and Globalists abhor one natural law right over all the others: the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Marxists and Globalists view the right of the people to keep and bear arms as not only dangerous to their well-ordered, tightly controlled society, but incoherent. For, the language of the Second Amendment implies that the people are sovereign over Government. That notion is the obverse of that held by Marxists and Globalists because, for them, Government is the supreme sovereign. For them, hundreds of millions of common people are merely viewed as cattle and the idea that cattle should be allowed to keep and bear arms is an anathema to them.Marxists and the Neoliberal Globalist “elites” view the very concept of ‘natural law rights’ as inimical to the maintenance of a well-ordered Collectivist society they envision. And, in fact, the exercise of basic natural law Rights is dangerous to a society that is predicated on principles that have no use for them because the continued exercise of them would upend a rigidly controlled society. The armed citizenry is seen as especially dangerous to the Collectivist society. Anyone who insists on arming him or herself will be seen and is coming to be seen as engaging in behavior considered toxic to the operation of a well-ordered Collectivist society. And the public, from child to adult, is slowly, methodically, inexorably being conditioned to perceive guns and the wish to exercise one's right to keep and bear them in defense of one's self, home, family business, and as the ultimate fail-safe mechanism to thwart tyranny as an anathema, as a neurotic or psychotic aberration that is not be condoned.The insanity of a renegade Federal Government isn’t going to cure itself. And the failure of the public to recognize and acknowledge the insanity of a renegade Government will only serve to entrench all the postulates of an insane Government on the psyche of the American people. The illness will only get progressively worse, the rot infecting more and more of the Nation until the Nation dies. It happened to Rome. But, then, Rome didn’t have access to modern information technology. Nor did the civilization of Rome see advances in communication. Nor did Rome have access to precise social engineering tools, or knowledge of psychology and neurology and other neurosciences that has made possible the Government's ability to successfully indoctrinate, “reeducate,” and condition the minds of the people, and on an industrial scale.Pay close attention to the manner in which the Government, the Press, and social media handle the Rittenhouse case. And pay close attention, in the next several months, to the weaponization of the Department of Justice as it begins to target more and more average citizens. And pay particular attention, in the next several months, to Governmental policies that slowly and increasingly negatively impact speech, gun rights, privacy, and the application of justice.The seditious Press and its fellow travelers in the network and cable news have regularly persisted in posting deliberate lies, misinformation, and selected information to sway public opinion against the Rittenhouse case and to encourage mob retaliation against any verdict the Marxist and Anarchist rabble happen to disagree with. And, now, a major cable news organization, MSNBC, has gone a step further, intimidating the jury, in that case, is a serious crime. The New York Post just reported the following:“The judge presiding over the Kyle Rittenhouse trial banned MSNBC from the courtroom on Thursday after a man claiming to be a producer for the network was accused of following jurors.The man, who identified himself as James Morrison, was pulled over Wednesday after he allegedly blew a red light while pursuing a bus that transports jurors from the Kenosha County Courthouse, Judge Bruce Schroeder said.“He stated that he had been instructed by [a superior] in New York to follow the jury bus,” Schroeder said.Police confirmed Thursday that there was an “incident with a person who is alleging to be affiliated with a national media outlet” and the suspect was issued several traffic citations.“Police suspect this person was trying to photograph jurors. This incident is being investigated much further,” police said.Schroeder called the incident an “extremely serious matter” and barred any journalists from MSNBC from attending the ongoing trial.” The puppet-masters through their toadies will continue to aggressively attack anything they find detrimental to their intention, goal, desire to destroy the Republic. Even the sanctity of the Judicial system in the United States is considered fair game to these powerful, ruthless forces. They are getting the Marxist and Anarchist rabble to once again unleash its mindless, senseless, radical, and rabid vindictiveness against a City and against the Country.Many Americans are beginning to fight back, asserting their sovereignty over the Government. They are beginning to fight back against the concerted effort by Government, by the Press, and by other malevolent forces, intent on destroying the Republic. The U.S. Supreme Court can assist in this effort through the Bruen case. A strong, unequivocal statement of the right of armed defense outside the home would go a long way in strengthening the Nation’s Bill of Rights upon which the American people depend to maintain their sovereignty over the Government. ____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

11/2/21 11/2/21

NEW YORK TIMES UNLEASHES ATTACK DOGS IN OP-ED ON EVE OF ORAL ARGUMENT BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT IN BRUEN

The U.S. Supreme Court hears oral argument today on the Second Amendment case NYSRPA vs. Bruen (previously captioned NYSRPA vs. Corlett).This is the first major case to come before the High Court after Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joining the Liberal wing of the Court, punted on last year’s New York City Gun Transport case. Let’s hope the Chief Justice and Associate Justice Kavanaugh don’t get cold feet this time.But there are enough Anti-Second Amendment fanatics, including, unfortunately, jurists and attorneys, waiting in the wings, to castigate the Justices if they should—horror of horrors—actually strike down unconstitutional laws.One can perhaps understand the “walking dead” among the living who pay too much attention to the nonsense spouted by jackasses in the Government, in the Press, in social media, and in Hollywood—allowing others to do their thinking for them. And the message is always the same:“Surrender your firearms and peace will rain down upon you from the heavens.” And “the walking dead” nod their heads in mindless, senseless bovine agreement.At one time the fiction might have been somewhat believable, even though patently untrue. That was in the day when communities actually had well-funded police departments to provide at least a modicum of security. Now, however, police departments in major cities are underfunded, defunded, and emasculated, or are on the verge of extinction.One is left to ask, plaintively: “who will protect me if there are no police around and I’m not permitted a handgun to protect myself?” And, one is left befuddled at the reply given him from the vacant-eyed cultists: “That’s your white privilege talking.”But, when some jurists and attorneys claim a person’s right to defend him or herself with a firearm must stop at the doorstep of one’s house, such an assertion is untenable and unconscionable.Yet, that is what the public gets.In an Op-Ed titled, “Prominent Conservatives Back Letting States Limit Guns in Public,” published in The New York Times, on November 2, 2021, one day before the oral hearing in Bruen, J. Michael Luttig, a former U.S. Court of Appeals Judge, and Richard D. Bernstein, an appellate lawyer, make clear their disdain for “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.”They demonstrate their abhorrence of the unfettered Constitutional Right of Americans “to carry loaded concealed weapons in public and in public places, wherever and whenever they believe they might need their guns for self-defense.”They assert, “The announcement of such an absolute and unfettered right would be shocking and disquieting to most Americans. . . .” The appropriate, if curt, reply to this ridiculous remark is, “so what!”Since when is a decision on a fundamental, natural law Right to be treated like a Beauty Pageant—as a matter for popular acclaim?These two ostensible legal experts, continue:“The Supreme Court is not constitutionally empowered to make these decisions, and it is ill-suited to make them. For the justices to begin deciding for the people exactly where and when a person has a right to carry a handgun in public would be to establish the court as essentially a National Review Board for Public-Carry Regulations, precisely the kind of constitutional commandeering of the democratic process that conservatives and conservative jurists have long lamented in other areas of the law, such as abortion. It would be hypocritical for this conservative court to assume what essentially would be a legislative oversight role over public-carry rights, when conservatives on and off the court have for almost 50 years roundly criticized the court for assuming that same role over abortion rights.”Former Judge Luttig and Attorney Bernstein simply construct a strawman to unceremoniously knockdown.The U.S. Supreme Court isn’t operating as a “National Review Board for Public-Carry Regulations,” when deciding matters of Constitutional law. That IS precisely their Article 3 duty.Apparently, these learned gentlemen have forgotten what they came across during their first-year Constitutional law class: Marbury vs. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803).“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”This function and the sacred obligation of the Judiciary do not fall to Congress. It doesn’t fall to the U.S. President. It doesn’t fall to State and Local Governments. And it sure as hell doesn’t fall to an uninformed, angry mob.It is the duty solely of the U.S. Supreme Court, to interpret the law—to say what the law is.Yet, Luttig and Bernstein would dare deny the Court its Constitutional function. They don’t just suggest this. They blurt it out,“Conservatives, textualists and originalists believe — or should — that the Second Amendment ought not be interpreted to take from the people and their legislatures the historical and traditional authority they have had for centuries to decide where handguns may be carried in public and in public places.”They continue,“Historically and traditionally, legislatures have restricted the public carry of guns, from medieval England to colonial times, through the founding and to the present day. In fact, many of those early laws were more draconian than our own, banning the carry of guns in public places generally, without offering any exceptions like those New York provides for people who can demonstrate an actual need to defend themselves. Those restrictions extended far beyond public locations with a large and continuous armed police presence, such as government buildings and courthouses, to almost any public place — fairs, markets and indeed wherever a person would ‘go armed.’”Reliance on historical anecdote—and Luttig and Bernstein do not offer support for any of this—has limited prudential value at best. That is why originalists do not place much stock in it, and should not.In the first instance and in the final analysis, one should go to the written language of the law:The Second Amendment says,“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.”Where in the language of the Second Amendment is there any statement of limitation on the exercise of the Right?The danger of overbearing Government action is most acute where fundamental rights are involved. Governments must act circumspectly. They rarely do. Government justification for infringing a fundamental right on the pretext of pragmatic expediency must be scrutinized by the Courts.New York gun legislation is a case study of heavy-handed action by the Government. The Second Amendment Right is converted into mere privilege and one that the Government rarely grants to the American citizen.Luttig and Bernstein apparently aren’t even aware that, in blindly defending the New York City handgun licensing scheme—requiring the applicant to show actual need before obtaining a concealed handgun license—they fail to see the inherent absurdity of it.Why should a person be forced to proffer a reason to a Government official that one’s life is worth defending with the best means available for doing so—a handgun? It presupposes one’s life isn’t really important. And, the entire exercise comes down to an arbitrary, perfunctory, and often futile and expensive ordeal for the citizen; one inviting corruption and unfair dealing of which the NYPD Licensing Division is notorious.Lastly, Luttig and Bernstein have the audacity to give advice to Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, attempting to thrust her own words back upon her. They assert,“Two years ago, then-Judge Amy Coney Barrett called English and founding era statutes ‘the best historical support for a legislative power’ to restrict firearms.”The case Luttig and Bernstein refer to is Kanter vs. Barr, 919 F.3d 437 (7th Cir. 2019).But, what Justice Barrett said, in her dissenting opinion, apropos of that passage, in full, is that:“The best historical support for a legislative power to permanently dispossess all felons would be founding-era laws explicitly imposing—or explicitly authorizing the legislature to impose—such a ban. But at least thus far, scholars have not been able to identify any such laws. The only evidence coming remotely close lies in proposals made in the New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania ratifying conventions.”Justice Barrett wasn’t advocating for use of historical support for legislative power to curb the exercise of one’s Second Amendment right. On the contrary, she was claiming the jurist should be wary of relying on it.In the case before the Seventh Circuit, Judge Barrett argued for the reinstatement of Plaintiff Kanter’s right to own and possess a firearm; not to dispossess him of it. She concluded her dissent, saying,“Kanter is a first-time, non-violent offender with no history of violence, firearm misuses, or subsequent convictions,’ and he is ‘employed, married, and does not use illicit drugs, all of which correspond with lower rates of recidivism.’ Absent evidence that Kanter would pose a risk to the public safety if he possessed a gun, the governments cannot permanently deprive him of his right to keep and bear arms.”Luttig and Bernstein should have given proper context to Justice Barrett’s dissenting opinion in Kanter, or have shown her the courtesy to refrain from quoting her at all.______________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

10/30/21 10/30/21

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS GONE ROGUE

MULTI-SERIES ON THE ISSUE OF POSSIBLE TREASON AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT

PART SIX

SUBPART A

“All tyrannies rule through fraud and force, but once the fraud is exposed they must rely exclusively on force.” ~ attributed to George OrwellThe central theme of our multi-series set of articles on “treason,” and the principal focus of our series, is that treason, as defined in the U.S. Constitution, has been operating at the highest levels of the Federal Government since the inception of the Harris-Biden Administration, on January 20, 2021.Our discussion here is dedicated to laying out a case for the inference of treason in the legal sense of the word, and not in a mere colloquial, hyperbolic, or pejorative sense. This treason exists in and has infected the whole of the present Administration, and this infection extends to Congress.The Government under the Harris-Biden Administration is rogue and renegade.Our central thesis is that the extent of and expansiveness of infection is so pervasive, so dominant, so permeates the Administration that an inference of treason by Government against the Nation, Constitution, and People must be drawn.Corruption of Government extends to the Pelosi-Schumer-controlled Legislative Branch of Government, working in lockstep with the Executive Branch.Beyond the present policy decisions indicative of treasonous intent on the part of Joe Biden and other known and unknown individuals who control and manipulate him, the Administration intends to corrupt or control or neutralize the Third Branch of Government, the Judiciary.The Three Branches of Government have, since the creation of the Federal Government, through ratification of the Constitution, operated as discrete independent bodies—Legislative, Executive, Judicial.Each Branch is expected to perform its tasks within the confines of the limited powers and authority ascribed to it by the dictates of the U.S. Constitution, always operating in and remaining within its own orbit, its own sphere of influence and activity, as each was meant to.This Governmental construct was meant not to be a stopgap measure for the Federal Government, but a permanent fixture in it.The doctrines of “Separation of Powers” and “Co-Equal Branches,” that underlie the Federal Government construct for this Nation, were designed to discourage and forestall, if not prevent, the inception of tyranny in the Federal Government.Having successfully defeated the tyranny of one regime through armed revolt, the framers had no wish to plant the seeds of tyranny for another through the Government they would create that would, ironically, come from their own hand. So, they gave scrupulous attention to the creation of a Government that would have the best chance of avoiding the tyranny that besets a monarchy—even a Constitutional Monarchy—that England ostensibly had. They sought to create a Government for a new Nation that would best secure for themselves, and for their fellow Americans, and for generations that followed, one conceived in liberty.The Founders determined that a Republican form of Government would best serve the interests of the American people and would be least likely to turn against the people. They constructed a Federal Government that rejected a monopoly of powers in Government.The first three Articles of the Constitution attest to the Framers’ intention to preclude the consolidation of legislative, executive, and judicial power in one body. And they hoped that clear division of authority and power would also prevent the accumulation of power in two or all three Branches of the Government.That structure is now crumbling. Two Branches of Government—one controlled by the Harris-Biden Administration and the other controlled by the Pelosi-Schumer Congress—are overlapping, embracing each other; converging and merging into each other; operating in unison as a single entity.The intention of both the present Administration and the present Neo-Marxist-led and controlled Congress is to bring the Third Branch of Government, the Judiciary, the U.S. Supreme Court, into their fold.And their actions to date demonstrate this maneuvering to consolidate power into one super organ of Government.If this process continues, there is nothing to stop the Government from collapsing in upon itself, centralizing power of the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branches in one Branch even if the trappings of separate, co-equal Branches should continue. It would all be an illusion.The aim of the present Administration and the Democrat Party-controlled Congress in orchestrating consolidation of power is, as is self-evident, to streamline and to steamroller execution of Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist policies. Thus, the Government avoids debate among the few dissenting voices in Government that would be able to stop the operations of a rogue Government and avoid accountability to the polity that would justifiably object to and reject those policies.Further consolidation of all the power functions of Government, if left unchecked, would degenerate into Authoritarianism and eventually to outright Totalitarianism. The Federal Government would have long ceased to operate and function in accordance with Republicanism.At that point even the vestige of a Federal Government ruled by law and not by men would be dropped, as there would no longer be any need for it.The citizenry would live under perpetual surveillance: thoughts and behavior strictly controlled; dissent denied; the armed citizenry, disarmed.The Executive and Legislative Branches of Government are being drained of vitality as they lose their respective independence of function.The Federal Government is coalescing into autocratic rule.But whatever the form of autocracy—Authoritarianism, Totalitarianism, Fascism—it all denotes TYRANNY. This Country is treading close to that. And we may already be there.The legacy Press fails to acknowledge this even as the public recognizes it; is forced to come to grips with it; accept the disturbing, frightening reality of it.Tyranny is rapidly coming to fruition because—The Harris-Biden Administration and the Pelosi-Schumer-Controlled Congress do not perceive the Constitution as an essential framework within which they are to exercise their respective powers in a lawful manner. Rather, this Government perceives the Constitution merely as an obstacle, an obstacle to be overridden by Congressional statute and/or by Executive fiat, or simply ignored.

THE ADMINISTRATION AND CONGRESS ARE OPERATING OUTSIDE THE BOUNDS OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

The Executive Branch, the Office of the President of the United States, is operating in contradistinction to its Constitutional directive in defiance to the “TAKE CARE” CLAUSE of the Constitution.Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution says, in pertinent part, that the U.S. President “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”This isn’t a suggestion or wish. This is an obligation and one that the present Administration has not only flaunted but has dismissed out-of-hand.And the Legislative Branch, Congress, is failing to heed its salient obligation to Nation, Constitution, and People, in contradistinction to the “NECESSARY AND PROPER” CLAUSE of the Constitution.As set forth in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 18 of the Constitution, it is the function of Congress,“To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.” The Neo-Marxist Pelosi-Schumer-controlled Congress extracts from the “NECESSARY AND PROPER” CLAUSE what it wants.But, this clause DOES NOT grant to Congress unlimited power to alter the Constitution as it wishes, outside the strict bounds set by the Constitution.“The Necessary and Proper Clause does not vest Congress with any power to alter constitutional structure by statute. Congress may only use that Clause to assist itself and the other branches by providing the means for carrying into execution a power already possessed by a branch of the federal government.” “The President’s Power to Execute the Laws, 104 Yale, L.J., 541, by Steven G. Calabresi, Associate Professor, Northwestern University School of Law; J.D. Yale University; and Saikrishna B. Prakash, J.D., Yale University.The only way Congress can change the Constitution, lawfully, is through the Amendment process. That process is set forth in Article 5 of the Constitution. It is a difficult, complex, time-consuming task; deliberately so.This is as the Founders made it, lest unscrupulous, ruthless individuals in Government attempt to utilize the Constitution to corrupt it, transforming the Government operating under Republicanism into Authoritarianism or Totalitarianism.But, even if the Pelosi-Schumer Congress or some other unscrupulous Congress could convince enough States to cede power to it, through the Article 5 Amendment process, this would amount to the shredding of the doctrine of Federalism.The amendment process would drastically alter the framework of Government grounded on REPUBLICANISM. But that is the goal: to dismantle a free Constitutional Republic, unimpeded. It would be an impossible task, as well it should.A massive reconfiguration of the Federal Government even if attempted lawfully, through the application of the Article 5 amendment process, would require:

REPEAL OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS OF THE CONSTITUTION

REVISION OF ARTICLE 4 OF THE CONSTITUTION

Let us look at this more closely.

REPEAL OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS

Congress cannot modify or abrogate the Bill of Rights through Article 5 of the Constitution, even theoretically. The reason is this: The Bill of Rights is a codification of Natural Law Rights. These Rights precede the creation of Government.Natural law Rights exist intrinsically in man, bestowed by the grace of the Divine Creator. They aren’t bestowed on man by the grace of Government.The Article 5 amendment process would also require repealing Article 4 of the Constitution.

REVISION OF ARTICLE 4 OF THE CONSTITUTION

Article 4, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution sets forth in critical part that, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion.”

THE “GUARANTEE” CLAUSE

The first clause, the “GUARANTEE” CLAUSE, isn’t a suggestion or wish, or whim. It is a mandate, guaranteeing REPUBLICANISM.Even if it were theoretically possible to erase Republicanism through the Article 5 amendment process, most States would never agree to this.But, AUTHORITARIANISM in the Federal Government cannot logically coexist with REPUBLICANISM in the States. These two forms of Government are logically, not simply empirically, incompatible.The Government would either have to reject AUTHORITARIANISM or convince the States to agree to AUTHORITARIANISM as the new mode of Government in the Nation.

THE “PROTECTION AGAINST INVASION” CLAUSE

The Federal Government isn’t protecting the States from invasion. That is a fact. The Harris-Biden Administration is actively inviting the invasion of the Nation through its “OPEN BORDERS” policy.The States, as sovereign entities themselves, have every right, and duty, to take those steps necessary to protect themselves from invading hordes if the Federal Government cannot or, as is evident, will not protect the States from invasion.Texas and Florida are therefore compelled to act to protect themselves from invasion and have done so since the Harris-Biden Administration has refused to do so.The Administration even tries to prevent the States from protecting their own borders.These facts suggest the Administration isn’t merely enabling invasion of the Country, it is involved in orchestrating it. This is unconscionable.The States—all fifty of them—have every right to protect their borders from invasion. They are sovereign entities. The sovereignty of the States is manifested through the Tenth Amendment of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. The Tenth Amendment sets forth,“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”The Tenth Amendment is a statement of FEDERALISM. This means that sovereignty is shared between the Federal Government and the States.The Administration’s actions are inconsistent with the sovereignty of the States, protected under the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution and with the DOCTRINE OF FEDERALISM, underlying the Tenth Amendment.The Administration’s actions are also inconsistent with the DOCTRINE OF REPUBLICANISM, mandated by Article 4 of the Constitution, and inconsistent, as well, with its obligations to the States under Article 4.The States would never agree to revisions of the Constitution that would operate as waivers of Federal Government obligations under Article 4 of the Constitution and of States’ sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution.The Administration’s unwillingness to protect the States from invasion and, at once, attempting to foreclose States from protecting themselves, is not only unconscionable, it is patently illegal, amounting to treachery and betrayal of the Nation, Constitution, and People.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ESCHEWS ANY DISCUSSION OF ARTICLE FIVE OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION IN A MONSTROUS PLOT TO RESHAPE EVERY INSTITUTION OF THE NATION

The Pelosi-Schumer Congress and the Harris-Biden Administration realize the Herculean task if not outright impossible task of utilizing Article 5 of the Constitution to transform the Nation into a functioning Neo-Marxist Dictatorship. The difficulty of doing so is no accident. It is by design. It is as the Framers of the Constitution intended.“Amending the Constitution should of course be undertaken with the gravest of care. After all, there is a reason why constitutional designers impose special rules for amending a constitution. If it were just as easy to amend a constitution as it is to amend an ordinary law, there would be nothing special, more authoritative, or more meaningful about it than a statute. It may admittedly be unwise to fiddle with the constitutional text because frequent constitutional changes breed uncertainty, which itself undermines the stability that government requires to function properly. Stability was in fact a chief objective in the minds of the Framers as they set out to establish the parameters for amending the constitution. Other objectives which Article V serves are popular legitimacy and federalism, the former oriented toward ensuring that any amendment may be said to flow from the durable will of the people, and the latter permeating the entire constitutional text and indeed its very genesis. The high procedural hurdles of Article V that citizens and legislators must clear in order to perfect a constitutional amendment also entail considerable investments of time and cost, which together serve an important purpose of diluting the passions that may otherwise suffuse the daily business of popular politics.” “The Constitutional Politics Of Presidential Succession, 39 Hofstra L. Rev. 497, Spring 2011, by Richard Albert, Assistant Professor, Boston College Law School; Yale University (J.D., B.A.); Oxford University (B.C.L.); Harvard University (LL.M.). The frustration of the Neo-Marxist Internationalists and Neoliberal Globalists is palpable.They reject Republicanism for Authoritarianism or Totalitarianism, either of which requires the dismantling of a free Constitutional Republic. The tacit goal is to INSTITUTIONALIZE TYRANNY of Government.This monumental task cannot be undertaken through the lawful operation of Article 5 of the Constitution. That would be much too time-consuming and, in part, logically, as well as legally, impossible. So the Government attempts to reconfigure the political, social, economic, and legal fabric of the Nation, avoiding Constitutional stricture, through the operation of statute and executive fiat; openly denying and defying the Constitution.Is this radical, illegal alteration of the structure of a free Constitutional Republic truly coming from the faces of Government that the American people see? Or is this transformation coming from unseen forces behind the scenes?If an unseen hand is making executive-level policy decisions, then this points to treachery and betrayal of the Nation, Constitution and people, for the Chief Executive cannot Constitutionally delegate executive-level policy decision-making authority to unnamed, unelected individuals.Article 2 of the Constitution places EXECUTIVE DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY in one person, and one person, only: The President of the United States.The President is the only person who has executive-level decision-making authority. THIS IS NOT DELEGABLE.It is a violation of the Constitution if Biden did attempt to delegate this authority to others or consciously or unconsciously acquiesced to it.If Biden is not making executive-level decisions or even involved in the policy-making process, he is not serving as U.S. President. That means he is merely a figurehead, a placeholder.If true, this means the Nation is devoid of a sitting President of the United States.

THE SALIENT PROPOSITIONS THAT COMPRISE MATTERS TO BE DISCUSSED IN OUR ESSAY ON TREASON INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:

The present Government’s actions amount to treachery and betrayal of the Nation, the Constitution, and the People in failing to perform and in actively disregarding its core functions and duties to preserve, protect, and defend the Nation, the States, and the People.

The present Government has not only failed to perform its duties and to comply with its obligations under the Constitution of the United States but has unlawfully usurped power and authority that resides solely in the States and in the People as codified in the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The present Government’s usurpation of power and authority residing in the States and the People reflect a conscious effort of the Government to undermine the security and well-being of the Nation, the States, and the People.

The present Government’s policies and actions are directed to harming the States and the people and to the eradication of, not the preservation of a free Constitutional Republic.

The present Government’s actions are directed to transforming a free Constitutional Republic into an autocratic regime, inconsistent with the Constitutional Requirement and mandate of Republicanism.

The insinuation of Autocracy in the present Government is incompatible with and constitutes a direct assault on the continued existence of a free Constitutional Republic.

Treachery against the States and the people constitutes a betrayal of the U.S. Constitution, the Nation, and the People.

The Treachery of the Federal Government is equivalent to the Tyranny of the Federal Government.

The Tyranny of Government directed against the States and the people has its expression through the subversion of the Constitution and of the law; contempt for and defiance of the Rule of Law; disrespect for and denial of the sovereignty of the States and of the ultimate sovereignty of the American people over Government; suppression of the Peoples’ right to exercise their Natural Law Rights and Liberties, codified in the Bill of Rights; and repression, oppression, subjugation, persecution of, and unlawful prosecution of the people in defiance of due process and equal protection under the law.

The present Government’s actions evidence a deliberate intention and desire to impose Tyranny on the States and on the American people.

Imposition of Tyranny of Government extends to the institutionalization of Tyranny in the Government and throughout the Nation.

Tyranny of Government constitutes a Treason of Government directed to and against the States and the People.

Treachery of Government is equivalent to Tyranny of Government.

The Treason Clause, Article 3, Section 3, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution, extends to Treachery of Government directed against the States and the People.

Application of the Treason Clause of the Constitution was intended not only as of an assertion of treachery directed against the United States and against the United States Government but as the assertion of the treachery of the United States Government directed against the States and/or the People.

The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms was designed to be the ultimate protector of the States, the People, and the United States, not only against their enemies, both foreign and domestic but as a defense against the tyranny of the United States Government and its standing army as might be directed against them—namely, the States and the People.

10/10/21 10/10/21

THE HARRIS-BIDEN ADMINISTRATION’S ASSAULT ON THE BILL OF RIGHTS BETRAYS THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND "WE THE PEOPLE"

MULTI-SERIES ON THE ISSUE OF POSSIBLE TREASON AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT

PART FIVE

SUBPART A

IS THE HARRIS-BIDEN ADMINISTRATION AND CONGRESS PLAYING AMERICANS FOR DUPES?

“I can forgive a foe, but not a mistress and a friend; treason is there in its most horrid shape, where trust is greatest!” ~aphorism by John Dryden, English Poet, Literary Critic, and Dramatist, 1631 to 1700In our multi-series treatise on treason, it is possible that some readers may view these articles as discrete vignettes or snapshots on the topic of treason. That would be wrong. It is our intention readers see each article as connected to the one before it; each article progressing sequentially to produce a unified whole.Treason is operating at the highest levels of the Federal Government. That is our main contention, our central thesis, our salient focus. And, we are talking here of Treason as actionable crime, not mere political rhetoric, dramatic theater, inflammatory invective, hyperbolic epithet, or coarse name-calling. There is too much of that already in the media. It gets us nowhere.The crime of treason committed by High-Level Government Officials, of the Harris-Biden Administration should not be handled obliquely or alluded to delicately. It must be dealt with head-on.The Administration’s blatant, unprecedented attack on the rights of free speech and free association, the right to be free from unwarranted intrusion, the right to be free from unlawful detainment, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms, are signs of a concerted effort on of Government to assail civil liberties.This wide-ranging, calculated, and deliberate assault by the Federal Government on fundamental rights and liberties signals the unlawful takeover of that Government that belongs to the American people, and not to those who serve in Government.This callous, caustic, sinister assault on the elemental, immutable, illimitable rights and liberties of the people attests to an aggressive attack on the sovereignty of the American people. It announces a clear intent to undercut the very sovereignty and authority of the American people over the Government. The Destructors and Obstructors know that with the eradication of the authority of the American people over their Government, a Constitutional Republic cannot long stand. And, in that vacuum that arises, tyrants are there to fill it. Totalitarianism is born.The harm this Government has done to the Country, the Constitution, and the people isn’t difficult to ascertain.Consider—

INTENTIONAL DISSOLUTION OF OUR NATION’S GEOGRAPHICAL BORDERS UNDERCUTS THE PHYSICAL INTEGRITY OF OUR NATION. CAN THIS BE TREASON?

The Administration’s blatant, unconstitutional open border policies, along with its unabashed attacks on, and emasculation of, Customs and Border Protection Officers, Border Patrol Agents, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agents are all signs of loss of the integrity of our Nation-State. See article in New York Post and article in the website think civics. The effect of massive migration here and across Europe is deliberately designed to destabilize all of western civilization.The Administration has released over a half-million illegal aliens into our Country, in accordance with its blatantly illegal open border policy, and intends to release tens of thousands more into the interior of the Country. The Administration knows its actions are brazenly and flagrantly in violation of Federal Statutes, and in violation of Article 2, Section 1, Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution; and in violation of Article 2, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. So that his Administration doesn't admit to a violation of federal statutes and the U.S. Constitution, Biden's handlers instruct Biden and his Cabinet officers, and other high Government officials, to overtly lie to the American public.Since Biden's Director of DHS, Alejandro Mayorkas, cannot overly admit to deliberate, obvious violations of federal Statute pertaining to immigration and the U.S. Constitution, and so, lies overtly and cavalierly to the public. He says the borders are not open and that aliens are not free to cross over to this Country and that if they do, they will not be allowed to stay. See, e.g., article in United News-Post.These blatant lies to the public demonstrate the Administration's open contempt for the American people. See article on Culture dispersion and immersion is the goal, from a publication funded by or associated with the University of California, Berkeley. See also, Center for Immigration Studies Report. And how many of them have the COVID? See the article posted on reason.com. The UN’s articulated goal of moving tens of millions of people to the U.S. and EU is designed to destroy national borders and to de-stabilize western nation-states, thereby rupturing both the physical, geographical integrity of western nation-states as well as the social, cultural, political, and economic integrity of those nation-states. See the article in “Defend Europa” about the UN Migration pact.This UN Migration pact is nothing less than a brazen attempt to expunge the idea of the traditional nation-state and acts as a blueprint for a 3rd world invasion of Western countries. In short, the pact seeks to normalize mass migration and to establish migration as a global human right. After it’s enacted migrants from all over the world will be able to go where they want, when they please, and for whatever reason.”Through the deliberate rupture of the old nation-state governmental paradigm, a new transnational, multicultural, multi-ethnic borderless, world would emerge, but benefitting whom, exactly? To control billions of people across the entire world, a strong dictatorial regime would need to be imposed on billions of people. And, with the aid of mass surveillance that modern technology provides, the overseers of the new international order can accomplish that.The EU is already living under tacit Dictatorship disguised as Liberal Democracy. And yet Countries like Poland and Hungary, that recall the domination of the Soviet Union, know better. So, the overseers in Brussels treat them like pariahs for asserting their Sovereignty, lest other member states take notice and act similarly.The New York Times wrote, recently:“In a tart statement, the European Commission, the bloc’s executive arm in Brussels, said the Polish ruling ‘raises serious concerns in relation to the primacy of E.U. law’ and vowed to uphold ‘the founding principles of the Union’s legal order, namely that: E.U. law has primacy over national law, including constitutional provisions.’”But, does EU law control the law of its member nations? The website Full Fact says it does. See also an article from the BBC. See also report in Euronews. Doesn't this raise a question as to the original, secretive intent behind those who constructed the EU? And, one must wonder of the UN's complicity in all this; a concerted plan to dismantle nation-states and to rupture the sovereignty and independence that one had defined them.The Constitution of the EU, unlike that of the U.S., has undergone several iterations. The draft treaty of 2003, following upon the Treaty of Lisbon of 2001, recites, in its Preface,“The Convention was asked to draw up proposals on three subjects: how to bring citizens closer to the European design and European Institutions; how to organize politics and the European political area in an enlarged Union; and how to develop the Union into a stabilizing factor and a model in the new world order.”Consider the implications of this.See the EU Parliament's Resolution of 2005. This concept of EU sovereignty over Nation-State sovereignty is the topic of much discussion. And, through it all, there is a common disquieting theme, of the systematic erosion of National Sovereignty to a transnational State. See, e.g., world101 Report, and article by aalep.In the U.S. we are seeing something similar occurring, as the Federal Government asserts its dominance over the States. This is a direct and unconstitutional assault on and violation of federalism—the sharing of sovereignty between the Federal Government and the States.In contemptuously ignoring and decimating the Bill of Rights, along with the doctrine of federalism, the Federal Government has taken arms against the authority of the American people, in whom ultimate sovereignty over all government rests, as the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights mandates and makes abundantly clear. The Government is “We The People.”Government’s actions against, we the people, is no less than the deliberate debasement and betrayal of the sanctity and inviolability of the U.S. Constitution and of the sanctity and inviolability of the personal autonomy and of the inherent and absolute sovereignty of the American people over Government. The government’s actions signify treachery beyond all precedent.These perpetrators of this treachery to Country, Constitution, and people have constructed and implemented a comprehensive, elaborate plan to usurp the sovereign authority of the American people over Government just as the Government of the EU in Brussels has betrayed its member countries.The usurpation of authority by the EU Government over its member countries is occurring simultaneously with the usurpation of authority by the Federal Government over the States and the people. Can this be a mere coincidence? Is this not all concomitant of a concerted plan to eventually bring the U.S. into the orbit of the EU, along with the Commonwealth Nations? And, isn’t the grand scheme being concocted through the UN, masking the move toward a one-world government through international pacts, treaties, and initiatives? Consider the import of the ambitious “Sustainable Development” initiative of the UN., which apparently subsumes the broader “Global Compact.”And there is the deceptively named UN “Programme of Action on small arms and its International Tracing Instrument” that is really an oblique assault on the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Biden intends to sign on to this. To do so is treachery of the highest order. See, e.g. article in Small Arms. Implementation of this treaty in the U.S. is unconstitutional because it is in direct conflict with the sovereignty of the American people through their unalienable right to keep and bear arms, even though it isn’t in conflict with the Constitution of the EU.The complexity and convoluted mess that this EU structure IS, and the machinations of the UN, spill over to the U.S. It all serves to hide an insidious intent: to bind and then absorb first the Countries of the EU into an intricate web that they cannot extricate themselves from, and eventually bind and absorb the Commonwealth Nations and that of the U.S. The UN is actively involved in this projectAmericans can’t control events in the EU, but they sure do have the authority to demand accountability from their own Government.Americans are witnessing a cold, calculated, callous, insidious attack by the Federal Government to wrest control from the States and from the people the citizenry's control over their own country, much as the EU is slowly entangling its member Countries into a sticky web. There is a word for this. It is called TYRANNY.The founders of the Republic had good reason to fear TYRANNY. After all, they lived, for a time under it. And it took a war for the American colonists, the first patriots to extricate themselves from the morass of this TYRANNY.They designed the Country to be a free Constitutional Republic. And they made sure the people, as the sole sovereign ruler of the Nation and of its federal Government they constructed, would forever retain and maintain arms to prevent TYRANNY from ever again enfolding upon and entrapping the people in a spider's web. Along with the equally important right to DISSENT against Government policy that the people perceive as eroding the Republic, the people will forever be able to remind the Government that it is the people who are sovereign over their Nation and their Government. And that:THE RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH, NAMELY THE RIGHT TO DISSENT, AND THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS PROVIDES THE PEOPLE WITH THE MEANS TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AGAINST ENCROACHING TYRANNY.And we are moving ever closer to tyranny. One must ask,DOES THE TREACHERY OF GOVERNMENT AND BETRAYAL OF THE OATH TO THE NATION, CONSTITUTION, AND PEOPLE AMOUNT TO ACTIONABLE TREASON?Treason by Government, if it exists, means Government operating not on behalf of and in service to its people but actively, avidly, assiduously, and decidedly against them, against their interests, and thwarting any attempt by the people to counter the dire threat to their absolute sovereignty over Government.____________________________________

DIRECT ASSAULT ON THE INTEGRITY OF THE FAMILY UNIT AND ON THE EDUCATION OF OUR CHILDREN

SUBPART B

Treason is not own’d when ‘tis descried; Successful crimes alone are justified” ~aphorism by John Dryden, English Poet, Literary Critic, and Dramatist, 1631 to 1700The Administration’s recent weaponization of the DOJ, FBI, and NSD against average American citizens, treating them as domestic terrorists and pariahs is patently illegal, unconstitutional, and unconscionable. It is clear evidence of tyranny of Government over the people. See the Leftist “Daily Beast” making light of the matter, giving cover to the actions of the Attorney General, Merrick Garland. The propagandists attempt to deflect the tyranny of the Government by reflecting that tyranny duplicitously back onto the people, asserting——“This is about intimidation and bullying, pure and simple. That behavior is aimed at school officials—and especially the members of school boards.” See the article in the daily beast. But, is this really about intimidation and bullying of members of school boards? Isn’t it really intimidation and bullying by members of the school boards themselves directed on the parents of those schoolchildren who simply want a say in the education of the children as is their right, even duty, as parents? Consider the remarks of Terry McAuliffe, Virginia Gubernatorial Candidate, as reported in the National Review. McAuliffe, baldly and shamelessly retorts, as reported in the national review, to wit:“I’m not going to let parents come into schools and actually take books out and make their own decisions,” . . . “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.” . . . “Listen, we have a board of ed working with the local school boards to determine the curriculum for our schools. You don’t want parents coming in every different school jurisdiction saying, ‘This is what should be taught here’ and, ‘This is what should be taught here.’” But, parents should care about their child’s education. See article in great schools. And, do you remember an organization called PTA—Parent Teacher Association. It once had importance, but no longer; why is that, do you suppose?Take a look at Garland’s Memo to the FBI, local law enforcement, and the U.S. Attorneys of each State. Garland is ordering a nationwide strategy session to implement “measures for the benefit of our nation’s 14,000 School Districts” . . . “to ensure our children a proper education in a safe environment. . . .” See Justice Department Memorandum of October 4, 2021.But, more to the point, it is singularly odd that Garland would use the phrase “our children” in his memo, and yet fail to mention even once in that memo, the word ‘parent.’ It is, after all, the parents of these children whom Garland is targeting. One would think he would at least mention that fact. Yet he says nothing. But, against whom would he be unleashing the dogs of war if not the parents of these children?But Garland doesn’t do that, and one must ask, “why is that?” In the final analysis aren’t local school boards answerable to the parents of the children, in whom they entrust to the schools and local boards’ care? Garland must not be naïve to think otherwise. He knows his attack on the parents is patently illegal.Garland intends to induce fear of Government retaliation against these parents—any that dares to raise a voice in anger to outrageous conduct of the School Boards. That much is obvious.The school boards don’t work for the Federal Government or for the major school unions. And any concern over the understandable anger of parents elicited by the parents over these School Boards' actions isn’t a matter for the Federal Government. There are no civil rights violations here, except those committed by the local school boards themselves in promoting racism and sexual promiscuity in the schools. This is a state and local government matter.The Harris-Biden Administration’s actions are all in “vein” (yes, in ‘vein,’ not ‘vain’)—i.e., all in character. These actions are all part of a grand design to disengage, decouple, and disconnect the American people from their Constitution; their own fundamental, unalienable rights. Understandably pushback has come. The Federal Government must have seen this coming; must have expected it, and they planned to deal with it, knew how they would have to deal with it, and they have—ergo, Garland’s memo to use the full sources of the Federal Government and even mandating local and State governments action against the residents of their own State.Congressional Democrats know the jig is up. More Americans have caught on to the elaborate plan to eradicate the U.S. Constitution. And, Government wants to keep this all nebulous. The Government wants to keep the public off balance. And Congress pretends to be upset with this and drafts a detailed letter to the AG, saying so. Even some Republicans sign it.But, the attempt at bipartisanship on this matter is disquieting. Is something sinister going on here?Are Republicans in on the charade too? Are both Neo-Marxist Democrats and placid, obsequious Republicans simply Gatekeepers, playing each American off against the other to wrench power from all of us? Granted, a few Republicans drafted and signed their own letters, even as they also signed on to the Democrats' letter to the DOJ AG, Merrick Garland. See, e.g., letter to Garland from Senators Cruz, Blackburn, and Lee.But, the overall effect smacks of an elaborate hoax perpetrated on the American people to keep them guessing as to what Congress and the Administration will do next.Americans are led to believe that:“Sure, the U.S. Government may seem to be warring against your own best interests, but don’t worry, Government is safeguarding, protecting and preserving your Country, your Constitution, and your well-being against all enemies, both foreign and domestic” in full accord with the stated purpose of the Constitution. And, what is the stated purpose of the Constitution? Take a look:“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”But is the sentiment reflected in the Preamble still hold true by those IN the Government?Reflect for a moment on the sheer number of, the scope of, and nature of all those seeming misadventures, misunderstandings, misconceptions, misapprehensions, and mistakes that have plagued this Nation since the puppet-masters installed their frail, fragile, imbecilic puppet, Joe Biden, in the highest Office of the Land in January 2021.And, contemplate how these five Stooges—Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Nancy Pelosi, Charles (“Chuck”) Schumer, and, oh yes, Mitch McConnell, too—dangle limply, lifelessly, from their strings in the Grand Deluxe Puppet Theater that our Nation has become, waiting obediently, expectantly for their next set of orders from on High, to spring to action. And so many Americans clap in appreciation as these rag dolls tap dance across the puppet stage, keeping the public amused so it fails to notice the firestorm raging all around the Nation’s puppet theater—until it is too late to react.But some Americans do notice the firestorm. And, against these Americans, who fail to be mesmerized by the puppet show, who fail to be taken in by the illusionists’ tricks, the Administration is clamping down, and clamping down hard.The marriage of “Big Business” with “Big Government” is the hallmark of Fascism, be it on the far left of the political spectrum, or on the far right. It is all part and parcel of the broad political, social, and economic ideology of Collectivism—an ideology anathema to that of Individualism. For it is upon the tenets, precepts, and principles of Individualism, not Collectivism, that our free Constitutional Republic exists, in accordance with the sovereignty of “we the people” over the Government, as maintained principally through the unalienable rights to be heard and to bear arms.America’s “Progressives,” i.e., America’s Neo-Marxists, co-opt “we the people” and then twist the idea of “we the people” “all around the mulberry bush,” for their own advantage to fool the unwary. Their notion of “we the people” is as “we a majoritarian mob” dancing to the tune of tyrants, doing their bidding. Did we not see this through the crimes of assault, arson, and intimidation by members of anarchist group ANTIFA and by the Neo-Marxist group, BLACK LIVES MATTER? These so-called Progressives, a euphemism for Marxists which, at the moment isn't a popular word, don't represent “we the people.” But the dead giveaway is seen through their use of the phrase, ‘imperialism.’The word, ‘imperialism’ is used by Marxists and others who adhere to the tenets of Collectivism. They use ‘imperialism’ invariably to refer to Capitalists and Capitalism. See, e.g., essay in the Marxist, by a chap named Paul Costello.Americans, are rightfully outraged by the disgusting actions of the Harris-Biden Administration aren’t fooled by any of this.Not without reason do they dissent, and vociferously, against the Administration’s absurd policies and initiatives, attacking both speech and gun possession and ownership, with a vengeance. As for the latter, much of the Administration’s policy goals are presented matter-of-factly, albeit cloaked under the guise of protecting the public from the purported scourge of the “Gun Violence Epidemic.”The Administration's answer to the scourge of gun violence, as the Administration sees it, is, as it has always been: disarming the citizen and treating all those, who happen to wish to exercise their right to keep and bear arms, as pariahs. To effectuate the eventual disarming of all Americans, the Administration is treating gun ownership as a sickness, as an abomination.Psychiatric news, for one, emphasizes that the simple act of owning a gun is considered a risk factor that should be a target for behavior modification.The disinformation campaign of treating gun ownership as psychosis, or as a trigger for those who suffer from psychoses or neuroses that they are more likely to harm themselves or others, has been in operation for quite a while, much of it done just below the level of conscious awareness. And many in the medical community have jumped on board. But, what is really the point of this from the Government's perspective: is it really to protect tens of millions of average, trustworthy, responsible, rational people from themselves lest, at some indefinite point in time, they happen to go off the deep end, or, rather, is it to remove a potential threat to Government that the mere existence of an armed citizenry poses? But, as for the latter, wasn't it always the purpose of an armed citizenry to protect itself from tyranny? If a Government adheres to its Constitutional duties and accepts the fact that the people are the sovereign authority over Government, then what is there for Government to fear from the people, as there is nothing Government has taken from the people. But, if Government has ambitions to amass power that belongs to the people, to dictate how a person should live his life, and to oppress that person, then Government has reason to fear an armed citizenry as was the intent of the founders of a free Republic. And, the citizen, for his part, as reason enough to be wary of such a Government that would take from the people that ultimate authority that belongs only to the people, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that Government has no ownership over.The dissolution of the armed citizenry of America, through which the sovereignty over Government is enforced, IS THE POINT of Biden’s 6-point policy plan. The sixth and last point of Biden’s plan requires the appointment of David Chipman, as Director of the ATF.That last policy objective of the Administration's 6-POINT PLAN to subvert the right of the people to keep and bear arms didn’t pan out. That was an unexpected and unfortunate setback for the Administration. The Harris-Biden Administration was puzzled and more than just a trifle upset, considering the ease by which the Administration was able to place so many other Neo-Marxist Internationalists in high Government posts in and across the Administration.But, the failure to secure David Chipman as Director of the ATF is no small matter for the Administration. Had Chipman been confirmed by the Senate, the Administration would have had its “Tool” in place for banning all semiautomatic firearms through the mechanism of a simple Rule Change to the definition of “machine gun.” That was the plan, and during his Senate confirmation hearing, after dogged questioning by Senate Republicans, Chipman finally admitted it even though he pointedly said that the banning of semiautomatic firearms is the role of Congress. But, the intention all along was to accomplish this quietly, surreptitiously, through the Administrative Rules process.Recall how Trump banned “Bump Stocks” through the Administrative Process, bypassing Congress—altogether unconscionable and patently illegal—it was done anyway.Subsequent to a challenge in the U.S. Supreme Court, that kept the bump stock ban in place having decided not to rule on the merits of the case, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in The Sixth Circuit ruled against the Bump Stock ban in Gun Owners of Am., Inc. v. Garland, 992 F.3d 446 (Sixth Cir. 2021). ruled against the bump stock ban. This was cause for rejoicing. See, e.g., articles on sites, “Reason” “the federalist.” But the elation was short-lived.In an en banc hearing of the entire complement of Sixth Circuit judges, the decision of the three-judge panel was vacated. See Gun Owners of Am., Inc. v. Garland 2 F. 4th 576, 2021 U.S. App. (6th Cir. 2021), 2021 WL 2621112. A U.S. District Court of the Seventh Circuit also found the ruling of the ATF under the Administrative Procedures Act to be lawful in Doe v. Trump, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185138. That decision is now on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. The appeal was filed, September 29, 2021.In the next several weeks and months pay close attention to Administration attempts to undermine the Second Amendment right of the people to keep and bear arms unlawfully through executive orders and Administrative Rules. The Harris-Biden Administration and the Schumer/Pelosi Controlled Congress has shown its propensity to violate the Constitution with abandon in the areas of immigration, elections, censoring of speech, COVID mask and shot mandates, to name just a few. Should the public not also expect this Government to go after firearms ownership and possession in violation of the Bill of Rights with the same abandon and zeal?______________________________________________

IF THE PEN CAN BE CENSORED, CAN THE SWORD ALSO BE CENSORED?

SUBPART C

ATTACKS ON THE FIRST AND SECOND AMENDMENTS BEST EXEMPLIFY TREASON AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF THE HARRIS-BIDEN ADMINISTRATION

I must own, I know not what Treason is, if sapping and betraying the liberties of a people be not treason, in the eternal and original Nature of Things.” ~ John Trenchard (1662-1723) & Thomas Gordon, English Journalists and political theorists of the late 17th and early 18th Centuries, the two writing together under the nom de guerre, “Cato.” The passage comes from “Reflections upon Libelling,” June 10, 1721. Ref: Cato's Letters; or Essays on liberty, pg 249 (1737). Citation obtained from the website, “the liberty tree” Back in 2003, before the Heller decision of 2008 and the subsequent McDonald decision of 2010, a legal scholar considered whether the protections underlying the First Amendment against censorship can also be applied to the Second Amendment.The author of a Law Review article, from whom we borrow words of the title of our article from the title of his, wrote, in part:“The First and Second Amendments differ in both their construction and in the nature of the rights that they secure; it seems that the text of the Second supports a more expansive reading than that given to the First. Despite (or perhaps because of) these differences, legal scholars and philosophers have recently started to wonder what justifies giving the Second Amendment a narrow construction at the same time one gives an expansive interpretation to the First? . . . [The] text cannot help, since both amendments are equally susceptible to either narrow or broad constructions. Reliance on precedent also cannot solve the problem since the narrow interpretation of the Second Amendment is not so settled by a series of Supreme Court decisions that it could not be revisited. One plausible approach is to apply analogous First Amendment standards to Second Amendment issues. This approach would clearly be neither perfect nor universally applicable, but there are some broad principles that would serve as valuable tools in this developing area of the law.To justify the application of First Amendment standards to the (very different) Second Amendment, one must begin by noting the fact that the First Amendment's guarantees of free speech and free press, as well as the Establishment Clause, incorporated via the Fourteenth Amendment, are constructed as a restraint on federal and state governments.The Second Amendment, by contrast, is a ‘right of the people,’ one that secures a specific and individual liberty. This difference in construction is significant because, as the Second Circuit has noted ‘the Establishment Clause, unlike the Fourth Amendment, contains no limiting language. Indeed, the basic structure of the Establishment Clause, which imposes a restriction on Congress, differs markedly from that of the Fourth Amendment, which confers a right on the people.’” ~ from the Law Review Note, “Treating the Pen and the Sword as Constitutional Equals: How and Why the Supreme Court Should Apply Its First Amendment Expertise to the Great Second Amendment Debate,” 44 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 2287 (April 2003), by David G. Browne.The author of the above-mentioned law review article could not know, in 2003, that the U.S. Supreme Court would, in fact revisit the import and purport of the Second Amendment, a few short years later. And the Court majority did rule, clearly and categorically, that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right, unconnected with one’s service in a militia. But let us be clear about this: The salient holding in Heller and McDonald didn’t expand the notion of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Rather, it simply acknowledged what was always there in the language of the Second Amendment—that the Right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right, not an amorphous collective right. It is a right of the people to be enjoyed irrespective of one’s service in a militia. This is a critical point. We, therefore, disagree with the author’s contention that the text of one fundamental Right can ever be construed to be more or less expansive than any other fundamental Right.It is incongruous to give wide latitude to one Fundamental Right and less latitude to another. To conclude otherwise means the framers of the Bill of Rights intended to place limitations on the exercise of Fundamental Rights. They didn’t.The idea that some scholars, commentators, and politicians have that they did intend to place limitations on the exercise of Fundamental Rights is both erroneous and ludicrous. Yet, it is an error many scholars, commentators, and politicians do make, and they make that error often. And frightful, dire repercussions follow from that error. Politicians piggyback off the error. They continually restrict and constrict exercise of Americans’ fundamental rights, with the aim, eventually, of eliminating all of them, as presently codified in the Bill of Rights, to be repackaged as Government sees fit; but this time merely as a set of rules, not Rights, to be changed or cast aside, as the Government from time-t0-time wishes, attempting to win over the populace. And some come to believe that Rights aren't such things Americans inherently possess, but, rather, are prizes to be won from or privileges of a sort to be bestowed upon them by Government, through proper obeisance to Government.Therein does Tyranny of Government over the citizenry reside, winding, and wending its way in and through the Nation, insinuating itself on everyone and everything.But, was the Bill of Rights ever supposed to be thus. Surely, there is nothing in the characterization of the text of any of the Rights, set forth in the Bill of Rights, to suggest constraints and limitations to be attached to one or the other or to all of them. Surely, there is nothing to suggest that these God-Given Rights were never to be perceived but merely beneficent privileges created by the Government itself to be awarded to some and withheld from others, subject merely to the whims, vagaries, and inclinations of arrogant overseers of Government.Thus, we must agree with the author of the 2003 article that it makes no sense to treat the Second Amendment as the poor cousin to the First and we agree that it is incongruous to give wide latitude to one Fundamental Right and less to another. But, at one and the same time, we must take exception with the writer's belief or supposition that the text of any one or more of the elemental Rights codified in the Bill of Rights bespeak, or were meant to bespeak, any limitation by the American people in their exercise of them.Tyranny of Government proceeds from its failure to heed to the dictates of the Bill of Rights as a set of fundamental rights emanating from the will of the Divine Creator.

TENETS OF THE NATION'S FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

The language of the Second Amendment, as with all other fundamental, unalienable rights, exists intrinsically in Man.

Fundamental Rights are Primordial Rights, i.e., Natural Law Rights, preexistent in Man that precede all manmade governmental structures.

Fundamental Rights as Primordial Natural Law Rights aren’t privileges to be bestowed on Man by grace of Government, nor can they be taken from Man at Government’s whim.

Since Government did not create and cannot create Primordial Natural Law Rights, Government cannot lawfully modify, dilute, abrogate, or ignore these Rights.

Since Primordial Natural Law Rights are not man-made rules, they cannot be treated as mere privileges to be granted to some and denied to others by the grace of Government, nor can they lawfully be rescinded at the whim or pleasure of Government.

Because Primordial Natural Law Rights are unalienable, immutable, illimitable, and eternal, i.e., existing for all time, such Rights are not and cannot reasonably, rationally be perceived as transitory, archaic, anachronistic, antiquated, or conditional, i.e., merely applicable to particular time periods, particular conditions of man, or to particular governmental and societal structures.

Primordial Natural Law Rights, as creations of the Divine Creator, are absolute, permanent, and perfect; sacred and pure, sanctified and inviolate, residing in the Divine Creator and, by the Creator’s Grace, in the Spirit of Man.

The Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution is to be perceived as the codification of a set of Primordial Natural Law Rights laid down by the Divine Creator. They are not to be construed merely as the codification of a set of higher, mutable, aspirations of man, conceived by and inspired by man, independent of God’s Hand.

Man is incapable of perceiving Primordial Natural Law Rights, as High Moral Precepts, but for the Divine Creator instilling these Rights in Man’s Spirit.

Each Primordial Natural Law Right recited in the Bill of Rights is to be perceived as part of a unified whole; no Right is to be considered irrelevant, extraneous, redundant, or noncontiguous with any other. They operate from and derive their ultimate strength and potency as a Divine whole.

ONLY THROUGH FREE AND ABSOLUTE EXERCISE OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS CAN TYRANNY OF GOVERNMENT BE FORESTALLED AND PREVENTED

The United States, conceived as a free Constitutional Republic, is on a collision course with tyranny and in the most literal sense precisely because of the degradation of the Bill of Rights and because of the arrogance of those in power who have forgotten that they rule at the pleasure of the people.The author of the afore-cited law review article, hoping for a revitalization of the Second Amendment, in line with the First Amendment, could not have foreseen the irony playing out in the Country today, with the denigration and degradation of both. Yes, the U.S. Supreme Court made clear, in the Heller case in 2008, that the right codified in the Second Amendment is an individual right and that the holding in Heller applies to the States as made clear in the McDonald case of 2010. But, State and local governments routinely, blatantly, and unconscionably ignore the rulings of Heller and McDonald. Will the upcoming Second Amendment Corlett case strengthen Heller and McDonald? That is the hope of those Americans who cherish the Bill of Rights but it remains to be seen. Ultimately, Corlett may not make a damn bit of difference.Concomitant with the erosion of the Second Amendment, in spite of Heller and McDonald, the fundamental Right of Free Speech of the First Amendment is also being eroded. If the sanctity of the First was to help buttress the sanctity of the Second, both may ultimately be discarded. There is a sad irony in this. The expansive First Amendment has been radically constricted by the power of a seditious Press and a sympathetic technology sector that exerts massive control over information content and information flow.An Administration that won’t tolerate dissenting speech, most certainly won’t long abide an armed citizenry either.If “the pen” can be muzzled, then, so too, can “the sword” be broken. This is the hallmark of an Authoritarian or full-bore Totalitarian Nation-Regime. Dissent is deemed intolerable and an armed citizenry, insufferable. The United States, conceived as and constructed as a free Constitutional Republic, with a free and sovereign citizenry, is rapidly degenerating into the founders’ worst nightmare.In the next segment of our series, PART SIX, in our continuing series on treason, we dive deeply into this notion of ‘Tyranny of Government.’We ask, and resolve to answer—If the vast apparatus of the Federal Government devolves into Tyranny, does that not support a finding that high-level officials and officers within it can be charged with and tried for “treason” and suffer the consequences if convicted of it? And, if so, cannot and ought not the American people dismantle a Government that has been irreparably damaged by their treacherous, traitorous servants? And might not the people try once again to reconstruct a Government in the form it was originally designed and meant to be, one surely serving their interests, and truly answerable to them?__________________________________________________

AN AUTHORITARIAN OR TOTALITARIAN REGIME WILL NOT LONG SUFFER THE DISSIDENT VOICE

SUBPART D

If the present Administration won’t tolerate dissent, it is equally clear that dissent in the Second Amendment won’t be tolerated either, as we pointed out in our previous article. The exercise of one's Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms can also be considered a form of and therefore equated with speech. Thus if “the pen” can be muzzled, then “the sword,” as we said, in Subpart C, supra, can be broken, which is to say, “the gun” can be confiscated. That is how intolerance of Dissent is handled in a totalitarian Country as this one is rapidly becoming. In its drive to subjugate the American people, the Harris-Biden Administration understands the necessity of eradicating the armed citizenry. The Administration is doing this incrementally. The Administration's extraordinarily expansive, vicious, and virulent attack on dissenting speech is to be properly perceived as an oblique attack on the Second Amendment right of the people to keep and bear arms, as well.Now when it comes to dissent, as speech, the Harris-Biden Administration won’t tolerate it, notwithstanding that the right of free speech, i.e., the right to dissent against Government policy that the public disagrees with, is protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. See, e.g., article in “daily truth report,” and in thought crime radio. Finding overt evidence of the Government clampdown on speech is easy to come by. Consider Google’s search algorithms.Do a search on Google Chrome and you will find page after page after page of search results concerning the clampdown on dissent in many Autocratic Countries like China, Russia, Myanmar, Belarus, Turkey, and Tunisia and on, and on, and on, but nary a word about clampdown of dissent in the United States.But, then, the U.S. is still a free Constitutional Republic, isn’t it? Of course it is! And, woe to any American who dares say, “no,” that we “once lived in a free Republic, but no longer.” Government, through the information technology monopolies, is actively, avidly, rabidly censoring speech. Unfettered exercise of Free Speech and of the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms are the most crucial rights, without which a free Constitutional Republic cannot survive, and tyranny arises.Recall Google’s fatuous motto “Don’t Be Evil.” Is that still Google’s motto? It once was, but no longer. That was many moons ago. Today, as pointed out by the website Gizmodo,“Google’s unofficial motto has long been the simple phrase ‘don’t be evil.’ But that’s over, according to the code of conduct that Google distributes to its employees. The phrase was removed sometime in late April or early May, archives hosted by the Wayback Machine show.”Gizmodo goes on to say, “When Google was reorganized under a new parent company, Alphabet, in 2015, Alphabet assumed a slightly adjusted version of the motto, ‘do the right thing.’ ” However, Google retained its original ‘don’t be evil’ language until the past several weeks.” But the “past several weeks,” was back in 2018 when that story broke.Just a slight change in Google’s motto? One must wonder: what ‘does the new motto, “Do the right thing” mean? It means do the right thing for itself, consistent with the goals of the Administration and of the Neo-Marxist-led Congress. A documentary that came out in the same year that Google did away with its “don’t be evil” motto, explains.See “The Creepy Line,” a documentary that “. . . reveals the stunning degree to which society is manipulated by Google and Facebook and how they do it.” But “Big Tech” isn’t working alone.The Harris-Biden Administration and the Pelosi-Schumer-controlled Congress are in bed with Big Tech. See article in Deep State Journal, for one. But, wasn’t there a whistleblower that came out to warn Congress of the danger of Facebook, Frances Haugen? It seems there is more to this story than the legacy Press would like you to know. See, e.g., article in the Conservative Tree House, the daily wire, and scheerpost. With massive censorship of speech, and with so many people being “canceled” for voicing their opinion and with Government and the Technology monopolies refusing to permit vigorous debate—the hallmark of a democratic society—tyranny is a heartbeat away from rearing its ugly head, and thence, “treason.”The Administration attempts always, with the assistance of the legacy Press and Big Tech to keep one step ahead of the public, to keep Americans off-guard, off-kilter through constant vague, inconsistent, messaging, and ludicrous denials, like the Secretary of DHS, Alejandro Mayorkas baldly, absurdly proclaiming to the public, that the Nation’s borders aren’t open. See, e.g., article in the NY Post. In other words, “don’t believe your lying eyes.” And, it doesn’t end there:Consider—The impact of the Nation’s retreat from Afghanistan, leaving billions of dollars of sophisticated weaponry in the hands of our enemy, an enemy we have been at war with for almost 20 years. Are Americans expected to treat this as a mere accident? And, the Administration doesn’t even claim there was an accident. Everything worked out fine—more than fine, really. Biden’s handlers instructed the idiot to assert the Afghanistan withdrawal was an “extraordinary success.” If Biden had any “gray matter” left in his skull, one would think he would have objected to reciting such a line. Biden’s handlers must think the public is as blockheaded as Biden, himself.No, the Afghanistan withdrawal wasn’t a success, extraordinary, good, adequate, satisfactory, or even passable. It was an unmitigated disaster and the repercussions from this disaster are so awful, so horrific, that one cannot pass this off as simply ineptitude or mistake. One must infer the actions of the Government to be by design.Biden’s predecessor, Donald Trump, had done much to stabilize the Middle East. Yet now, once again the region is destabilized. Worse, the disruption of the Middle East under the present Administration is even than under Obama’s. The present Administration has endangered the security of the Nation and that of the world. Indeed it compounds the threat a thousandfold by airlifting tens of thousands of unvetted Afghans into the Country, to be secreted silently and secretly throughout the interior of our Nation. See, e.g., articles in red voice media, the Washington Examiner, and in town hall. Also see the YouTube video with Michael Franzese, “Our Government Is Screwing Us.”Do you recall the old slogan, “if we don’t fight them over there, we will fight them over here?” Back in 2006, the leftist Daily Kos made light of this. A website called the new Federalist, playing off the name of the well-known and ostensibly Conservative website, “The Federalist,” apparently with no association with t he federalist shrugs off the danger to the stability of nation-states.These Sixth Century sheepherders are unassimilable, as are hundreds of thousands of other ignorant, poverty-stricken populations, many of them carrying the Chinese Communist Coronavirus, often referred to simply as COVID; or they may be, and probably are carrying other abominable, highly communicable, and dangerous infectious diseases. These illegal aliens are all given carte blanche entry into our Nation. These alien populations have a culture, heritage, and ethos antithetical, and our culture, heritage, and ethos are altogether incomprehensible to them to our own. Many have a religion that does not cohere with Christianity and does not recognize the legitimacy of other religions, especially Christianity. And these are the sorry creatures upon which the Neo-Marxist Internationalists and the billionaire Neo-liberal Globalists intend to fracture our society, bringing it to complete ruin. These populations completely dependent on subsistence from the taxpaying citizenry have little to no formal education and will require substantial taxpayer outlay to assist them with their health care, housing, and a host of other welfare needs. These populations have little to no formal education and will require substantial taxpayer outlay to assist them with health care, housing, and a host of other welfare needs. The drain on Americans and on the economy will be substantial, immense, catastrophic. And, Americans are obtaining just a glimmer of what lies in store for them, why it is that the Administration and the Neo-Marxist Democrat Party-controlled Congress are Hell-bent on passing a multi-trillion-dollar so-called Human Infrastructure spending plan. This does nothing to help Americans. This plan is designed to destroy the Country and oppress the citizenry, using the citizenry's tax dollars to pay for the upkeep of tens of millions of illegal alien freeloaders, the new dependent American, happy and content to live under oppression for a few trinkets and a few welfare checks a month upon which to subsist. And the American citizenry will be taxed into penury itself, and become itself dependent on the largess of Government to survive.And, once the will of the American citizenry has been broken, and the Nation's institutions destroyed, and the history and heritage and Christian ethos but a distant memory if memory remains at all, the new international world order will rise as the Devil-Spawn from the skeletal remains of this Nation of all the others that once comprised western civilization.A once-proud, healthy, wealthy, secure, powerful, independent sovereign Nation and a free and sovereign American people will live under constant surveillance and oppression, sans liberty, happiness, and hope for their future.

THE HARRIS-BIDEN ADMINISTRATION’S POLICY DECISIONS HARM THE NATION CATASTROPHICALLY AND IRREVOCABLY, AND THAT IS THE POINT.

But the American people must first recognize and acknowledge that deliberate policy decisions of the Federal Government do constitute actionable treason if the people are to hold onto their Republic as the Founding Fathers intended and as the Constitution mandates. Their Republic is rapidly slipping from their grasp.As mentioned in our opening, we said the Federal Government has committed actionable treason against the American people. That is our thesis. Many scholars say this is impossible. They contend that, as a matter of law, Government cannot commit treason against its people even if Government intentionally operates to the detriment of the people.If Big Tech and Big Government routinely and brazenly censor speech, censorship of guns, i.e., confiscation of firearms, cannot be far behind.In the next few articles, we deal squarely with whether Government can, theoretically, as a matter of logic and law, commit treason against its people where Government deliberately takes action against the interests of the people. Is this the stuff of treason by the Government against its own people? We shall see. We now peer at the concept of TYRANNY.______________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

10/1/21 10/1/21

IF TYRANNY IS TREASON, ONLY A WELL-ARMED CITIZENRY CAN EFFECTIVELY RESIST IT AND HAS THE DUTY TO DO SO

MULTI-SERIES ON THE ISSUE OF POSSIBLE TREASON AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT

PART FOUR

TYRANNY OF GOVERNMENT IS TREACHERY TO A NATION'S PEOPLE

Quotations to ponder apropos of “tyranny of Government as actionable treason against the American people”“If there is a clear distinction between a Republican and a Democrat during these trying times, it has to be boiled down to this single truth: Republicans trust our neighbors with their God-given rights and ask to be left alone; Democrats extend privileges to their neighbors and become little Robespierres to see whether or not those privileges should continue to be extended. That’s it.” ~Shaun Kenney, a contemporary web blogger, of the website, The Republican Standard, reflecting on the thoughts of C. S. Lewis on tyranny. “All tyrannies rule through fraud and force, but once the fraud is exposed they must rely exclusively on force.” ~from an essay by George Orwell, novelist, journalist, essayist, who is best known for his satirical allegory on totalitarianism, “Animal Farm,” published in 1945; and for his dystopian novel, “1984,” published in 1949.“The greatest tyrannies are always perpetuated in the name of the noblest causes.” ~Thomas Paine, American Patriot, Philosopher, and Political Theorist“I think myself that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious. Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. . . . The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases. The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.” ~Thomas Jefferson; Founding Father of our Nation, Third President of the United States, Statesman, Philosopher, and Lawyer; quotation taken from a letter from Jefferson to William Ludlow, September 6, 1824. “Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.” ~quotation attributed to John Basil Barnhill, anti-socialist writer, editor, politician, and debater of the late 19th Century and Early 20th century.“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. . . .” ~C.S. Lewis, novelist, essayist, and lay theologian; from his essay, “God In The Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics” (1948)Tyranny is here, in America. It is here now, today. That this is so, is indisputable, irrefutable fact; unsettling and distressing as this fact may be to contemplate.The Neo-Marxist Internationalists and Mega-Billionaire Neoliberal Globalists of present-day America would vigorously deny this, of course, when confronted with the inescapable ample evidence for it.The actions of a Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist led and controlled Congress and Executive Branch of the Federal Government glaringly demonstrate the truth of this. They are responsible for it, and what is more, they know it to be so; they welcome it; they have planned for it; they intend to see it come to fruition—tyranny imposed on the people by a rogue Government.But they assiduously try to hide the truth of their crimes and sins from the people, lest the people rebel. The people cannot be allowed even to whisper the truth while these Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists go about conjuring up a drastic transformation of our Country.The Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists are methodically, inexorably dismantling a proud, sovereign, independent Nation, a sovereign people, and a free Constitutional Republic; rendering it an afflicted, wretched, borderless, amorphous territory—eventually to be merged into a globalist totalitarian new world order. This massive, horrific transformation of a free Constitutional Republic is taking place quickly. Already, in the space of eight months, after the puppet-masters evicted Donald Trump from Office through the unethical and criminal manipulation of the electoral process, the Nation is unrecognizable. Although powerful, secretive Destructive elements had been machinating to dismantle the Republic at its inception, upon Ratification of the United States Constitution in 1788, the process of dismantling the Republic had heretofore proceeded relatively silently, furtively plodding forward at a snail's pace. It was only at the dawn of the 21st Century upon the inauguration of the “Skull and Bones” President, George Bush, that the process of dismantling the Republic pushed forward openly, fervently, rapidly, in earnest. The Bush Administration with the assistance of Alan Greenspan, Chair of the Federal Reserve, along with a host of neoconservative henchmen, embroiled the Nation in an expensive escapade in the Middle East, from which we have never really extricated ourselves, and which resulted in the loss of thousands of American lives, trillions of taxpayer dollars, and the collapse of the American economy in 2008. The Grand Apologist, Barack Obama, compounded the Nation's economic and geopolitical plight. As another puppet of the shadowy Destructors of our Nation, Obama attempted, through secretive, negotiations with other nations and multinational businesses, to bind the Nation to two massive transnational trade deals: the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and the Transatlantic Trade Investment Partnership (T-TIP). Had those international trade agreements materialized, they would, in their operation, have severely weakened the Nation's Constitutional underpinnings. It was expected that Hillary Clinton would have continued the Obama policies had she succeeded him. And, many there were, both here and abroad, that presumed Hillary Clinton was a shoo-in to succeed Obama. They were wrong. Clinton lost. Donald Trump became President and threw a wrench into the grand scheme of the Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists to dismantle the Republic. The shadowy puppet-masters who oversaw all of this were enraged. They made sure Trump wouldn't serve a second term in Office. Once their physically frail, emotionally weak, and cognitively challenged puppet was firmly ensconced in Office, they wasted no time completing the process of destroying the Country from within—not only economically, but politically, societally, juridically, and culturally. Already, we see inklings of the resumption of TTP and T-TIP.The seditious Press and social media are collaborating in all of this. They are baldly, blithely censoring speech and endlessly, relentlessly pumping out gibberish on behalf of the puppet-masters. They have obtained the cooperation and acquiescence of many Americans; some capitulating, resigned; reconciled to their fate; others avidly embracing it.Americans’ brains have turned to mush. Many of them ardently support the takeover of the Nation, ravenously gobbling up all the nonsense generated by the Press and social media that an omnipotent Government, doling out occasional dollops of “freedom” and a few trinkets to those Americans who obey their dictates is a good thing; a right and proper thing; and they think: “woe to those Americans who do not heed the dictates of the Government taskmasters.”Americans who have bought into the nonsense, daily and malevolently spun by the propagandists, don’t realize or, more likely—especially the “Baby Boomer” Generation—did know, as well the public schools at the time had taught them, but now have long since forgotten, that our Nation was conceived in liberty.The ruination of a free Constitutional Republic is at hand and with it, the suppression of our sacred freedoms.The Neo-Marxists have taken over the education of our youth. They have rewritten the civics and history curricula of our public schools. They have recast the entirety of a Nation’s glorious history and Constitution to create a false narrative, one completely at odds with the truth, and one alien to and antithetical to the nobility of man, as they usher in a new era. It is one devoid of the notion of the sanctity, invincibility, and inviolability of the rights and liberties of man; of the autonomy and sanctity of the individual over the Collectivist State.But freedom is not a privilege to be dispensed occasionally to some and denied more frequently to others—at the whim of and by the grace of Government.‘Freedom,’ ultimately, is an incommensurable, irreducible, ineffable, elemental concept, actualized as an illimitable, immutable, unalienable right of the people. It is intrinsic to the people, bestowed upon them and into their very being by a loving God. Yet, Government usurpers pretend that freedom is an artificial construct. These usurpers see, in “Freedom” something akin to candy; a reward to be given to those who willingly bow to their will.To these usurpers, “freedom” is nothing more than a commodity, a thing created by or manufactured by the Government and therefore a thing within the lawful power of Government to mete out or to revoke, as Government alone, at its whim, decides.THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S ABSOLUTE CONTROL OVER THE FREE EXERCISE OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND ITS DISDAIN FOR THE NATION'S CONSTITUTION AND LAWS IS THE SINE QUA NON OF TYRANNY. Not without reason, the founders were much concerned with tyranny. And, a deep and disquieting concern over the unintentional resurrection of tyranny in a fledgling independent sovereign Nation informed the founders’ thinking as they fretted mightily over the shape a new Government, one conceived in liberty, should take.For, they knew it would be the greatest of ironies indeed, if, at the end of the day, a Federal Government they created for a new Nation—one conceived in liberty—would fall victim to the very thing they had with no little effort defeated. They determined that a true Republican form of Government would best stave off a rebirth of tyranny.But even a Republican form of Government, with powers carefully delineated and demarcated among three co-equal Branches, would of itself be insufficient to defeat tyranny. For ambitious powerful men would undoubtedly attempt to usurp powers the Constitution forbade. Thus would spawn a new tyranny—the very thing the founders had defeated and had no stomach to see arise anew.The founders realized the most effective weapon to check the natural inclination of those wielding power to acquire ever more power beyond the limits imposed on them by the Constitution would require an omnipresent armed citizenry. And as they perceived as self-evident true that the right of the people to keep and bear arms preexists in man—they etched that Divine Right in stone. The usurpers of the sovereignty of the American people don't care about any of that. Their sacrilege against the one true Deity knows no bounds.An explicit Bill of God-Given Rights incorporated into the Constitution would make clear to those who serve in Government that what the Divine Creator gave to man, no artificial Government construct can lawfully take from man. For any attempt to do so would be an assault not only on the dignity and autonomy of man but a mortal sin against the will of the Divine Creator, not that the usurpers wouldn’t attempt, or, for that matter, haven’t already attempted to do so.THEY WILL GO AFTER AMERICANS’ FIREARMS AS THEY MUST BECAUSE AN ARMED CITIZENRY CONSTITUTES AN IMMEDIATE AND DIRE THREAT TO THE EXECUTION AND COMPLETION OF THEIR GOAL: THE IMPOSITION OF TYRANNY.The usurpers know that wresting firearms from Americans would be a far more difficult proposition than constraining the right of free speech and association, which they have been doing with relative ease, and abrogating the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, which they have already accomplished.Actions of the Biden-Harris Administration and of the Pelosi-Schumer Congress are a conscious, unmitigated assault on the Constitution, on the Nation, and on its people. Together these actions constitute the imposition of tyranny on the American people.

BUT——DO THESE DELIBERATE ACTS, SINGLY OR COLLECTIVELY RISE TO THE LEVEL OF TREASON AS THE WORD ‘TREASON’ IS DEFINED IN THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND IN FEDERAL STATUTE?

Does the import of the Treason clause the founders wrote into the Constitution extend to the imposition of tyranny on the people? If so, then tyranny amounts to levying war against the people. This means that the levying of war against the people is no less an act of betrayal, i.e. no less an act of treachery against the people, and, therefore, no less treason committed by the Government upon its own people, than is an unlawful levying of war by the people against Government.But this idea that those individuals serving in Government can, through their actions, commit treason against a people is a novel concept. For the treason laws of all other Nations do not admit of a Government action that can constitute a betrayal of the people. But, then, no other nation on Earth has adopted a Bill of Rights that at once establishes fundamental rights that exist intrinsically in the people; a Bill of Rights that serves as both a categorical declaration and an urgent reminder to those that serve in the Government that Government exists solely to serve the people. This means that the People are the Master, and Government is the Servant. It also means that the People are the sole Sovereign of and over the Nation and thence manifestly Sovereign over the Government and Government is manifestly subservient to the people.Taking these propositions as axiomatic, i.e., self-evident, true, this means that, as a matter of both law and logic, Government itself, through its actions that harm the people——harms that rise to the level of betrayal of a sacred trust binding Government to service to the people for all time——are an UNFORGIVABLE TREASON AGAINST THE PEOPLE. And, the people, for their part, have the lawful right and the lawful duty, under the Treason Clause of the U.S. Constitution, to bring those who betray them, to account for their crimes against them.This notion of “TREASON AS TYRANNY OF GOVERNMENT DIRECTED AGAINST ITS OWN PEOPLE” is a thesis that demands further attention and explication.In the next several articles, we explore this idea of deliberate imposition of tyranny by High Officials of the Federal Government against the people, as implicating the Treason Clause of the U.S. Constitution.____________________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

9/25/21 9/25/21

DO GOVERNMENT POLICIES AIMED AT WEAKENING THE SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES AND DISARMING THE CITIZENRY RISE TO THE LEVEL OF “TREASON?”

MULTI-SERIES ON THE ISSUE OF POSSIBLE TREASON AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT

PART THREE

As we stated in our first article posted on Ammoland, “Does the Biden Administration’s Assault on the Second Amendment Amount to TREASON,” one must be circumspect in application of a TREASON hypothesis. For, if we are careless in our understanding of the import of it, we risk diluting its significance, mistakenly attaching the duo labels of ‘TREASON’ and ‘TRAITOR’ to those who never warranted it but happened nonetheless to be branded with it and then crucified for it.And we know whereof we speak: Recall the branding of “TRAITOR” to our 45^th President, Donald Trump, and recall the crucifying of him and those closest to him: Those individuals who assisted him in his run for U.S. Presidency; Cabinet-level Officers; close friends and associates; even members of his own immediate family. All of them have been incessantly, rapaciously, relentlessly, viciously attacked and hounded because of service to, or mere association with, the purported traitor, Donald Trump.Trump was called a TRAITOR because of his alleged collusion with Russia—false as it turned out; a complete fabrication, and a pretext to get him out of Office; a well-orchestrated sham for his impeachment. The Neo-Marxist Democrats spent our precious tax dollars to launch an extensive investigation of Trump in launching and conducting it, hoping to find evidence of it; but found nothing, nothing at all for their trouble. A backup plan to destroy the Trump Presidency was then initiated as a pretext to impeach Trump, grounded on the flimsiest of notions: a telephone call to the President of Ukraine. Trump’s call to Volodymyr Zelensky was perfectly lawful, but it was nonetheless blown up to monstrous proportions by the legacy Press in league with the Neo-Marxist Democrats, led by the notorious, power-mad Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. But that time-consuming, wasteful, taxpayer-funded enterprise, too, fell flat.But what was Donald Trump’s worst “crime” for which he was presumed by the Neo-Marxist Internationalists and mega-billionaire Neoliberal Globalists to be a traitor—calling him an autocrat and a threat to democracy and constantly blaring out that he damaged democracy? It was this: support for the right of the people to keep and bear arms. The Heritage Society, on September 9, 2020, reproducing an article by the Federalist Society, said this about Trump’s record on the Second Amendment after four years in Office:“In his most recent State of the Union address President Donald Trump promised the American people, “So long as I am President, I will always protect your Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms.” This was certainly a welcome statement from any elected official, particularly from the nation’s chief executive during a time of unprecedented attacks on the Second Amendment by many local, state, and federal lawmakers.But how has the President’s first term stacked up against his grand promise? When we step back from the hype and honestly assess Trump’s performance with respect to the Second Amendment, what do we actually find? Fortunately, when we take a hard look at the bad and the good in three important categories—the President’s rhetoric, policy, and judicial nominations—it is evident that Trump has gotten the Second Amendment right more often than he has gotten it wrong.Actions speak louder than words, particularly when it comes to national policy. But words, especially when they come from a President, are important. A President’s policy agenda often carries great weight with Congress, signaling to federal lawmakers what types of bills they might pursue without risk of a Presidential veto. President Trump’s Second Amendment rhetoric has occasionally been lacking. Yet more often than not, and principally when it has been most important, the President has said the right things.As with Trump’s rhetoric, most of his administration’s policy efforts have been consistent with his promise to protect the right to keep and bear arms.Early in his first term, federal agencies reversed course on several Obama-era policies that would have jeopardized Americans’ Second Amendment rights. For example, under the Trump Administration, the State Department settled a previous Obama Administration lawsuit with Defense Distributed and permitted that organization to publish its blueprints for 3D-printed guns online. This was a win for both the First and Second Amendments. Americans clearly have a right to discuss and disseminate information about how to conduct lawful activities—including how to smith a firearm for personal use.Similarly, the Trump Administration rescinded (before it could go into effect) an Obama-era regulation that would have effectively stripped the Second Amendment rights of any person who checked a particular box on a form submitted to the Social Security Administration. Normally, before the government can prohibit a person from keeping and bearing arms, it must first prove at some sort of hearing or trial that the person is a criminal, seriously mentally ill, or otherwise poses a serious danger to the community. The new Obama rule, however, would have summarily declared tens of thousands of Americans ineligible to exercise a constitutional right without first providing them any semblance of due process.In March 2018, the President signed into law the Fix NICS Act, an effort to strengthen enforcement of existing federal gun laws without expanding them or imposing new restrictions on law-abiding citizens. The federal background check system has long suffered from the failures of states and federal agencies to submit the criminal and mental health records of individuals disqualified from gun ownership. The Act increased federal oversight over federal agencies responsible for submitting records, increased funding to assist states in reporting disqualifying records, and prioritized funding for those states that established plans for increased reporting.Most recently, the Trump Administration lived up to its Second Amendment promise by fighting back against state closures of gun stores, shooting ranges, and government permitting offices during the COVID-19 pandemic. Several states and counties ordered these places shut down or refused to exempt them as “essential businesses.” In some places, this meant that residents who did not already own guns were de facto prohibited from exercising their constitutional rights for the duration of the epidemic.While the federal government could not override state definitions of “essential business,” the Trump Administration issued federal guidelines that deemed gun stores and gun ranges, as well as firearms and ammunitions manufacturers, as “critical components of the nation’s workforce.” The guidelines recommended that states allow those businesses to continue operating during the pandemic.Officially, this federal guidance applied only to the enforcement of federal laws or regulations. Nonetheless, it helped strengthen legal challenges to state closures and suggested that the federal government might intervene in such lawsuits on behalf of gun owners. As a result, several jurisdictions—including New Jersey and Los Angeles County—walked back their original orders to close gun stores.Despite all of these actions, President Trump’s first term saw one clear Second Amendment policy failure. Under his administration, the ATF arbitrarily reinterpreted the federal definition of “machine gun” to include bump stocks, banning their civilian possession and requiring owners to turn in these devices. It did so even though bump stocks do not modify the mechanics of a semi-automatic firearm, and the agency has no authority to change the meaning of federal law.Regardless of one’s perspective on the desirability, constitutionality, or practical effectiveness of banning the civilian possession of bump stocks, the way in which the ATF went about doing so is troubling. When a largely unaccountable federal agency feels empowered to effectively rewrite statutes in order to create new gun control laws, it poses a danger to the entire Constitution, including the Second Amendment.Thus far, the President’s most enduring legacy with respect to the Second Amendment will likely be his federal judicial nominees, who are primed to stand as a bulwark against future attempts by lawmakers to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms. While not all of these nominees have had the opportunity to rule on Second Amendment cases, several high-profile picks have shown they are willing to come to the Amendment’s defense. Most importantly, by nominating judges who properly understand the role of the judiciary—to say what the law is, and not what they wish it to be—Trump has helped decrease the risk that federal judges will undermine the right to keep and bear arms based on their own policy preferences.Many Second Amendment advocates were disappointed when the Supreme Court this term continued its decade-long refusal to take up a meaningful challenge to restrictive gun control laws. The Supreme Court’s reluctance to do its duty with respect to the Second Amendment has been despite—not because of—Trump’s two nominees to the nation’s highest bench. Both Justice Neil Gorsuch and Justice Brett Kavanaugh have signed on to dissents from denials of certiorari in important Second Amendment cases, expressing their disappointment that the Court has so long declined to adequately protect this right from clear infringement. Moreover, in one of these dissents from denial, Justice Gorsuch did not refrain from attacking the Trump Administration itself over its agency-propagated bump stock ban.The President’s two Supreme Court picks are far from his only judicial nominees to prove themselves stalwarts of Second Amendment jurisprudence. Several of Trump’s lower court picks have made waves for their staunch defenses of the right to keep and bear arms.For example, Judge Amy Coney Barrett of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued a strong dissent in a case where two of her colleagues voted to uphold a Wisconsin law imposing a lifetime ban on gun ownership for non-violent felons. The plaintiff in the case was hardly a violent menace. He had been convicted of a single count of federal mail fraud after submitting sham requests for Medicare to reimburse non-compliant shoe inserts. Nevertheless, under the interaction of federal and Wisconsin law, this rendered the plaintiff ineligible to ever again exercise his Second Amendment rights.Judge Barrett analyzed the case through an originalist lens, noting that “Founding-era legislatures did not strip felons of the right to keep and bear arms simply because of their status as felons . . . but only when they judged that doing so was necessary to protect the public safety.”Similarly, Judge Stephanos Bibas of the Third Circuit wrote a scathing dissent when the other two judges on his panel upheld New Jersey’s ban on so-called “high-capacity magazines” as “reasonably fit[ting] the State’s interest in promoting public safety.” Judge Bibas excoriated the majority for failing to take the Second Amendment and Supreme Court precedent seriously. He reminded them that their job as judges is not to “water [the Second Amendment] down and balance it away based on our own sense of wise policy.” Rather, “the Framers made that choice for us. We must treat the Second Amendment the same as the rest of the Bill of Rights.”Finally, four Trump-nominated Fifth Circuit judges—James Ho, Don Willett, Kyle Duncan, and Kurt Engelhardt—joined together in a notable opinion dissenting from the Circuit’s denial of a request to rehear an important Second Amendment case before all of the Circuit judges. This case involved the federal prohibition on interstate handgun sales, requiring all handgun sales to out-of-state buyers first be transferred to an in-state dealer.As the dissenting judges noted, this law effectively imposes an additional waiting period and tax on certain handgun buyers, without really furthering a compelling government interest. Moreover, as they wrote, the Government “turns the Second Amendment on its head” by arguing that “to protect against the violations of the few, we must burden the constitutional rights of the many.” Importantly, “[o]ur Founders crafted a Constitution to promote the liberty of the individual, not the convenience of the Government.”In his first term, President Trump largely lived up to his promise to protect Americans’ Second Amendment rights. There have been a few missteps along the way, but on the whole, the Trump Administration has kept its word when it comes to our right to keep and bear arms.”You can read the entire article, a commentary on firearms, titled, “Second Amendment Grade for President Trump So Far,” by Amy Swearer, Legal Fellow at the Messe Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, at the Heritage Foundation website. But the words, “So Far,” in the above commentary on Trump’s Presidency must, unfortunately, read, “At the End Of” Trump’s Presidency. There would be no Second Term in Office. The unlawful machinations of Neo-Marxist Internationalists and Mega-Billionaire Neoliberal Globalists would see to that.Trump is now out-of-office. And it matters little at this point whether the failure to secure losing a Second Term was due to a fair and disappointing election outcome, or chicanery of the highest order, even as the latter inference is the sound one to draw from the evidence.Now, as Trump’s legacy is being shredded by the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists, Americans face a more pressing and vexing problem: protecting the U.S. Constitution from being shredded and preserving a free Republic that is being systematically dismantled.Americans now have a National embarrassment in the Oval Office: a corrupt, placid, flaccid, and senile shell of a man, Joseph Biden.Economically, Militarily, Geopolitically, Constitutionally, Culturally—this Country faces disasters on multiple fronts. There are three possible albeit mutually exclusive explanations for this. Americans must infer that this sad situation is due to:ONE, A SET OF UNFORTUNATE, PUZZLING CIRCUMSTANCES TO BE ATTRIBUTED TO CONDITIONS NO ONE COULD REASONABLY FORESEE, THAT PROPER ALLOWANCES AND CONTINGENCY PLANS COULD HAVE BEEN MADE APROPOS OF POLICY POLICIES EXECUTED; OR TOTWO, A CASCADING SERIES OF MISSTEPS TO BE ATTRIBUTED TO DELIBERATE INEPT AND INCOMPETENT POLICY CHOICES THAT BIDEN’S POLICY PLANNERS CONCEIVED, FORMULATED, AND EXECUTED, EVEN IF THE RESULTS OF THESE POLICY CHOICES WERE UNANTICIPATED AND UNWANTED; OR TOTHREE, A CAREFULLY DESIGNED AND IMPLEMENTED SET OF POLICY CHOICES, THE OUTCOMES OF WHICH HAVE BEEN CONTEMPLATED, MODELLED, ANTICIPATED, HOPED FOR: THE DESTRUCTION OF A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, OF A POWERFUL INDEPENDENT NATION-STATE, AND OF THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.Any one of these three explanatory scenarios mark the impending doom of the United States engulfing, convulsing, and ripping the Nation apart, and that of the rest of the world. But, only the third explanation bespeaks possible TREASON. That explanation also seems the most plausible to us and, as well, the most disturbing for what it entails: the INTENTION TO PROMOTE OR CAUSE A SPECIFIC OUTCOME.Americans are witness to it all: a meticulously contrived, calculated, calibrated, and executed series of scenes and acts unfolding as if from a monstrous Shakespearian Play, played out on the Nation and the world as STAGE.Be this play comedy or tragedy depends on one’s perspective. But it is a play meticulously preplanned and prearranged; carefully rehearsed and choreographed and assiduously implemented in sequential order.It began with a flurry of executive orders and actions designed to unravel the stability Trump had brought both to and for our Nation and its people, and, by extension, to and for the rest of the world. And it is proceeding apace through deliberate, brazen, scurrilous evasion of and de facto abrogation of our Constitution and federal law.Trump had redressed a multitude of disasters deliberately inflicted on our Country by Bush and Obama. Such disasters were to continue under Clinton, consistent with the orders of a cabal of shadowy puppet masters. For nothing happens but for the “say so” of these puppet masters, whom Trump refused to answer to and obsequiously obey. And so, they had to push him out of the way. And with a last “Hail Mary Pass” they banked it all on the 2020 U.S. Presidential election. With a dementia plagued President Joe Biden and the insufferable Kamala Harris safely ensconced in the Executive Branch of Government, all the wrongs of Bush and Obama that Trump had redressed, and all the safeguards Trump had instituted to protect the Nation and its people, were thenceforth cast aside.Once again, Americans witness a Nation and world returning to a state of volatility and chaos, and all of it deliberately created, deliberately ordained.The goal of this elaborate, extravagant, carefully orchestrated policy agenda now unfolding in the Nation, is to dismantle the underpinnings of the most powerful, successful, and prosperous Nation on Earth.This involves:

DISSOLVING THE CAREFULLY CONSTRUCTED DEMARCATION OF POWERS AND AUTHORITY EXISTENT BETWEEN THE THREE BRANCHES;

UNDERCUTTING THE DOCTRINE OF FEDERALISM THAT HAS TO THIS POINT OPERATED EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY TO CARVE OUT AND DELINEATE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S AUTHORITY AND THAT OF THE STATES; AND,

UNDERMINING THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, IN WHOM RESTS ULTIMATE SOVEREIGNTY OVER GOVERNMENT, BOTH FEDERAL AND STATE, AS GOVERNMENT OF ANY KIND IS ULTIMATELY AND ANSWERABLE TO THE AMERICAN CITIZENRY.

As for the last,the attack on the right of the people to keep and bear arms as the final fail-safe mechanism to prevent tyranny is the most disturbing and alarming. For only by force of arms can the American people truthfully be able to successfully repel attempts to dismantle a free Republic and thrust America into a new Governmental construct: a transnational world order scheme that does not merely diminish the citizen’s sacrosanct and inviolate right of selfhood and personal autonomy but destroys that supreme unalienable Right.Through usurpation of the sovereign authority of the American people over Government and through the destruction of the United States as a free Constitutional Republic, preeminent military and economic world power, and predominant stabilizing influence in the world, a tornado is spawned. That tornado is destined to wipe away the fabric of western civilization—the Nation-State. In its place, comes the inchoate inkling of an “INTERNATIONAL WORLD ORDER,”—a harbinger of pain, misery, penury, and grief to the Nation and the rest of the world.Powerful functionaries of Government both here and abroad have intimated this new world order for some time.The late U.S. Senator John McCain mentioned this back in 2017 (see article in the Independent Sentinel) and that illustrious statesman and regular Bilderberg Group attendee, Henry Kissinger worked tirelessly for its creation, even writing a book about it. That book comes with the hardly inscrutable and singularly uninspiring if, for some, wistful title, “World Order,” published, on September 9, 2014, during Barack Obama’s reign.After defeating Trump, by chicanery on a massive scale, these same forces that crushed Trump, now focus attention on one-third to one-half or more of the American population that continues to support the “MAKE AMERICA GREAT” agenda.In the end, it was always the American people, who, all along, were the true target of the Neo-Marxist Internationalists and the mega-billionaire Neoliberal Globalists. Trump merely represented the wishes and desires of Americans who saw their Nation stolen from them. Most Americans saw their sacred rights shredded: the right of free speech; the right to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures of their property by the Government; freedom from unlawful detention; and the right of the people to keep and bear arms, necessary to secure their freedom from tyranny and maintain their sovereignty over Government.Most Americans sought to set the Nation’s course back toward the direction set by the founders of the Republic. We have diverged so far from the founders’ vision for us.Under the Harris-Biden Administration, Americans have inexorably moved away from the vision of the Framers of the U.S. Constitution, grounded on the tenets, precepts, and principles of Individualism, and back toward the vision of the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists who envision a world grounded on the precepts, tenets, and principles of Collectivism. Collectivism in such Countries as China, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, and those under the domination of Brussels, and in the Commonwealth Countries are in store for Americans.Through an orchestrated program of DEFLECTION, DISTRACTION, DIVERSION, and DIVAGATION, the Nation’s OBSTRUCTORS and DESTRUCTORS who control the legacy Press and social media draw the public’s attention away from Federal Government policies designed to dismantle the Republic in clear violation of and defiance to the U.S. Constitution and to Federal Statute and channel the public’s reasonable, rational concern to the Nation’s DISSENTERS—those Americans who seek to preserve the Nation as a free Constitutional Republic—treating true PATRIOTS as improbable TRAITORS and possible TRAITORS as improbable PATRIOTS. And this topsy-turvy elaborate propaganda campaign reflects the FOUNDERS gravest concerns, their most deep-seated fears.Under the Harris-Biden Administration and Neo-Marxist-led Congress, Americans are witnessing the entire collapse of a free Constitutional Republic, brought about NOT by mere ineptitude and incompetence, awful as those failings are, but by cold, calculated, callous, caustic, and cruel design which is even more disturbing.The American public must hold high officials of the Harris-Biden Administration to account. And this must include Joe Biden himself, along with his secret handlers of whom the American public is not presently privy.Biden claims to take responsibility for debacles plaguing his regime, but does not. His words are obviously contrived; meaningless scripted utterances; ridiculous clichés. His addresses to the Nation, few as they are, fool no one.High-placed functionaries in Biden’s regime routinely blatantly lie to the public. They exude empty apologies when caught; and further seeming blunders are on the way. They always arise, concomitant with policies meant NOT to provide for the public welfare, the public good, but to bring about the demise of the Republic; to usher in the rise of a new international order; one sans independent, sovereign nation-states. And so, the Administration continues along its merry way.Biden and the policymakers and policy deciders DID what they intended TO DO. The nature of events that unfold are the consequence of options considered; the result of policy decisions made.Even if, sometimes, consequences of poor decisions backfire on them, like the drone attack that destroyed the lives of an innocent man and innocent children in Afghanistan—even as results seem unintentional to some—many other horrific events ARE intentional, the direct result of cold, callous planning, and cannot be reasonably denied. And they cannot be reasonably explained away.Consider the recurrence of COVID and other dangerous infectious diseases on the horizon in our Country this Fall. This is due to the Administration’s deliberate release of hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens into a Country, unvetted and unexamined by medical personnel.The Harris-Biden Administration has thrust a dagger into the heart of our Country. Many of the illegal aliens have COVID or other noxious, disgusting diseases. Others belong to murderous international criminal cartels. The Administration has invited all this horror upon us. It wants this. That is plain.The Administration evidently wants instability—social, economic, and health-related upheaval and unrest to occur in the Country. If that isn’t the case, then why deliberately weaken the security of the Nation by opening the geographical borders of the Country? See articles in NY Post article; National Review; Border Report; and Geller Report.Americans will likely see in the coming weeks and months ahead, horrible diseases coursing through the Nation, along with continued social unrest and terrorist attacks against the citizenry. And there will be no respite from this. Americans will see an onslaught of hundreds of thousands more illegal aliens and purported “refugees” flowing into and throughout the Country before the end of the year, bringing with them the plague, crime, and terror attacks.Do Governmental policy decisions to date support a legal finding of TREASON by Biden and those serving in the Administration? To answer this question it is necessary to understand the law of TREASON—TREASON IN THE LEGAL SENSE, NOT MERELY IN A COMMON OR RHETORICAL OR THEATRICAL SENSE.It is only through a keen understanding of the law of TREASON, that one can establish the elements of treason, applying those elements to the actions of Biden and others, and therefrom know whether those actions amount to TREASON. If so, the American people have a sound and solid basis to bring Biden and others to account for their Treason against the Nation, against its Constitution, and against its people.Through all that we do in our articles on Treason, please etch in your mind the definition for it as set forth in the U.S. Constitution.Article 3, Section 3, Clause 1 “Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. And, “18 U.S. Code § 2381 – Treason,” “Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”In the next article we undertake an examination of the elements of treason in the U.S. so that we can apply those elements to the actions of Biden and others in his Administration.Our end goal is to ascertain whether specific policy choices of Biden and others amount to treason, namely, those policies directed to——

STABILITY BY FOMENTING DISSENSION AMONG THE AMERICAN PEOPLE; AND,

INDOCTRINATING AMERICA’S CHILDREN, INTRODUCING MILLIONS OF UNASSIMILABLE ILLEGAL ALIENS INTO THE COUNTRY ALONG WITH MURDEROUS INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL CARTELS AND INTERNATIONAL TERRORISTS, AMONG OTHER THINGS; AND,

SUBJECTING THE AMERICAN CITIZENRY TO UNLAWFUL HARASSMENT; AND,

TREATING LAW-ABIDING AMERICANS AS “DOMESTIC TERRORISTS” THROUGH DISTORTION OF LAWS DESIGNED TO COMBAT “INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC TERRORISTS,” AND OTHER “INTERNATIONAL TERRORIST” GROUPS; AND,

ERODING THE SEPARATION OF POWERS DOCTRINE AND THE DOCTRINE OF FEDERALISM; AND,

DISARMING THE AMERICAN CITIZENRY, LEAVING THEM DEFENSELESS AGAINST INCREASING CRIMINAL PREDATION, AND THREATEN THE CITIZENRY’S SOVEREIGNTY OVER GOVERNMENT.

The question is whether any one or more of these policies directed against the Nation, its Constitution, and its people, amount to “levying war against them” and/or encompass “adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” We shall see.____________________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

9/17/21 9/17/21

DEVELOPING A DOCTRINE OF TREASON IN AMERICA

MULTI-SERIES ON THE ISSUE OF POSSIBLE TREASON AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT

PART TWO

As we maintained in our first article posted on Ammoland, “Does the Biden Administration’s Assault on the Second Amendment Amount to Treason,” one should be circumspect in the application of ‘TREASON’—this so there is no mistake in our understanding of the import of it, lest we dilute its significance—attaching the dire duo labels of ‘TREASON’ and ‘TRAITOR’ to those who never warranted it, but happened nonetheless to be branded with it, and crucified for it.And we know whereof we speak: Donald Trump, and those closest to him, those who assisted him in his run for the U.S. Presidency, including Cabinet-level Officers; close friends and associates; even members of his own family have branded and crucified the 45^th U.S. President and those connected closely to him. And now with Trump out-of-office—whether the loss of a Second Term was due to a fair and disappointing election outcome, or chicanery of the highest order, those who replaced Donald Trump with a National embarrassment, in the form of a corrupt, placid, flaccid, and senile shell of a man, one, Joseph Biden, must continue with the charade.The forces that crush a Nation and its people into submission now focus their attention on one-third of the population that supported the “MAKE AMERICA GREAT” agenda that sought to reset the Nation’s course back toward the vision of the founders of the Republic.Through an orchestrated program of DEFLECTION, DISTRACTION, DIVERSION, and DIVAGATION, the Nation’s OBSTRUCTORS and DESTRUCTORS who control the legacy Press and social media draw the public’s attention away from Federal Government policies designed to dismantle the Republic in clear violation of and defiance to the U.S. Constitution and to Federal Statute and channel the public’s reasonable, rational concern to the Nation’s DISSENTERS—those Americans who seek to preserve the Nation as a free Constitutional Republic—treating true PATRIOTS as improbable TRAITORS and treating possible TRAITORS as improbable PATRIOTS. And this topsy-turvy elaborate propaganda campaign reflects the FOUNDERS gravest concerns, their most deep-seated fears.The Founders realized, over two hundred years ago that THE BEAST in MAN, such as it is, never changes, and that BEAST would eventually, inevitably bring out THE WORST in MAN. The Founders were deeply concerned that appellations of ‘TREASON,’ ‘TRAITOR,’ ‘BETRAYER,’ and ‘JUDAS’ would be misapplied not to true ENEMIES of the Nation, but to its veritable PATRIOTS, the Nation’s PROTECTORS. The Founders were well aware that unscrupulous, scurrilous, craven, usurpers of the sovereign authority of the American people would damage and disparage and bring to utter ruin the lives and character of innocent people, and do for any of multiple reasons: anger and rage; spite and jealousy, or even for no other reason than political expediency or perceived political exigency.“English treason law influenced America's founding fathers as they crafted the U.S. Constitution. Specifically, America's founders wished to develop a treason doctrine that—unlike English treason doctrine—could not be used to suppress political adversaries.” United States v. Hodges: Developments of Treason and the Role of the Jury, 97 Denver L. Rev. 117, by Jennifer Elisa Chapman, Jennifer Elisa Chapman, Ryan H. Easley Research Fellow, University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law.

THE STUDY OF TREASON IS THE STUDY OF HISTORY

“The study of treason is really the study of history. No other constitutional provision is as deeply rooted in English history as the Treason Clause. William Blackstone wrote that treason ‘imports a betraying, treachery, or breach of faith.’ Treason Blackstone further noted that treason against the sovereign—termed ‘high treason’—amounts to the ‘highest civil crime.’ Due to the gravity of the offense, the crime of treason must therefore be precisely ascertained. ‘For if the crime of high treason be indeterminate, this alone . . . is sufficient to make the Government degenerate into arbitrary power.’“Treason is the highest crime known to law. It is more serious than even murder: the murderer violates a single person or at most only a few, whereas treason cuts at the welfare and safety of all members of society. And the punishment for treason has always underscored the gravity of the offense.“The delegates to the Constitutional Convention faced a significant dilemma when they met to frame a new system of government. On one hand, the new republic would not last if the government could not demand the loyalty of its citizens; on the other hand, history had shown that broad treason laws led to the suppression of political opposition and free speech. English experience had also shown that leaving the definition of treason to judges left the law open to abuse through ‘constructive treason.’ The Framers therefore took upon themselves the difficult task of fashioning a law that would protect the newly formed government from disloyalty and betrayal, while simultaneously preserving the right of political dissent.” State Treason: The History and Validity of Treason Against Individual States,” 101 Ky. L.J. 281, 2012/2013, by J. Taylor McConkie, Brigham Young University, B.A.; Georgetown University Law Center, J.D. Trial Attorney, United States Department of Justice, Civil Division.The Founders were deeply concerned about the misuse of treason by a rogue Government that would use “TREASON” for unlawful, nefarious purposes.“The Framers’ intent for including the Treason Clause within the Constitution was to immortalize the definition thus preventing a rogue legislature from creating what James Madison called ‘newfangled and artificial’ treasons These judge-made expansions of the common law definition of treason more commonly called ‘constructive treasons were made in order to cover conduct that had never before been known as treasonous. This was a common practice in England and is what prompted the passage of the Statute of Edward III in order to control the definition of treason by the legislature instead of the courts. “Another major concern was that the state could use an undefined definition of treason to punish political dissidents or people who opposed the sovereign’s policies. Based on the freedom of speech and freedom of peaceful political expression, later memorialized in the First Amendment, it was important to limit the definition of treason to only levying war and adhering to enemies of the United States by providing aid and comfort to them.’” “The Revival Of Treason: Why Homegrown Terrorists Should Be Tried As Traitors, 4 Nat'l Sec. L.J. 311, Spring/ Summer, 2016, by Jameson A. Goodell, George Mason University School of Law, Juris Doctor Candidate, May 2017; Virginia Military Institute, B.A., International Studies & Arabic Language and Culture, 2014.It is the purpose of these Arbalest Quarrel articles on the subject of “TREASON” to lay all this out for the reader.For, if there be TREASON in our midst, we must recognize the legal contours and parameters of it in the manner the founders of our Republic intended for it to be used, as elucidated further in case law. Thus, before we apply it, we must be reasonably sure of our case against those we deem to have committed it. And, once assured of the efficacy of our case, proceed forward aggressively forward, to bring those charged with treason to account for their treacherous actions against the Nation and its people.Let us be clear. It is not enough to say, for example, that such individuals in Government that have committed treason should simply resign from their posts or should, if they refuse to resign, then be fired.Several media pundits deplore the actions of Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken; Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin; White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan; General Mark A. Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; General Kenneth F. McKenzie, Director of Strategic Plans and Policy on the Joint Staff. And, these media pundits have voiced, vociferously, their anger over the manner in which these individuals handled the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan—a complete debacle. Biden, for his part, not unsurprisingly, stated his support for General Milley and others. Some media pundits in the last couple of days, on Fox News, at least, have even made reference to “treason.” See, e.g., a recent episode on Tucker Carlson. But that is as far as any of the media pundits have, to date, gone and that is, apparently, as far as any of them are will to go. None of them has suggested impeachment of any of Biden's people except, perhaps, in a couple of instances pertaining to Biden, himself, and, even so, no one in the Fox Press Corps, or in any other media organization, that we are aware of, has suggested that Biden himself should be impeached specifically for the crime of “Treason.” And, we can appreciate the circumspection of the Press on that score. For unless a person can articulate the legal basis for impeachment on a charge of treason of Biden, or of impeachment or General Court Martial on a charge of treason of any one else in Biden's Administration, it behooves a person to be very mindful of and careful of what he or she is asserting. Nonetheless, what has taken place in Afghanistan under Biden’s watch, and the many devastating, deadly, horrific repercussions from that debacle which are just beginning to play out in Afghanistan and here in the U.S. and that are having a ripple effect around the globe, cannot be simply wallpapered over through mere resignations or firings of Biden officials even if Biden were to do so.Our adversaries in China, Russia, and Iran as well as our allies have taken due notice of the extent to which this weak-willed, corrupt, compromised, physically ill, and mentally debilitated “U.S. President” has given up all pretense of ability to lead a great Nation. Joe Biden has shown that he has no authority—bullied and pushed this way and that, this Country is going Hell in a Handbasket and taking the rest of the world down with it. In fact, the ineptitude and incompetence of Joe Biden and his Administration—from the instant Biden took Office up to the present moment in time—is so acute and so extensive, that one must wonder if the policy decisions made by Biden or by a secret cabal, operating behind the scenes, can simply be chalked up to a cascading series of unfortunate missteps, a set of deeply unfortunate circumstances and puzzling misadventures that the Harris-Biden Administration could not have reasonably made proper allowances for or contingency plans for because the events that unfolded simply could not have been reasonably foreseen, even as flagrant as those missteps seem to be and even as one remains deeply puzzled that Joe Biden is seen complimenting his advisors for doing a great job. Is he kidding?Anyway, that is one explanation one might conjure up for the disasters confronting our Nation on multiple fronts—disasters that are affecting many countries and that will eventually engulf the entire world. But there is another explanation. It is this:Americans are witnessing precisely what was meant to happen, is meant to happen, a meticulously contrived, calculated, calibrated, and executed series of scenes and acts of a monstrous Shakespearian Play. Be it comedy or tragedy depends on one’s perspective. But it is all preplanned, and prearranged, carried out sequentially, having commenced with a flurry of executive orders and actions designed to unravel the order and stability Trump had brought for our Nation, and, by extension, this order and stability that Trump had brought for the world.The goal of this elaborate, extravagant, carefully choreographed performance that is now unfolding under the auspices of the Harris-Biden Administration is meant to undermine the most powerful, successful, and prosperous Nation on Earth. And with the destruction of the United States as a preeminent world power and stable influence for the world, a whirlwind would materialize to destabilize the entire world and thereby pave the way for a new “INTERNATIONAL WORLD ORDER” that powerful functionaries here and around the world are intimating; a new world order that the late U.S. Senator John McCain happened to mention (see article in the Independent Sentinel, published March 26, 2017) and that the illustrious statesman and regular Bilderberg Group attendee, Henry Kissinger worked tirelessly for and wrote a book about, with the hardly inscrutable and singularly uninspiring if, for some, wistful title, “World Order,” published, on September 9, 2014, during Barack Obama’s reign.We, at the Arbalest Quarrel, are going under the assumption that, whether by sheer ineptitude and incompetence or cold, calculated, callous, caustic, and cruel design, high officials of the Harris-Biden Administration—and this must include Joe Biden himself, and any and all secret handlers that the American public is not privy to if such there be that had a hand in this, and we look at one example here, a real “cluster f**k” that transpired at Kabul airport involving the drawdown of American troops in Afghanistan and the deaths of Americans during that drawdown—DID DO what they intended TO DO even if the consequences of their actions were not what they had in mind, can those policy decisions support a legal finding of TREASON of any one or all of them. And we will look at other policy decisions and the execution of those decisions as well.Through all that we do in the articles to follow, we ask that you etch in your mind the following, for we will be constantly coming back to it:Article 3, Section 3, Clause 1“Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. And, “18 U.S. Code § 2381 – Treason,”“Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”The third part of our series on treason follows forthwith.____________________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

9/15/21 9/15/21

DOES THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION'S ASSAULT ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT AMOUNT TO TREASON?

MULTI-SERIES ON THE ISSUE OF POSSIBLE TREASON AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT

PART ONE

THE MEANING OF 'TREASON'

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.” ~Attributed to Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C.) Roman Statesman, Philosopher and Orator, in a speech he gave to the Roman Senate in 58 BC as ‘Recorded by Sallust’ in the fictional novel 'A Pillar of Iron,’ by Taylor Caldwell (1983), ch. 5. ~The quotation bears resemblance to Cicero's Second Oration in the Cataline war (circa 40 b.c.) Under Biden’s reign, Americans are slowly losing their fundamental rights and liberties. They have already lost any vestige of a fundamental right of privacy as protected under the Unreasonable Searches and Seizures clause of the Fourth Amendment. And the Right of free speech under the First Amendment is, as well, under tremendous assault today.And let us not forget the assault on the right of the people to keep and bear arms as codified in the Second Amendment. For without the citizenry's exercise of the fundamental Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, the exercise of all other Rights is tenuous at best or becomes altogether illusory, leading inevitably, inexorably to subjugation.Americans already see that Biden, and his fellow Progressive and Neo-Marxist Democrats in Congress, and legions of unelected bureaucrats of the Administrative Deep State have made substantial inroads curtailing the right of the people to keep and bear arms. But the question is: Do these assaults on sacred Rights truly rise to the level of treason, well beyond the federal crimes of sedition, insurrection, and rebellion, awful as they are?How can the public know? And, if treason does exist, and if the polity shows Republicans in Congress that Biden and/or several of his senior advisors have committed treason, how can Americans persuade their Representatives in the House and their Senators in the U.S. Senate to hold those high-level elected officials and high level unelected military people accountable beyond merely requesting they simply and humbly resign, as some have averred.How can Americans make a cogent argument to legislators so that they will undertake or at least attempt to undertake impeachment of Biden and/or his senior advisors? And for senior officers in the military, how can the public urge that these military advisors be subject to a General Court Martial.The words, ‘treason’ and ‘traitor’ are often cavalierly bandied about. The American public has heard it all before, many times, mostly directed to Donald Trump and, by association, directed to all Americans who voted for him or who supported and who continue to support his “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN” agenda.Few people in American history, though, have been charged with “treason” against the United States; fewer still have ever been convicted of it. And no one has been executed for it.* That fact underscores the deadly seriousness of the import of the words despite the oft offhanded use of them, and says much of the true and dire purpose of and hidden motives of those forces that have used the word, ‘treason,’ incessantly against Trump. And many are those who leveled the charge of treason against the 45^th President, Donald Trump. Upon taking the Oath of Office, well-placed operators in the Department of Justice and FBI and in the military and in the intelligence apparatuses of Government, and in Congress, in academia and in the media, and even some individuals closest to Trump in his own Administration went immediately to work to undermine and sabotage and destroy his Presidency from its very inception to the final days. See, e.g., New York Times article. and an article in The Atlantic.Government, academia, the Press, social media, all operated, in concert—components of an extraordinarily elaborate, well-organized, well-executed series of false flag operations—all designed to bring about Trump’s downfall.And, considering the extent to which these operators plotted to bring about Trump’s downfall, one is led to conclude either that Trump did indeed pose the greatest internal threat ever to befall our Nation, or, like Horatius at the Bridge, protected our Nation, standing alone against the hordes both within the Government and outside it who themselves truly pose the greatest and gravest threat ever to befall our free Constitutional Republic.Calling a person a “traitor” serves as a handy propagandist tool and it is one that is employed for the emotional reaction it is expected to elicit in the American public for the purpose of creating animus toward a person, but often, as well, as a distraction to direct public attention to the innocent person and thereby draw attention away from the real “traitor.”“The crime of treason carries an emotional response unlike any other. Its severity is second to none because one who commits treason aims to support the enemies his government, betray his own nation, and wage war against his own people. Infamous traitors such as Benedict Arnold conjure a near-unanimous feeling of disdain and anger amongst Americans, while others like John Brown do not so easily create the same uniform negative perception. Such is the nature of treason: those convicted of betraying their nation receive the designation of ‘traitor,’ arguably the most severe, polarizing, and stigmatic title law can provide, which may partially explain why the last case of treason occurred in 1952.” ~ from the law review article, “Treason In The Age Of Terrorism: Do Americans Who Join Isis ‘Levy War’ Against The United States?” 9 Am. U. Nat'l Sec. L. Brief 155 (2019) by Stephen Jackson, J.D., Senior Policy Analyst with SAIC.But, when do the words ‘traitor’ and ‘treason’ merely function as expletives and when do they function as true descriptors, indicative of the worst sort of criminal behavior of an American?It is one thing for a person to employ the words ‘treason’ and ‘traitor’ merely as a pejorative. In that case, “You Traitor, You!” is akin to the words, “Damn You, Go to Hell!” or “You Bastard, You!” But it is another thing entirely when the phrase, “You Traitor, You!” is to mean that the targeted person IS TRULY A “TRAITOR,” i.e., a person who commits the crime of ‘TREASON.’ For ‘Treason’ IS a crime.TREASON IS THE MOST SERIOUS OF CRIMES, for Treason is nothing less than BETRAYAL of one’s Country and of one’s people. It is essentially the MURDER of one’s Country and of one’s Countrymen. Betrayal of one’s Nation and one’s Countrymen was considered one of the most heinous crimes going back to the ancient Greeks and Romans. Dante Alighieri, in his monumental epic, “The Divine Comedy,” PLACED THOSE GUILTY OF TREACHERY TO NATION IN THE DEEPEST CIRCLE OF HELL.To apply the term, ‘traitor’ to anyone is no small matter and should not be a matter of casual conversation. It is defamatory if untrue.As applied especially to an elected official, no less a personage than the President of the United States, one should practice circumspection before employing it, in the absence of evidence to support the declaration of it. Unfortunately, we do not see this at all. And, it is all quite remarkable, as the denizens of “POLITICAL CORRECTNESS,”—today’s “THOUGHT POLICE”—so keen are they on remaking the English language so as not to offend, do not apply that prime directive across the board, utilizing the worst invective against anyone, everyone, who happens to hold to a different political and philosophical persuasion than that of the “WOKE” crowd to use of their own neologisms.To our Nation’s founders, treason is the most serious crime imaginable. It is not by accident that it is referenced in the U.S. Constitution.Treason is the only crime BOTH MENTIONED AND DEFINED in the U.S. Constitution. But, through overuse and deliberate misuse of the words, ‘treason’ and ‘traitor,’ by various members of Congress and by Government Officials and by the Press, Americans are unable to gain a clear view of and true perspective of actual instances of treason and of the those who commit it when evidence for it abounds.A person needs to cut through the chatter and chaff of those who cavalierly bandy the term about, misapplying it hither and yon to Donald Trump—and, now misapplying it to Trump’s supporters who number one-third to one-half of the population of the Country.The term, ‘treason’ is a legal term of art that has a clear meaning. One need only go to a readily available source, the U.S. Constitution, to determine its import and purport, and from the definition for it, look for instances of it. Article 3, Section 3, Clause 1, sets forth:“Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”Further, ‘treason,’ as with ‘sedition,’ ‘insurrection,’ and ‘rebellion’, is a statutory offense, Congress reiterates the definition of ‘treason,’ of it. “18 U.S. Code § 2381 – Treason,” sets forth:“Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”Given the seriousness of the crime, the framers of the Constitution severely limited its application to the commission of either one of two, and only two, kinds of acts. The U.S. Constitution leaves no room for constructive treason and Congress could not and has not undertaken to restrict or enlarge constitutional. The Constitutional, as well as Statutory definition for Treason, involves:

Levying war against the United States; OR
Giving the Nation’s enemies aid or comfort.

But what does “levying war against the United States” really mean, and what does the phrase “giving the Nation’s enemies aid or comfort” mean?In the next few Arbalest Quarrel articles we look closely at these phrases. For, once we have a clear operational definition of the phrases, we can ascertain if any one or more actions of Joe Biden and of his senior advisors amount to actionable treason.Few people to date have actually applied the appellation or descriptor of ‘treason’ to Biden and/or to his senior advisors although the abundance of misdeeds leads one to wonder whether one or more of those misdeeds rises to the level of treason. Before the Arbalest Quarrel makes its announcement, it is necessary to see if Biden and other senior advisors have plotted to destroy this Nation. As an aside, there is a question of whether Biden is making policy decisions at all. Given the man's obvious and increasingly severe mental infirmities, this strongly suggests that Biden is incapable of sound judgment and reasoning. If true, that means that Biden's secret handlers are making policy decisions for him; policies affecting the Nation and the rest of the world. And that raises serious legal questions of its own. But as for ‘treason,’ one can, with a clear operational definition, determine if the elements of the crime apply to the conduct of Harris-Biden Administration senior officials who are the decision-makers. But, what can we say about treason at this point before delving into the details of it?In the broadest sense, “levying war against the United States” and “giving the Nation’s enemies aid or comfort” involves the BETRAYAL of one’s Country and one's Countrymen—TREACHERY so extreme that, if tried and convicted of it, must need send the party guilty of it to prison for a substantial period of time and, perhaps warrants a sentence of DEATH. But, whether a TRAITOR to the Country is actually indicted and tried as such, and convicted of TREASON, such an individual rests well beyond any hope of absolution, dispensation, or redemption—ever.Now, among those who hate Trump, anything the man has said or did, during his tenure in Office, amounts to “treason.” Yet, one would be hard-pressed to distill from any of Trump’s actions anything that amounts to betrayal of Nation and people. Nation’s people. To the contrary, on any reasonable analysis Trump was faithful to the Oath of Office he took on Friday, January 20, 2017.Article II, Section 1, Clause 8:“Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: –I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”In retrospect, Trump’s actions were always honorable. But, can the same be said of Biden and his top advisors and handlers?From what the public knows about, Trump, it is clear that he fulfilled or attempted to fulfill to his foreign and domestic policies and initiatives, consistent with the promises he made to the American public in his campaign. Trump forged a stronger Nation from the mess created by his predecessors Barack Obama and George W. Bush.; strengthening the Nation in the broadest sense: economically, geopolitically, militarily, and societally. Disruption arose artificially, concocted by elements inside and outside the Country, intent upon undermining Trump’s achievements. Trump sought to protect the fundamental rights of the people—most importantly the sacred rights of free speech and freedom of religion; the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures; and, critically, the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Yet, the legacy Press called him an Autocrat and Traitor; but to whom? Not to the U.S. Constitution, but to those who seek to dismantle the Constitution and to dismantle a free Republic. And they installed their puppets, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, corrupt and unscrupulous people to do just that.In eight months, the senile, weak-willed, and corrupt puppet, Joe Biden, likely dutifully obeying the dictates of his secret handlers, unwound all the positive work for the Country that Trump had achieved. And what do Americans now see? Much, and none of it good: Government policies that promote economic instability and societal unrest—all of it manufactured by an Administration intent on disrupting societal harmony and cohesion.And, because the Harris-Biden Administration refuses to enforce the Nation’s immigration laws, Americans see massive waves of destitute illegal aliens, breeching our Southern Border; with tens of thousands more flooding through the Southern Border each month, along with members of international drug cartels and other assorted dangerous riff-raff; and most of them are disbursing throughout the United States. More recently, the Administration has compounded its unlawful immigration actions, having airlifted thousands of unassimilable Afghans to the U.S., disbursing them throughout the Country, without properly vetting them—a lengthy process to screen out the Islamic terrorists among them.Americans see multiple instances of unlawful federal encroachment on the authority of State. The Administration has openly, unabashedly disobeyed rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court; and is exerting unlawful authority over the polity by mandating COVID vaccinations.Through wholesale adoption of the Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist program of “DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION” the Harris-Biden Administration is implementing policies designed to subvert and eradicate our Nation’s culture, history, heritage, and Christian ethos.Given the Administration’s contempt for the Bill of Rights, Americans are witnessing an assault on their basic freedoms, including, critically, the right of free speech and free exercise of religion; the right to peaceably assemble and the right to petition the Government; the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.In the matter of the “Capitol Breach” cases, of January 6, 2021, Americans have witnessed multiple instances of unlawful detention, the suspension of Habeas Corpus, and violations Due Process, and Equal Protection.And the Harris-Biden Administration is quietly, assiduously drawing up Executive Actions and agency rules, to undermine the right of the people to keep and bear arms.And through the implementation of its bizarre and inept military and State Department Middle East Policies, the Harris-Biden Administration has overnight destabilized the Middle East, thereby endangering the security of the United States and the world. Are we looking at mere incompetence here or something ominous: a devious master plan to destabilize society, dismantle the Constitution, destroy a free Constitutional Republic, and reduce the American citizenry to a state of abject penury and misery. Do any of the aforementioned actions by Joe Biden and others arise to the level of actual, indictable treason? In the next few articles, the Arbalest Quarrel will be looking closely at the law of treason with the aim of determining whether any one or more actions of Biden, and of Biden's Cabinet Level Officials, and of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and of Biden’s National Security Council committed actionable treason. ____________________________________________*One academic scholar, and apparently the only one, demurs, asserting that one man was in fact executed for committing treason against the United States. In his book, “On Treason, A Citizen's Guide to the Law” (published September 29, 2020), Carlton F.W. Larson, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of California, Davis, School of Law, avers that Hipolito Salazar, “is the only person ever executed by federal authorities for treason against the United States since the adoption of the Constitution for treason. . . . And the federal government later admitted it had made a terrible mistake—Salazar owed no allegiance to the United States and therefore was not subject to American treason law at all.” (pages 102-103). The execution took place on April 9, 1847, following jury trials “in what was called the ‘District Court of the Territory of New Mexico. ’ Five of the men had been convicted of murder. But, one, . . . Salazar, had been convicted of high treason for levying war against the United States.” (page 102). ____________________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

9/8/21 9/8/21

AMERICA: “A FREE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC—IF YOU CAN KEEP IT!”

PART ONE

DO NEOLIBERAL GLOBALISTS AND NEO-MARXISTS HONESTLY BELIEVE AMERICANS WILL MEEKLY SURRENDER THEIR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES?

“‘The deliberations of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were held in strict secrecy. Consequently, anxious citizens gathered outside Independence Hall when the proceedings ended in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, ‘Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?’ With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, ‘A republic, if you can keep it.’” ~quotation from an article by John F. McManus, published on November 6, 2000, in The New American, referencing an “exchange . . . recorded by Constitution signer James McHenry in a diary entry that was later reproduced in the 1906 American Historical Review.”Benjamin Franklin’s seemingly droll, yet, at once, sagacious response to Mrs. Powel’s query as to the salient nature of our new independent sovereign Nation, “A Republic If You Can Keep It,” echoes down from the ages to this precarious moment in our Nation’s history.While most Americans do fervently wish to retain our Nation in the form the founding fathers bequeathed to us, a free Constitutional Republic, some there are who do not. Their hostility toward the Nation’s continued existence as a free Constitutional Republic is both intense and blatant; and disturbingly, they control the Government, the legacy Press, social media, our educational system, and our financial system; and, most importantly, many of the “TOP BRASS” of the military.These would-be Destructors and Obstructors of our free Republic are ruthless, even rabid in their condemnation of our Country’s history, heritage, culture, and Judeo-Christian ethic. They intend to destroy all of it. To date, they have undermined much of it, and they have corrupted the minds of many Americans: youth, adolescents, and adults alike.They have corrupted innocent, impressionable school-age children, who are unable to comprehend the poisoning of their young minds. They have corrupted undergraduate university youth, who—so enthralled with and enraptured by a Marxist college professor’s pretentious, false erudition—are unable to recognize and therefore appreciate the difference between a cogent, logical, sound argument on the one hand, and what amounts to elaborate, artful sophistry, on the other. And they have corrupted tens of millions of adults—those too simple-minded to notice, or too gullible to accept the mounting evidence before them; or those who feel too intimidated or threatened to voice an objection, or simply too jaded to care.Yet there are many Americans who do see the Nation transforming into a disgusting, leprous monstrosity. There are Americans who have taken notice of the dire threat to the Republic and cannot and will not deny the truth. They do care, and this is what they see: Two mutually exclusive, antagonistic visions for America; the one in open conflict with the other. Only one WILL prevail. Only one CAN prevail—One pure and sanctified by the Lord; the other a product of the Beast, the defilement of nature, the poisoning of all that is good and proper in America.See the Arbalest Quarrel articles, detailing the distinguishing features of INDIVIDUALISM and COLLECTIVISM in “The Modern American Civil War: A Clash of Ideologies;” posted on October 6, 2018; and our prescient article on the dismantling of the Nation, “In the Throes of America’s Modern-Day Civil War,” posted on October 28, 2018.One vision holds true to the Declaration of Independence and to the United States Constitution. That vision preserves the Nation in the form the founders gave to us and intended for us: an independent sovereign nation-state and free Republic, grounded on the tenets and precepts and principles of INDIVIDUALISM, sanctified by the Divine Creator.The other vision looks to the Communist Manifesto for guidance. That vision portends the end of a free Constitutional Republic and, further, the end of the very concept of a nation-state and true morality. The political, social, and economic scheme envisioned is diametrically opposed to that of a free Republic and a sovereign people, a vision of America grounded on the tenets and precepts of COLLECTIVISM; the needs, wishes, and concerns of the individual not only denigrated but denied.The Collectivist vision eschews individual needs, wants, and desires as irrelevant and antithetical to the goals of COLLECTIVISM. It is a vision of America that denies and rejects the Divine Creator outright, and worships, instead, such false gods as Satan, Mammon, and Asmodeus: the gods of wrath, greed, and lust.The architects of this new model for America view people as little more than cattle. People are herded into groups. Uniformity and conformity of thought and conduct are engineered into society to better effectuate control. The enslavement of mankind is the result. The subjugation of man’s will and spirit is the end goal.George Orwell, in his epochal work, “1984”, published in 1949, showed the FACE of the BEAST; and Taylor Caldwell displayed the BEAST’S UNDERBELLY, in her monumental work, “Captains and the Kings,” published in 1972.One cannot but wonder that some Americans would willingly surrender their Fundamental Rights and Liberties and forsake the sanctity and inviolability of the individual spirit for a life of servitude and perpetual misery under transnational alien rule—all for a few crumbs doled out by a Nanny State guilefully intent on keeping the polity indolent, somnolent, and dependent. It is happening even now.Is it not true the United States became the wealthiest, most productive, and most powerful Nation on Earth—the veritable envy of the world—through the foresight of the Nation’s founders, who fashioned a Country, unlike any other then existent or presently existent on Earth?The founders fashioned A TRULY FREE REPUBLIC, WHERE THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES ARE SOVEREIGN, NOT TYRANTS. They were of one mind against the construction of a MONARCHY, DIARCHY, TRIARCHY, OLIGARCHY or other AUTOCRATIC, DICTATORIAL “—ARCHY,” composed of plutocrats or monarchists who would, through those systems, systematically and brutally oppress, repress, and suppress the human will and spirit—all ostensibly, as they would no doubt tell themselves—for the well-being of a proper, well-ordered, well-engineered, society, operating in a perpetual, albeit meaningless, vacuous stasis.Prime examples of the sort of governmental schemes the framers of the Constitution would abhor include the LENINIST/STALINIST REGIME imposed on the people of Russia, and the MAOIST DICTATORSHIP imposed on the people of China.How well did these seemingly harmonious societal constructs pan out? How well are they working out now? How are the TOTALITARIAN regimes of Venezuela, Cuba, and other countries across the globe doing?How is it that those who viciously condemn our Nation’s history, heritage, culture, and Judeo-Christian ethic, can explain away the fact that so many people in countries around the world seek to come to ours if our Nation is such a terrible place to anchor as the haters of our Country proclaim? The answer is: they cannot do so, and they do not even try. Rather, they simply create false narratives of America as a racist Nation; an ignoble Nation; a Nation that lacks, in their words, proper “DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION.” Yet, what DO THEY REALLY MEAN by those words, in practice, that they plaster all over the place? We have a pretty good clue given what we have seen. It is all a façade:

‘DIVERSITY’ REALLY MEANS ‘NON-ASSIMILATION’ AND ‘SOCIETAL CHAOS’

‘EQUITY’ REALLY MEANS ‘INEQUITY,’ ‘INEQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY,’ AND ‘SOCIETAL IMBALANCE’

‘INCLUSION’ REALLY MEANS ‘EXCLUSION’ AND ‘REJECTION’

We, as a Nation, have come full circle, from 1776 to 2021: from the inception of our Nation as a free Constitutional Republic to the possible collapse of it.Are Americans witnessing the death throes of a free CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, and doing so in REAL-TIME?Just as Americans now seek to preserve a Republic from those who seek to wrest it from our grasp, back then there were colonists who sought to sever ties with Great Britain and there were those who sought to retain those ties. See the article on the website revolutionary-war.net.“The Revolution is usually portrayed as a conflict between the Patriots and the British. But there is another narrative: the bloody fighting between Americans, a civil war whose savagery shocked even battle-hardened Redcoats and Hessians. As debate and protests evolved into war, mudslinging and rhetorical arguments between Rebels and Tories evolved into tar-and-feathering, house-burning, and lynching.The colonists themselves were divided. Tories were colonists who helped and even fought with the British during the American Revolutionary War. Also known as Loyalists for their loyalty to the British crown, their contention with the Whigs (Patriots) was so intense that their savage fighting can justly be called America’s first civil war.By one process or another, those who were to be citizens of the new republic were separated from those who preferred to be subjects of King George. Just what proportion of the Americans favored independence and what share remained loyal to the British monarchy there is no way of knowing. The question of revolution was not submitted to popular vote, and on the point of numbers we have conflicting evidence. On the patriot side, there is the testimony of a careful and informed observer, John Adams, who asserted that two-thirds of the people were for the American cause and not more than one-third opposed the Revolution at all stages.”And, now today, there are Americans, most of us, who wish to preserve the Republic. They are the true Patriots, true to the vision of the founders of the Republic, true to the tenets and precepts of INDIVIDUALISM the blueprint of our Republic, the U.S. Constitution, and its Bill of Rights. And, then there are those, the Collectivists; those who intend to unwind the Republic and to rend the Constitution as the Constitution is wholly inconsistent with the tenets and precepts of COLLECTIVISM.Among those who seek to destroy a free Republic and independent sovereign Nation-State, there are various factions. They include, inter alia, Neoliberal Globalists, Marxists, Socialists, Communists, Anarchists, and Maoists, Leninists, Stalinists, and Trotskyites—all bound by a common desire to bring to a close the era of a free Republic forged in steel on THAT FATEFUL DAY of JULY 4, 1776, that ushered in the AMERICAN REVOLUTION and the Birth of a new Nation, conceived in LIBERTY. But, the Collectivists of the 21^st Century in America disparage it; want none of it; are bent on destroying all of it.The COLLECTIVISTS are a selfish lot. The COLLECTIVIST MEGA-BILLIONAIRE NEOLIBERAL GLOBALIST FINANCIERS AND CORPORATISTS, never sated, want to control ALL copper, gold, silver, platinum coinage, and, by flooding the market with worthless paper, i.e., “Federal Reserve Notes,” reduce the American polity to a state of abject poverty, penury, indigence, and misery, and despair, completely dependent on Government largess for basic survival.And the POLITICAL AND SOCIAL RECONSTRUCTIONIST COLLECTIVISTS look forward to a day when they can lower the American Flag one last time; celebrate the fall of the Republic; and observe the remains of the United States, “ONE NATION, UNDER GOD,” at long last merged into a mammoth global political, social, economic, transnational Governmental scheme—a new regime; one devoid of the very concept of an American citizenry, and of an American ethos, and of an American psyche, and of a Nation sanctified by the Divine Creator.Unfortunately, many Americans, while definitely loath to sacrifice a free Constitutional Republic, feel helpless to prevent its demise and, so, have resigned themselves to accept defeat. Still, there are those Americans who will fight, as the Patriots of old, to protect their birthright.THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION OF 1776 PRESERVED versus THE NEO-MARXIST INTERNATIONALISTS’ COUNTERREVOLUTION OF 2021 ATTEMPT AT REVERSALDo Americans retain and maintain their Republic as founded or allow it to be extinguished, erased, abandoned? WHICH SHALL IT BE?____________________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

8/20/21 8/20/21

THE ROAD TO SOCIALISM IN AMERICA—PAVED WITH NOT-SO-GOOD INTENTIONS

WHEN DO AMERICANS BEGIN TO REALIZE THEIR COUNTRY NO LONGER BELONGS TO THEM?

PART FIVE

Take a moment to ponder a portion of President Donald Trump’s last State of the Union Address. Consider his most important remarks to the Nation, as reported on, and poignantly elucidated by Rebecca Walser of Fox News Business, on February 19, 2020, eleven months before the corrupt, senile store-window manikin, Joseph Biden, was sworn in as the 46^th President of the United States:“Who would have ever thought that any president of these United States of America would have to stand before Congress—and before the American people—and publicly declare that the United States is a free country, standing for liberty.In his State of the Union address on Tuesday, President Trump made an unequivocal pronouncement against the multiplying cries for socialism in America.‘Here, in the United States, we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country,’ the president said. ‘America was founded on liberty and independence—not government coercion, domination and control. We are born free, and we will stay free. Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will NEVER be a socialist country.’ [Emphasis added.]Unsurprisingly, many on the Democratic side of the chamber did not stand in unison to agree, nor did they even clap. No, no, they have the wheels of the socialism freight train started now, and they will give not an inch to stop it in its tracks.Free lunch? Yes please, that sounds nice. Hmm, how about a free education with a side of free health care? Why don’t we even throw in student loan forgiveness, free housing, a guaranteed job, or forget the job, and let’s just give – you guessed it – free universal basic income while we are at it.America’s unique origin in escaping an overbearing, oppressive and overly-taxing government is likely the reason we have historically supported more freedoms, including economic freedoms, than our European cousins. But that is undeniably changing now.The shifting political winds are reflective of an underlying new positive attitude toward socialism in America. A recent Reuters poll found that 70 percent of Americans support Medicare-for-all, which includes a majority of Republicans. (A new poll released by the Kaiser Family Foundation found support drops, however, when participants were told the plan could lead to higher taxes.) . . . .This is our failure America, in not holding our government accountable. They have been allowed for too long to fake it, to spend money that we do not have to pay for services we cannot afford on a sustainable basis.For the last three decades, we have spent significantly more than we have collected in tax revenues resulting in a federal debt of $22 trillion.This has been carried out for the last 30-plus years such that the American people have been lulled into believing that we can spend without end, without the pain of an European tax scheme (40 percent to more than 60 -plus percent). So why shouldn’t we add Medicare-for-all, free college education and even UBI – universal basic income?But it is all an illusion. . . .Others say that you can just print more money, but inflating our way out of this economic hole is a non starter, since both Social Security and Medicare make inflation-adjusted payments. This means that if we try to inflate our way out, the costs of our biggest social programs just go up proportionally—solving nothing.Economic equality comes at the heavy price of freedom (yours). People logically act in their own self-interest even if it is to their long-term detriment, like a bug sucking its host dry. Most will take advantage of the government’s offer for "free" anything – thus the reason the road to America is packed while the road to Venezuela is empty.But let’s be clear – ‘free’ is not free to our country. The great Roman empire imploded and collapsed under the weight of their own debt and extreme taxation. Are we determined to go down that same road?Let us have renewed hope today that President Trump stands to say no.”Unfortunately, eleven months after this story and analysis broke, Trump is no longer President. The Neoliberal Globalist “elites” along with their sidekick, the Neo-Marxists, that together share achieving their common goal of a one-world, uniform Super-State governmental scheme, with the U.S. to be unceremoniously merged into it and consumed by it, made sure that Donald Trump would never serve a second term in Office, and, more to the point, would never be permitted to serve a second term in Office, which might also explain why powerful Neoliberal Globalists have continued to attack him and to attack over a third of the Nation that had voted for him in the 2020 General Election. And the prognostications of Rebecca Walser as laid out in her 2019 Fox Business Report, have eerily, and uncannily, and no less dishearteningly, come to fruition.The American people are disillusioned and disenchanted. And the U.S. is well on its way to becoming a Socialist Country, despite Trump’s remarks to the contrary.So, then, was Trump wrong in his assertion—at once a sacred promise to Americans and a pronouncement of defiance to the Neo-Marxists of all stripes among the Democrats—even as Pelosi in a choreographed fit of pique, rips up her copy of the President’s address, thereby demonstrating her utter contempt for the U.S. President, the Country, the American people, and the Constitution.No, Trump wasn’t wrong. Yet, there is an unintended, unplanned, unforeseen irony in Trump’s assertion “that America will never be a socialist Country,” insofar as the Country is headed in that direction under a Neoliberal Globalist and Marxist-Controlled Congress and a Neoliberal Globalist controlled Executive Branch. The U.S. is in fact turning inexorably, and possibly inevitably and irrevocably toward Socialism. But if that should happen, if that would befall our Country, then the COUNTRY WILL NO LONGER BE AMERICA, for our Country will no longer be a free Constitutional Republic, and so THE COUNTRY WILL CEASE TO BE.Indeed, the Neoliberal Globalists and Neo-Marxists don’t even refer to our Nation as a free Constitutional Republic; never did. Back in 2018, Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker, did say, of course, that:“We’re capitalists, and that’s just the way it is” which makes the Neoliberal Globalist “capitalist” monopolists happy to hear, who, for all that, eschew true competitive capitalism.But, has Pelosi ever been heard to reaffirm our Country as a “free Constitutional Republic?” In fact, has the infirm, corrupt, senile Joe Biden or the vacuous, opportunist Kamala Harris ever reaffirmed our Country as a “free Constitutional Republic? Has anyone in Biden’s Cabinet or Administration affirmed our Nation as a “free Constitutional Republic?”It stands to reason that the current crop of Neoliberal Globalists and Neo-Marxists in control of two Branches of Government have little if any regard for the Constitution. At best they give lip service to it, as they go about operating in the denigration of it. And no one in the legacy Press calls them to account for their abject failure to heed to the dictates of it. And we, Americans, are all the worse for it.________________________________________

HOW MANY AMERICANS APPREHEND THAT THE U.S. CONSTITUTION IS THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND?

PART SIX

It may be remarked—nay, must be proclaimed loudly, passionately, continuously as all too many Americans lose sight of the fact—that the Supreme Law of the Land is the U.S. Constitution. This isn’t mere supposition. It is fact.Neoliberal Globalist “elites” know this to be true, but they have no use for the Constitution as it intrudes upon their ability to consolidate economic power for themselves across the globe, at the expense of the economic well-being of the American people and at the expense of the well-being of the Country.And the sworn enemies of the U.S. Constitution and of a sovereign American people, America’s transnational Neo-Marxists, know this to be true as well because the U.S. Constitution is grounded on the tenets of Individualism, embracing the core notions of personal freedom and liberty—tenets and precepts and principles antithetical and anathema to those of Collectivism, upon which classic Marxism, and the spawn and shades of Marxism spring from. But they all come from one cloth, and they are all vehemently opposed to Individualism.For the tenets, precepts, and principles of Individualism, alone form the foundation of the U.S. Constitution, and they are inconsistent with and in clear contradistinction to those of Collectivism that insist on the subordination of the human will, soul, and spirit to and that demand obsequious devotion to and subservience of the individual to the State. That explains why the callous, caustic, fabulously wealthy Neoliberal Globalists and the idiosyncratic, cold-hearted Neo-Marxists are both of one mind in their stated objective to rid themselves of it.And so, with Trump out of the way, and as the Neoliberal Globalists and as America’s Neo-Marxists have brazenly, audaciously taken over the institutions of Government and of the Press and of much of society, they have begun in earnest to consolidate their power over the Nation and over the citizenry, in defiance of the plain import of the Constitution.And now they feel that the political and social and economic climate of the Country has changed to such an extent in their favor, that they feel no reticence in openly questioning the continued need for it. They have even gone further than that, questioning the very legality of it, and withal, cloaking their anathema to it and animosity for it, rebelling vociferously against it—the academia especially expounding through more and more rhetorical flourish and through sophistry, posing as a sound erudite argument, their naked abhorrence of it.See, e.g., the 2013 Article, in Harper’s Magazine, titled, “Constitution in Crisis;” and an article in The Atlantic, titled, “The U.S. Needs a New Constitution—Here’s How to Write It.” And, in a lengthy New York Times’ Op-Ed, the paper has tacked together several essays by various legal scholars who propose amending the Constitution’s Bill of Rights and Articles. A simple web search keying in the words, “do we need a constitution,” brings up a plethora of articles challenging the continued need for the U.S. Constitution—the blueprint of a free Republic that ceases to exist the moment the Constitution ceases to be.The reader should note that all or virtually all these articles arose in the most recent decade of the 21^st Century, and several of them within the last few weeks or months.But what explains this flurry of articles, and essays coming to the fore now? This cannot be accidental. Indeed, it isn’t.If the Neoliberal Globalists and Neo-Marxists thought the Constitution was simply irrelevant, they likely would have given little thought to it, would simply ignore it, and in the actions of the Harris-Biden Administration, the American people have witnessed just that: the blatant failure of Biden to faithfully execute the laws of the United States as required of him, spurning his Presidential duty under the “take care clause” of Article 1, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. This failure goes beyond an arguable difference of opinion as to the President’s duty, or to incompetence of which Biden has more than an ample supply. It is much more than that.Biden’s actions amount to outright subversion and sedition. And the Neoliberal Globalists and International Neo-Marxists are perfectly content with this. They have expected it of Biden. More, they have demanded it of him. And, he has delivered, doing all that his handlers expect of him, even as he makes a fool of himself during the few times his handlers allow him, albeit reluctantly, to appear before the public, hewing to script—at least to the extent that a person suffering from dementia can.Perfunctorily dismissing Congressional enactments such as the Nation’s immigration law, in direct defiance of the Legislature’s Article 1 authority, see irli.org, and dismissing out-of-hand U.S. Supreme Court rulings on evictions, demonstrating his contempt of High Court Article 3 authority on questions of law, if he ever thought about it, to the extent he is capable of coherent thought at all. See article in christianaction.org and article in theweek.com. Biden has not only defied the authority of two other co-equal Branches of Government, he has also spurned his own duties under the “take care clause” of Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution.But there’s more to the Constitution than the Articles demarcating and limiting the authority and powers of the three co-equal Branches of the Federal Government, critical as those Articles are to the foundation of a free Constitutional Republic.Even as few give little thought to it, there is one set of laws that preside even over that of the Supreme Law of the Land, the U.S. Constitution. It is Law bestowed on man by the Divine Creator. It is the Law of Natural Rights, and there is no inconsistency in averring the authority of and the awesome power of natural law above even the U.S. Constitution. The framers of that great document, the Constitution of the United States, conceded as much, through the codification of Ten Amendments to it thereby embracing and enshrining Divine Law within it, an integrated part of it, inextricably bound to it, so there is no inconsistency between the import of Divine Law and ofthe U.S. Constitution’s deference to Divine Law.

THE PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

The Bill of Rights is of paramount importance to, and a singularly critical component of the U.S. Constitution, both shaping the nature of a free Republic, and establishing the role of Government vis a vis the American people, subordinating Government to the people.It is the Bill of Rights, especially, that has provided the U.S. Constitution with its true staying power; and that has allowed the Country to survive and thrive as a free Republic. The Bill of Rights is one feature of the U.S. Constitution that cannot be readily ignored or dismissed out of hand by the Neoliberal Globalists and the Neo-Marxists, much as they wish to do; much as they try to do.The Nation, as a free Constitutional Republic can, truth to tell, continue to exist, at least for a time, even where a corrupt Executive Branch and a corrupt Legislative Branch give little heed to limitations built into their own authority and duties under the Constitution. And, that is true of the Third Branch of Government, the Judiciary, as well.The Bill of Rights, though, exists and operates on another plane; another order of magnitude; well beyond even the Articles, a human construct, and well beyond such man-made procedural Amendments that came thereafter. For, the Bill of Rights codifies Divine Law.The contents of the Bill of Rights isn’t a human construct because it isn’t a mere compilation of man-made law even though some there are who might perceive it to be such, namely the Neoliberal Globalist corporatist “elites,” and the transnational Neo-Marxists, and other Collectivists who, all of them, deny this, of course. Even to describe the Ten Amendments of the Bill of Rights as little more than an elucidation of and edification of man’s greater potential fails to hit the mark as to their true significance and purpose. For, it is only by the grace of Divine Providence that man can, a priori, recognize the Creator’s gifts to him, bestowed on man by the Creator as the supernal omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, and morally perfect Being. These God-given Rights and Liberties, Natural Law, preexist within man, exist, then, prior to the creation of Government by man.It is not given to man, by mere experience, a posteriori, through man’s five sense organs, that man comes to know of his true Nature made in God’s own image but, through man’s non-physical Spirit that the fact of and nature of the fundamental, immutable, illimitable, unalienable Rights come to be apparent to man. How, then, can man’s nature be lawfully subordinated and subjugated to State control and dominance, since Government is a man-made construct, and such manmade device offends and subverts the will of the Supreme Creator, where man’s will, and soul, and spirit are quelled and suppressed?Such a Government transgresses God’s will and such Government that dares to subvert the integrity and sanctity of man’s spirit and soul is heresy, and this heresy is the goal of this new, obscene non-American Governmental scheme that has begun to take root in the Country, and it is growing apace, to be merged into a new world order, to bring man low. Americans must fight the attempt with all the power they can muster. The way they can do this is to insist that their fundamental rights are not subject to negotiation or compromise. That which is given to man by the Divine Creator cannot lawfully be revoked by the State, and cannot be contracted or purloined away.______________________________________

AS LONG AS AMERICANS ARE ABLE TO EXERCISE THEIR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, SOCIALISM CANNOT TAKE ROOT.

PART SEVEN

Only through exercise of the peoples’ fundamental rights can the citizenry hope to withstand the onslaught from those disparate evil forces consisting, inter alia, of a heterogenous assortment of Neoliberal Globalists, Corporatist Monopolists, Internationalist Neo-Marxists, Government Neoconservatives, liberal Progressive and Marxist members of Congress and of the Federal Bureaucracy, the seditious legacy Press, and Marxist elements in academia, all hell-bent on disassembling the United States, transforming the Country from its root structure as a free Constitutional Republic and independent sovereign Nation-State into an autocratic lackey of a larger autocratic super-structure, embracing the entire world.On some level the combined power of these terrible, ruthless, amoral and immoral forces operating both inside the United States and outside it, Neoliberal Globalists and Neo-Marxists alike, adopting a common Collectivist ideology, an ideology incompatible with the tenets, precepts, and principles of Individualism upon which the U.S. Constitution is grounded, driven by a singular lust for amassing wealth and power—of benefit to themselves at the expense of the American polity—continue to plot, connive, conspire, and machinate toward realization of a similar goal: the creation of a one-world transnational super State; a mammoth transformative political, social, economic, and juridical construct; a global totalitarian regime embracing and subsuming all present western nation-states; erasing all geographical boundaries; eliminating and eventually erasing from the memory of the polity any sense of a once-shared national identity, a once-shared history and heritage, a once-shared civic culture, a once-shared Christian ethos and a once-shared Judeo-Christian ethic. It would all cease to exist. Yet, for the U.S. to become merged into this transnational one-world, totalitarian Super-State, it is essential that the U.S. Constitution first be abrogated, and that means abrogation of the citizens’ Fundamental Rights and Liberties. All of it must go. But there is a tenaciousness to the Constitution, especially that part of it that speaks to the fundamental, unalienable Rights and Liberties of the citizenry: the Nation’s Bill of Rights.Even with vast sums of money spent behind a massive propaganda campaign to denigrate the Nation’s revered history, heritage, and culture, and to challenge the inviolability of God-bestowed Rights and Liberties, set in stone in Nation's the Bill of Rights, most Americans maintain and exhibit a deep attachment to and devotion to their Country and to their fundamental Rights and Liberties upon which the sovereignty of the American people over Government is preserved. And, on some level all American citizens understand that God-given Rights and Liberties cannot be simply ignored and dismissed out-of-hand, if the Nation is to survive as a free Constitutional Republic; and the American people will not long abide usurpers in Government who betray their Oath to the United States Constitution, whether it be the President of the United States who betrays the Oath of Office he is required to take, pursuant to Article 2, Section 1, Clause 8 of the Constitution, to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States;”whether it be those in Congress who betray the Oath they are required to take, pursuant to Article 6, Clause 3 of the Constitution, to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States; or whether it be those in the Civil Service or uniformed services of Government who betray the Oath they are required to take, to “defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;” pursuant to 5 U.S.C.S. § 3331. The solemnity of the Oaths of those sworn to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution are not to be taken lightly. And, if these betrayers of their Oath think there will be no accounting for an act of betrayal to the Constitution of the United States, the American people shall demand an accounting, as they are the sovereign rulers of the Nation as established by the U.S. Constitution. Those who serve in Government are the servants, not the masters of the American people, and the ultimate enforcement power that the American people wield over Government is made abundantly clear not in the electoral system through which the American people have a say only in the vote they cast for this or that servant of the citizenry, but in one especial fundamental, immutable, illimitable, unalienable Right: the inviolate Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms.______________________________________________

THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS CANNOT BE LAWFULLY APPROPRIATED OR COMMANDEERED BY THE STATE; AND IT ISN’T FOR SALE!

PART EIGHT

The Bill of Rights cannot be easily supplanted, ignored, dismissed out-of-hand, as the fundamental rights and liberties are engrained deep in the psyche of most American citizens and they are loathed to surrender their sacred God-bestowed Rights and Liberties, knowing that, to do so, means the loss not only of their Country but of their own Soul.One natural, God-given right, in particular, the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, as Divine Law, codified in the Bill of Rights as “the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms,” is Divine Law that happens to have been codified into law by man. More to the point, this Divine Law is written into man's Spirit. That is what makes the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, Divine Law, and not mere man-made law. This Divine Law serves to prevent the takeover of the Nation’s Country by tyrants. The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, as Divine Law, isn't for sale!The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, as Divine Law, is subsumed in a more elemental Divine law: The Right of Personal Self-Defense, against a predatory animal, whether that predatory animal hops on two legs or runs on four, and against a predatory, tyrannical Government. Further, the Natural God-bestowed Right of Personal Self-Defense is itself subsumed in the God-bestowed Right of Personal Autonomy, for it is through Self-Defense that man is able to preserve and has the solemn duty and cardinal responsibility to preserve and secure from harm not only his physical well-being but his psychological and spiritual well-being; his individuality; the sanctity of Self-hood; the inviolability of his Soul, sanctified by the Divine Creator.If unable to exercise the God-bestowed Right of Self-Defense, of which the firearm is the most efficient means of Self-Defense, man cannot effectively persevere against those forces that would dare crush his will and spirit into submission; would not be able to effectively defend against those forces at work in society today that compel uniformity and conformity in all thought and conduct; would not be able to resist evil forces that insist on transforming a Nation of individual Souls into a collection of mindless, senseless drones, an obsequious, obedient, formless glob—a monstrosity, a thing created by evil forces in clear defiance to the Creator's will. For the Creator intended for man to be noble, that he might, through his individual Soul, be a demi-Creator in his own right, set out on his own path, realize his full potential as an independent creative Spirit; for he is made in God's Image.Yet, it is a thing strange that, given the plain meaning of the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, codified in clear, precise, concise words in the U.S. Constitution, it would come to pass that an American citizen would find it necessary to petition the Judiciary to secure for him a God-given Right that Government or private enterprise interests—artificial constructs of man—would dare deny him. Yet for decades, before the seminal Second Amendment Heller case was heard, ignoble forces were at work to subvert the plain meaning of the Divine Law, arguing that the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms was not an Individual Right at all, and certainly was not to be perceived as a Natural Right, but one bound up in service to a collective, a militia. This idea is false on its face, and, when one realizes that the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, codified in the Second Amendment, isn't a man-made law at all, but Natural Law, of Divine Origin, pertaining to the Individual Self, to the Individual Soul, to one’s personal autonomy, then any notion that the Right is to be understood as, to be taken as, something that applies to and has meaning only in the context of groups, to a collective, falls apart of its own weight as a matter of logic, as well as of law. One comes to realize that the mistake of law and logic that arises from the conclusion that the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms has meaning and purport in the context of one's service in a militia, in the context, then, of one's service in a group, is due to problematic, false assumptions. The mistake of law and logic that some academic scholars as well as the lay public fall prey to commences from an assumption, taken as axiomatic, as self-evident, that the Bill of Rights, is simply a creation of man, an artificial construction of the government, an arbitrary formulation by State actors in Government, not unlike the Articles of the Constitution, or later procedural amendments to it, and not unlike other man-made common or codified law. In that case, grounded on acceptance of false assumption and illogical reasoning, one draws the illogical conclusion that fundamental rights are no more than privileges to be bestowed onto this one or that one, or to this group or to that group by the grace of the State, and, just as readily, rescinded by the State, as the sole creator of the Right. Through acceptance of the false assumption that the Bill of Rights is really a set of State created privileges, all sorts of inanities arise therefrom, such as the idea that the Ten Amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights can readily be amended no less so than the Articles of the Constitution or the procedural amendments subsequently ratified and added to the Constitution or just as readily repealed. But, the Bill of Rights is no mere collection of Rights and Liberties, for they were not created by man. They are codifications of Divine Law. As such, they existed prior to any artificial governmental construct of man. As Divine Law, not man-made law the Bill of Rights cannot be lawfully amended, modified, abrogated, or ignored. The Rights codified in the Bill of Rights exist internally in and eternal in man. They aren't creations of the State, of Government, of man. This fact, the Neoliberal Globalist and Neo-Marxist Counterrevolutionaries both inside Government and outside it, will not accept—indeed cannot accept—for the idea that some Rights exist beyond the lawful power of the Government to whittle away at, to reinterpret the import and purport of, or to nullify outright, frustrates these evil forces to no end, as that idea makes impossible the realization of their goal of a one-world transnational governmental regime in which man is subjugated to the dictates of Government, as the State, alone, to these Neoliberal Globalists and Neo-Marxists, is to be perceived as god, having power of life or death over the men they rule.__________________________________________

LOOKING BACKWARD TO HELLER AND MCDONALD AND FORWARD TO THE UPCOMING BRUEN (CORLETT) CASE

PART NINE

The late, eminent Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, announced in Heller, what was always patently clear, but often denied: that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right. The clear language of the Right should have been enough to evince the Omni-expansiveness of it; the elemental inalienability, immutability, and illimitability implicit in it. Yet, from the inception of Heller, there was hesitancy and arrogance among many academicians and Government functionaries that compelled them to disavow the plain import and purport of the Right, grounded most likely on jealousy to concede the obvious import of the Right, having no desire to admit that sovereignty over Government is not a shared power or one that belongs only to those who serve in Government, but is sovereignty that rests solely with the American people. The servants of Government exercise such limited authority that the Constitution provides for and that authority is exercised only with the consent of the citizenry. That consent can be withdrawn. And the servants of Government well aware of the limitations inherent in their power constantly seek to constrain the sovereignty of the American people and they have been at work, enacting countless laws, rules, codes, regulations, and ordinances to constrict and restrict the right of the people to keep and bear arms notwithstanding the reaffirmation of the import of the right as categorically stated in Heller.And Anti-Second Amendment State Governments, as well as the Federal Government, are always looking for a way to avoid the import of Heller to affirm the legality and Constitutionality of State Action infringing the core of the Right protected. The first major attack against Heller took shape in the Anti-Second Amendment jurisdiction of Chicago, Illinois, with the City pointedly arguing that the Heller rulings pertaining to the right of Americans to utilize handguns for self-defense in their own homes, only operates as a constraint on the Federal Government, not on the States. Justice Alito who penned the majority opinion in the second major Second Amendment case, McDonald vs. City of Chicago, set forth at the outset of his remarks, the nature of and extent of Chicago’s defiant stance on the matter:“Two years ago, in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 128 S. Ct. 2783, 171 L. Ed. 2d 637, this Court held that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense and struck down a District of Columbia law that banned the possession of handguns in the home. Chicago (hereinafter City) and the village of Oak Park, a Chicago suburb, have laws effectively banning handgun possession by almost all private citizens. After Heller, petitioners filed this federal suit against the City. . . . They sought a declaration that the ban and several related City ordinances violate the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. Rejecting petitioners' argument that the ordinances are unconstitutional, the court noted that the Seventh Circuit previously had upheld the constitutionality of a handgun ban, that Heller had explicitly refrained from opining on whether the Second Amendment applied to the States, and that the court had a duty to follow established Circuit precedent.”The McDonald case made clear the rulings in Heller applied to the States too. In pertinent part, Justice Alito, wrote:“. . . we must decide whether the right to keep and bear arms is fundamental to our scheme of ordered liberty. . . .Our decision in Heller points unmistakably to the answer. Self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day, and in Heller, we held that individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right. Explaining that ‘the need for defense of self, family, and property is most acute in the home . . . we found that this right applies to handguns because they are 'the most preferred firearm in the nation to 'keep' and use for protection of one's home and family. . . . ‘[T]he American people have considered the handgun to be the quintessential self-defense weapon’). Thus, we concluded, citizens must be permitted ‘to use [handguns] for the core lawful purpose of self-defense.”Heller makes it clear that this right is ‘deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition. . . . Heller explored the right's origins, noting that the 1689 English Bill of Rights explicitly protected a right to keep arms for self-defense, and that by 1765, Blackstone was able to assert that the right to keep and bear arms was “one of the fundamental rights of Englishmen.’Blackstone's assessment was shared by the American colonists. As we noted in Heller, King George III's attempt to disarm the colonists in the 1760's and 1770's ‘provoked polemical reactions by Americans invoking their rights as Englishmen to keep arms.’The right to keep and bear arms was considered no less fundamental by those who drafted and ratified the Bill of Rights.In Heller, we held that the protects the right to possess a handgun in the home for the purpose of self-defense. Unless considerations of stare decisis counsel otherwise, a provision of the Bill of Rights that protects a right that is fundamental from an American perspective applies equally to the Federal Government and the States. We therefore hold that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment right recognized in Heller. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings.”Yet, the apparatus of Anti-Second Amendment forces in Government remained undeterred. These forces continued their efforts to find ways around Heller and McDonald through more and more comprehensive and Government licensing schemes.State and local Government firearms’ licensing schemes became progressively bloated through time, and with that bloat the language of them became increasingly vague and ambiguous; and, in the worst instances, became convoluted, inconsistent, and incoherent. Anti-Second Amendment Courts continually, blatantly misinterpreted the rulings of Heller and McDonald, setting down their imprimatur on unconstitutional Government actions.Perhaps the most voluminous Anti-Second Amendment regime to be constructed and one of the earliest, and one of the most insidious; a regime that was continually expanded and revised through time, is that one emanating from New York.Not surprisingly, the first major case the U.S. Supreme Court accepted for review, almost a decade after the seminal Heller case, was New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, et.al. v. The City Of New York And The New York City Police Department-License Division, commonly and colloquially referred to as the “New York City Gun Transport Case.”The case held a lot of promise for Americans who cherish their right of self-defense and the right of personal autonomy, for having granted Petitioners’ writ of certiorari, these Americans expected quite reasonably that the U.S. Supreme Court would apply its precedents in Heller and McDonald to affirm the unconstitutionality of the constraint on one’s right to keep and bear arms for self-defense, outside the home, at least for the purpose of transporting a handgun to a locale outside the environs of New York City. New York’s Courts had hitherto placed burdensome constraints on transportation of handguns outside the home for those New York residents who held valid but restricted handgun premise licenses.Although some Americans might see the New York Gun Transport case as a win for those who cherish the right of the people to keep and bear arms, it wasn’t. Rather, it was a lost opportunity. Consideration of and a decision on the merits of the case were sidestepped. Now Americans who cherish their Second Amendment right are looking to a second New York case, NYSRPA vs. Corlett (now captioned, NYSRPA vs. Bruen*) on which to pin their hopes for reaffirmation of the significance of the Heller imperative. The case will be heard in November 2021 and decided probably at some point in early summer, 2022.Our concern is whether and to what extent—even with a complement of three new Justices, all Trump nominees, who would seem to adhere to the methodology of the late eminent Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, when analyzing and deciding cases—the Bruen case will be decided in a manner that will reinvigorate and clarify the rulings and holdings and reasoning of Heller and McDonald.To get a good handle on the New York Bruen case, and to assess various outcome scenarios, it is necessary to understand what transpired in the earlier New York Gun Transport case, along with a few major post-Heller D.C. gun cases and others.Our focus going forward will be directed to the elucidation of four matters:

THE IMPORT OF GOVERNMENT FIREARMS’ LICENSING SCHEMES GENERALLY AND THOSE OF NEW YORK PARTICULARLY
THE FRAMING OF THE SPECIFIC LEGAL ISSUE BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT IN THE BRUEN CASE
STANDARDS OF REVIEW EMPLOYED BY THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURTS AFTER HELLER
A PERSPECTIVE ON THE JURISPRUDENTIAL APPROACHES OF THE JUSTICES

As for the first bullet point, firearms licensing schemes are a fact, and Heller’s position on them isn’t crystal clear. The mere fact of them and the propensity of Courts to align themselves with Government to stamp their imprimatur upon them are inherently in tension with the import and purport of the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, a tension that Heller did little rectify.As for the second bullet point, the Court has recast the issue for review. This recasting of the issue is critical to the decision to be reached and we will speculate on why the Court recast the issue and analyze what that may portend.As for the third bullet point, many lower Courts have routinely fallen back on judicial standards of review that majority opinion in Heller considered and rejected. The High Court may wish to clarify the standard that should be employed in Second Amendment cases where the Government actions impact the core of the right.As for the fourth bullet point, while the legacy Press constantly refers to the High Court as comprising 6 Conservative-wing Justices and 3 Liberal-wing Justices. That is an incorrect statement by the legacy Press and it is one constantly projected by the Press to express the need, as the Legacy Press sees it, for a contingent of new Justices, in the mold of the late Associate Justice, Ruth Bader-Ginsberg, and in the mold of the three remaining liberal Justices, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. These liberal-wing Justices, as often described by the Press, all ascribe to the view of the U.S. Constitution as a “Living Constitution,” (See, e.g. Acton Institute Article), which really calls for the death of the U.S. Constitution. These liberal-wing Justices' utilize a methodology for deciding cases that looks beyond the original text of the Constitution. These Justices believe in an expansive view of Constitutional analysis that routinely interjects ever-changing international law and international norms into their juridical pronouncements. This analysis is antithetical to and anathema to the methodology employed by the late Justice Antonin Scalia who realized that to interject international law and normative views of foreign countries into judicial decision-making is to denigrate the U.S. Constitution, subordinating the Supremacy of the Constitution and the Sovereignty of the United States to that of a Global initiative and Global objectives, at odds with the preservation of the U.S. Constitution in the manner the framers of it intended. Thus, these liberal-wing Justices find a strict reading of the Bill of Rights, for example, to be inconsistent with international law and norms and, so, rather than reject international law and international norms and standards, they would reject the language of the Constitution. This is most blatantly illustrated in their desire to reduce the fundamental Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms as codified in the Second Amendment, to a nullity. Thus, they seek to undercut the seminal Second Amendment Heller and McDonald case rulings and holdings, and their opinions demonstrate their clear animosity to the methodology employed by the late Justice Scalia in deciding cases: originalism and textualism. Associate Justices Thomas and Alito also adhere to the methodology of originalism and textualism, which demands strict adherence to the plain meaning of the Constitution and especially of that critical component of it: the Bill of Rights.Chief Justice, John Roberts, who wields considerable power as the Chief Justice, is not to be seen as an avid proponent of the Second Amendment, and, apart from Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, whose commitment to the defense of exercise of the Right embodied in the Second Amendment is established beyond doubt through a large body of Supreme Court Opinions, the commitment of the newest members of the Court—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—to the sanctity of the Second Amendment and to the other Nine Bill of Rights is not firmly established. And, as for Justice Kavanaugh, along with Chief Justice John Roberts, their dubious commitment to the preservation of the Second Amendment is manifest from a perusal of their handling of the New York Gun transport case. These latter two Justices demonstrate significantly less commitment to and decidedly less ardor toward the Second Amendment than do Associate Justices Thomas and Alito and as did the late esteemed Associate Justice Scalia. This is expressed in their failure to adhere unerringly to the methodology of originalism and textualism that serves to preserve the Constitution as written, upon which the continued existence of the Nation, as a free Constitutional Republic, necessarily depends.Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justice Kavanaugh do not employ—with the same devotion as do Justices Thomas and Alito, at any rate—the juridical methodologies of textualism and originalism, heralded by the late Justice Scalia; nor do they apply Supreme Court legal doctrines, uniformly and evenhandedly. This is apparent from their handling of the legal doctrine of “mootness,” which led to a less than optimum result in their handling of the New York Gun Transport case as a consideration of and decision on the substantive merits of the case were dispensed with.We discuss these matters in-depth in our upcoming articles._________________________________*When the Corlett case first wended its way up through New York’s Court, the Defendant, Keith M. Corlett, happened to be serving as the Superintendent of the New York State Police, the 16th Superintendent. But at some point, after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to take up the “Corlett” case for review, Kevin P. Bruen replaced Corlett as the New York State Police Superintendent: the 17th Superintendent of the New York State Police. The case now reflects Bruen as the proper Defendant-Respondent and properly the case should be referred to as the Bruen case even though many journalists who discuss the case continue to refer to the case as originally captioned. See New York State Police website.____________________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

8/6/21 8/6/21

SIX MONTHS INTO THE HARRIS-BIDEN ADMINISTRATION AND THE PROCESS OF DISMANTLING A FREE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC IS WELL UNDERWAY

NEO-MARXIST INTERNATIONALISTS AND NEOLIBERAL GLOBALIST ELITES TAKE A JACKHAMMER TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION*

PART FOUR

The last thing the Neo-Marxist Controlled Congress and Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist handlers of the dimwitted Biden and Harris want to contend with is an armed citizenry. For an armed citizenry is wholly incompatible with the Marxist-globalist agenda and with the construction of a uniform, unified autocratic world government they yearn to create from the hollowed-out shells of old Western Nation States. The U.S. Constitution must go, and a free Republic and sovereign People must go with it, into the dustbin of a forgotten history, making way for and replaced by a “Brave New World,” a technological New World Order, where billions of people, the Hoi Polloi of the Earth, now reduced to mindless, senseless, subservient automatons, no more than—and in a real sense—much less than the AI high-functioning robotic objects operating in this new world, co-existing all around them. Do you think this can't happen? The Deca and Centi-Billionaire Globalists are building these Cities of Tomorrow, right now and then plan to herd the public into them—tens of thousands of people will undoubtedly go willingly, at first, at least, buying into the soft-sell of how wonderful it is is to“live” in a “Smart-City” of the Future—and, eventually, all others will be compelled to do so, corraled against their will into a seemingly placid, tranquil, serene secure landscape. It is unlikely that Bill Gates and other mega-billionaires are buying up huge tracts of land simply to sate their penchant for farming, if that is truly the case, even if the public is told this. Can Gates truly be interested in farming? Is this for the purpose simply to grow food? Really? Huge agricultural combines such as Monsanto and huge food distributor companies like Conagra, already exist. Has Gates, probably at the behest of the Bilderberg Group et.al., of which he is a part, in fact must be a part, given his fabulous wealth, provided him and other Billionaires with their marching orders. The goal in the near term, after developing these so-called Smart Cities, is then selling the idea to the Hoi Polloi as a wonderful place for the Hoi Polloi to inhabit. See, e.g., globest.com, pymnts.com, techrepublic.com, and iberdrola.com, smartcitiesdive.com, and the ruthless and thoroughly deceitful international management consulting firm, McKinsey, is getting into the act. In fact, a tremendous ad campaign is underway to sell this idea to investment groups, and, ultimately, to the public. See, e.g., SmartCitiesworld.com and Springer Open, and blog.bismart.com. Is this effort grounded on truly creating a better world for billions of common people? Does it even really have to do with making money? When a person has accumulated tens of billions or even hundreds of billions of dollars, does a craving for billions more exist? Is that the motivation of these people? Is the motivation to benefit mankind? Or, rather, is the motivation all-too-human: to ensure a better, safer, more secure world for the multi-billionaire ruling elites, that can only be obtained by herding the billions of common people into vast enclosures, through which these masses can be best surveilled and controlled, effectively imprisoned. This is to be sold to the Hoi Polloi as better living through technology, of course. But, when the truth about the impetus for creating these so-called smart cities slowly dawns on some people at least, it will be much too late to resist. And, what then? Eventually, masses of people will be connected to vast neural networks, kept in check within ever smaller and smaller enclosures, perhaps one-room affairs, or large wards containing beds, of a sort, to which people will live their lives virtually, essentially asleep, needing very little nutrient and water, essentially existing as vegetables. And, what is the third step in this evolving strategy of control? Perhaps these billions of people will be dispensed with altogether. Since there is no need for them, even to perform limited custodial services as the simplest of robotic apparatuses could perform those functions and many such mechanical servants already do perform those services and quite well.But, the goal of shepherding billions of people into enclosures, a process to be replicated throughout the world, cannot be smoothly engineered through the present conceptual idea of a nation-state. This social construct must also be dispensed with as an inefficient use of and in fact waste of monies and resources and an ineffective societal device for controlling large populations of common folk. Obviously, the notion of the dignity of the individual and the idea of the sanctity of the human soul not only lose significance in this technologically balanced, unified, uniform, and well-ordered, and well-engineered, smooth-running, exceptionally streamlined society but are devoid of meaning. The next step in this development of a perfectly stable, well-ordered technologically streamlined world would involve the elimination of most of humanity, as superfluous, a drain on scarce resources. The slow dismantling of and hollowing out of the very concept of the nation-state has been gathering steam for some time.This process has been underway in EU for decades. The European Union operates as the initial experiment in the demise of nation-states. The process was sold on several nations of Europe as not involving the ceding of political and legal control over to a central government operating in Brussels, but, ceding a nation's economic control over to a transnational governing body, benefitting all the member nations. That was how the architects of the EU originally sold the idea of a European Union to the original member nations of Europe. But that was merely a ploy and pretext, and one that soured as Countries like Greece, Spain, and Portugal eventually discovered that, when it came to economic fortunes in the EU, there were winners and losers no less so than there were before the artifice of a supra-transnational European Union of nation-states began implementation. But the true raison d’être behind the creation of the EU went far beyond the notion of an economic union of member nation-states that was sold, deceitfully, to these member states. The goal of the grand architects of the EU involved nothing less than the eventual dissolution of the idea of sovereign, independent nation-states. The grand design of the EU involves the reconfiguring of the member nation-states of the EU into a single monolithic transnational unified, uniform construct, with a super-government reigning body ensconced in Brussels, Belgium. See the official European Union website page, delineating the major organs of Government. And this transformative process has been gaining steam, especially in the 21^st Century, as Brussels has run roughshod over the member nations and their populations. And with ultimate political, social, cultural, and juridical control over the governments of these nations, as well as financial and economic control over the governments of these nations, it became easier to begin the process of erasing the national identity of these individual nation-states. This involves a two-step process. The first step involves destabilizing the societal and cultural structure of the member nations. This is accomplished through insinuating into the member nations of Europe, uneducated, poverty-stricken individuals from alien cultures, namely from the middle-east and from northern Africa. The denizens of those regions of Africa and the middle-east naturally resist the process of assimilation, as the cultures of the nations of Europe are at once incomprehensible to them, and incompatible with their own cultural and religious milieu. The governments of the member nation-states of the EU are denied the ability to effectively control the breakdown of the societal order. Any attempt to do so is met with resistance from the Neoliberal Globalist elites and from the International Neo-Marxists, both of whom share the same goal: the annihilation of all nation-states, and the application of the Neo-Marxist dogma serves that common goal. Neo-Marxists argue that such efforts to control denizens from North Africa and the middle-east that are running amok in the various member nations of the EU are to be perceived as immoral, and contrary to the dictates of the nonsense dogma thrust on the EU member states and in the U.S., as well: i.e., the dogma of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, terminology as meaningless to those elements from the middle east and North Africa, insinuating themselves into Europe, as that terminology is the citizens of the EU's member nation-states who wish only to hold onto their culture and national identity and culture and are prohibited from doing so by the ruling elites' overseers in Brussels and their toadies in some of the member states that weaseled their way into power: for example, Emmanuel Macron of France, and Angela Merkel of Germany, and Mario Draghi of Italy, to name a few.Yet, even as most of the populations of the member states are not exactly ecstatic over the idea of ceding national political, social, cultural, and legal power over to a central transnational governing body in Brussels, whatever the ostensible benefits of an economic union might present—which is, at best, debatable—some have successfully resisted this unlawfully usurpation of political authority. Looking clearly and honestly at the structure of the EU governing organs, it is now clear to most populations of the member states that that the architects of the EU had engaged its member states with a Devil’s bargain as the these independent, sovereign nation-states would be required to cede all governing powers over to Brussels, not merely some governing power—i.e., economic power. Indeed, to cede economic power is, for all intents and purposes, to cede all other power—political, social, judicial.Countries like Hungary and Poland, though, have had enough of the EU and the unlawful encroachment of Brussels over their national sovereignty. Afraid of a general backlash, the Neoliberal Globalist architects of the EU treat those Nations as pariahs. The Neo-Marxist intelligentsia conjured up a specific derogatory expression to describe these malcontents, calling them seats of “illiberal Constitutionalism.”Legions of media puppets of the EU’s rulers attacked these Nations. The AP, for one, audaciously proclaimed: “Democratic standards in the European Union are eroding in several member countries, particularly in Hungary and Poland where judicial independence is under threat, the EU’s executive commission said Tuesday in its annual report on adherence to the rule of law.”This bit of propaganda, not surprisingly, emanates out of Brussels, the seat of the Globalist ruler “elite.” It is the very assertion of independence that Brussels abhors—a right that, curiously enough, is a right of every sovereign nation. Brussels, through the AP, is declaring that the member nations are not to be construed as truly sovereign countries—at least not anymore—and, in so saying, admits that the creation of the EU is predicated on the gravest of lies—telling each member State that it shall retain its inherent structure, as an independent sovereign nation, which means retaining all political and judicial power, when in fact, the EU governance requires the ceding of all of it, and slowly through the years and decades since the inception of the EU, has been drawing from their member nation-states powers that belong solely to those States. As the populations of all the member States are well aware of the Government in Brussels' unlawful usurpation of powers and authority, some of those member States have drawn a line in the sand, and said this cannot continue. The sovereign Nation-States of Hungary and Poland are two such that have basically told Brussels' tyrants to go to Hell. Unsurprisingly, the tyrants in Brussels haven't taken kindly to the reassertion of power and authority by Hungary and Poland. And the Globalists and Neo-Marxists here in the U.S. are chiming in to support EU's tyrants. Tucker Carlson makes the point in Budapest that it is time that Americans wake up to the fact that they are in danger of losing their Constitutional Republic if they don't reassert their sovereign authority over Government. In fact, our Constitution makes clear that true power and authority rests in the American people, not in Government. Limited and demarcated powers and authority made patently clear in the U.S. Constitution point to the fact that the Federal Government is the servant of the people, not the other way around. But, the Neoliberal Globalists and Internationalist Neo-Marxists don't give a damn whatever the Constitution has to say about the matter in whom sole, ultimate, and supreme authority resides. And the Bill of Rights, apart from the Articles, emphasizes in whom ultimate power and authority reside. The pack of lies coming from the Press that Donald Trump was an Autocrat is belied by the cavalier manner in which these Globalists in the U.S. Government, through their puppet, the senile Joe Biden, has systematically amassed powers in defiance of and in contradistinction to the clear meaning of the plain language of the Articles, and blatantly defies Congressional Statute, of which the Biden's open borders policy is a clear example of, or simply ignores Constitution and Congressional Statute, and operates as if the U.S. Constitution doesn't even exist. Tucker Carlson's visit to Budapest drives home the point that too many Americans have allowed themselves to be blindsided by the antics of tyrants here at home, in Congress and in the Executive Branch, who claim they aren't tyrants even as they go about terrorizing a goodly section of the populace that refuses to submit to their tyranny. Now the Press is going after Hungary and Tucker Carlson for fear that the American public will take notice of the loss of their Country and their liberty to Autocrats and demand an accounting of the actions of these Neo-Marxist Autocrat members of Congress and of the actions of the Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist-run Executive Branch of Government.As an example of the Internationalist Neo-Marxist attack against Countries that dare to reassert their National sovereignty and National Identity, the Neo-Marxist Wilson Center think tank attacks the concept of ‘nationalism’ openly and arrogantly, stating, “Hungarian nationalism, indeed all the Central and East European nationalisms, are driven by martyrologies of defeat.” In the article, the Wilson Center makes use of the obligatory Neo-Marxist verbiage, ‘inclusion,’ drawing a contrast with and denigrating the concept of ‘assimilation,’ as too confining and outmoded, reminiscent of nation-states. No surprise there. The Wilson Center goes on to say: “The word ‘inclusion’ rather than “‘assimilation’ is used in order to shift the focus onto the nation and the process of accepting minorities into a community, rather than on the actions of the minorities who are making the adaptation. Assimilation implies a solution, a kind of permanency, whereas inclusion suggests a process with ruptures and redefinitions. Policies of inclusion can be severed or reinstated more easily than assimilation.” See also the article in the Atlantic Council; the Council contemptuously refers to Hungary and Poland as “as a hotbed of nationalism and authoritarianism, a leading edge of bad trends in Europe generally.”Not to be outdone, the Neoliberal Globalist Jeff Bezos publication, The Washington Post, gets into the act, too, scorning Tucker Carlson for his visit to Budapest and for his meeting with Hungary’s Prime Minister, Vicktor Orbán. Of note, the Washington Post defends Brussel’s criticism of Orban, asserting:“. . . the reason that E.U. leaders have criticized Orban as authoritarian is that he has embarked on an unabashed and explicit effort to shift Hungary away from the traditions of liberal democracy, in which power is assigned through free and fair elections. Orban is criticized as authoritarian because he has embraced autocracy.”Tucker Carlson conducted an interview of Hungary's Prime Minister a few days ago. See Fox News Article, titled, “Hungary's Viktor Orban tells Tucker Carlson: ‘Western liberals can't accept’ right-wing dissent.” During the interview, the Prime Minister said in pertinent part:“‘The Western liberals cannot accept that inside the Western civilization, there is a conservative national alternative which is more successful at everyday life, at the level of them—the liberal ones,’ he said. ‘That's the reason why they criticize us. They are fighting for themselves, not against us. But we are an example that a country which is based on traditional values, on national identity, on the tradition of Christianity can be successful—sometimes more successful than a leftist-liberal government. . . . But you can’t say, okay, it’s a nice country. I would like to come and live here because it’s a nicer life, it is not a human right to come here. No way. It’s our land. It’s a nation, a community, family, history, tradition, language.’”These remarks drove the Marxists in the Press apoplectic with rage. They couldn't let this pass. How dare an American news host take control of the Marxist/Globalist narrative, and attack their unholy Radical Left Gospel of “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion!”And they let loose their venom on both Orban and Carlson, and, by extension, on American conservatives, as well—those Americans who have the audacity to cherish their history, heritage, culture, and Judeo-Christian ethical foundation and a free Constitutional Republic that the founders of the Nation bequeathed to America's descendants. The New York Times' posted two Op-Ed pieces on the matter, both of which were published in the newspaper on August 6, and 7 2021, respectively. One article deserves especial attention, for its discussion of an essay by George Orwell, ‘Notes On Nationalism,’ That article by New York Times Op-Ed Columnist, Jamelle Bouie, sports the sarcastic title, “Tucker Carlson Has a New Hero,”—a title that manages to convey in six words, the author's contempt for both Fox News Host, Carlson, and Hungary's Prime Minister, Orban. Jamelle's Bouie's article is, though, not to be remarked upon for the unrestrained disdain in which he holds Carlson and Orban, of which the Op-Ed elicits much, but rather, for its attack on the notion of ‘nationalism,’ which Bouie, perceives as contrary to the spirit of intellectualism and therefore, contrary to rational thought. And he sees the expression of nationalist fervor as a thing as relevant in today's world as corsets and buggy whips and as worthy of emulation as the Dictators of history that Bouie ties to the term. To support his attack on ‘nationalism,’ as something to be despised, he cites George Orwell—but not Orwell's famed novel, ‘1984,’ much-cited today by Progressives, Marxists, Anarchists, and the like, on the Leftside of the political spectrum, and by those on the Right of the political spectrum. Bouie cites, instead, a lesser-known work, a short essay, titled, ‘Notes On Nationalism,’ for the proposition that Orwell considered ‘nationalism’ as anathema to rational thought. But, he made a point of asserting ‘nationalism’ to be a fault as much among the intelligentsia as among the common man.For Orwell, ‘nationalism’ is tied to a narrowness of thought and perception which therefore admits a multitude of sins. But for all that, the term is vague in meaning as is the term ‘patriotism’ which, for Orwell, is a thing to be lauded, not despised, although, here, in the United States at this particular time, the Neo-Marxists do not draw a distinction between the two, unlike Orwell, as the emulation of both is despised by the Neo-Marxists. Orwell writes,“Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.”It is not hard to see that, in our own Country, the Neo-Marxists at once will dismiss their insatiable desire, even lust, for the acquiring of absolute power for themselves, and are therefore nationalists, in a true Orwellian sense, and eschew any notion they are patriots, as that notion is tied inextricably to the American Revolution of 1776, which they revolt against, as they definitely have no devotion to the United States as a free Constitutional Republic, and they definitely do not believe the American way of life to be the best in the world given their desire to dismantle every vestige of the past and to rewrite history in accordance with their mythology. And, since they do indeed have wish to force Marxist Collectivism in this Country and world-wide, they can neither considered to be ‘patriots’ in the Orwellian sense, which happens to be consistent with the sense of the word that America's Conservatives ascribe to.In that Essay, ‘Notes On Nationalism,’ George Orwell further explicates the meaning of ‘nationalism’. He says, “A nationalist is one who thinks solely, or mainly, in terms of competitive prestige. He may be a positive or a negative nationalist – that is, he may use his mental energy either in boosting or in denigrating – but at any rate his thoughts always turn on victories, defeats, triumphs and humiliations. He sees history, especially contemporary history, as the endless rise and decline of great power units, and every event that happens seems to him a demonstration that his own side is on the up-grade and some hated rival is on the down-grade. But finally, it is important not to confuse nationalism with mere worship of success. The nationalist does not go on the principle of simply ganging up with the strongest side. On the contrary, having picked his side, he persuades himself that it is the strongest, and is able to stick to his belief even when the facts are overwhelmingly against him. Nationalism is power-hunger tempered by self-deception. Every nationalist is capable of the most flagrant dishonesty, but he is also – since he is conscious of serving something bigger than himself – unshakeably certain of being in the right.”But, is this exposition on the meaning of ‘nationalism’ not an apt description for the political failings of the Neo-Marxist? And, as for the idea of flagrant dishonesty and self-deception that marks the Marxists' inner thoughts and outer actions, we can add that the Neo-Marxists are unabashed, sanctimonious hypocrites whose tenets and precepts aren't even internally consistent and coherent.The New York Times Op-Ed writer, Jamelle Bouie, chides Tucker Carlson for admiring Hungary, and says that this is form of nationalism referred to as transferred nationalism, a term that Orwell coins. But is that so wrong? In fact Tucker Carlson only points to Hungary as an exemplary model because it alludes to a United States that existed for well over 200 years, a United States existing as a free Constitutional Republic, a Republic grounded in liberty, where is not a mere word, but reigns supreme, a Republic where the American people themselves, and only they, are the sole sovereign ruler, power, and authority in the Nation, over the Federal Government and those who serve in it, at the pleasure of the American people, as the servants of the people, not their overseers. It is this Country, grounded in the tenets of Individualism that the Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist abhors and seeks to change both here and abroad; indeed, seeks to transform the entire structure of Western Civilization, grounded on the concept of the nation-state. The Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist elite seek to evoke a horrific inter-nationalism or trans-nationalism to replace each independent, sovereign nation-state, and to inflict their radical makeover of Western political, social, economic, and juridical structures to reflect their warped philosophy; and they intend for that philosophy to embrace and shape the entire world, or at least that substantial portion of it included in the domain of Western Civilization. The world they envision is one in which one's every thought and conduct is conditioned and controlled; a world of incessant surveillance, in every sphere of influence, public and private, within the home and outside it; a world that tortures and subjugates body and spirit and that destroys mind and reason and will.The Neo-Marxist is a textbook case example of George Orwell's nationalist—an internationalist mindset that seeks to remake the entire world in accord with its tenets and precepts, and that will suffer no contrary viewpoint; will tolerate no dissenting voice; will abide no demonstration of uniqueness, of individuality; that will brook no interference, no opposition. The Neo-Marxist is one so enamored with him or herself—so certain of the truth of his or her beliefs, and so convinced of the perfection of the morality that undergirds those beliefs, that debate, any debate, is deemed to be unnecessary and superfluous, or worse, to admit of blasphemy or heresy, and must not be entertained, lest the purity of Marxism be contaminated and one's mind be confounded by impure thoughts. One must submit to the orthodoxy or be crushed into submission. This is nationalism as internationalism, transnationalism—the embrace of nationalism as universalism to overtake, overshadow, overpower every other system of belief, on any conceivable topic—Marxism, this new Neo-Marxism, not Classic Marxism, will shape any topic; have something to say about any subject, however prosaic or abstruse; and those entrusted to define and interpret this new Marxism are the lofty Priests of the new Marxism, those who inhabit the highest Caste, and woe be to that person who dares to disagree or, worse, to interfere with the musings of these High-Lord Muck-a-Mucks.Orwell writes,“As nearly as possible, no nationalist ever thinks, talks, or writes about anything except the superiority of his own power unit. It is difficult if not impossible for any nationalist to conceal his allegiance. The smallest slur upon his own unit, or any implied praise of a rival organization, fills him with uneasiness which he can only relieve by making some sharp retort. “Every nationalist is haunted by the belief that the past can be altered. He spends part of his time in a fantasy world in which things happen as they should – in which, for example, the Spanish Armada was a success or the Russian Revolution was crushed in 1918 – and he will transfer fragments of this world to the history books whenever possible. Much of the propagandist writing of our time amounts to plain forgery. Material facts are suppressed, dates altered, quotations removed from their context and doctored so as to change their meaning. Events which, it is felt, ought not to have happened are left unmentioned and ultimately denied.”All nationalists have the power of not seeing resemblances between similar sets of facts. . . . Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits, but according to who does them, and there is almost no kind of outrage – torture, the use of hostages, forced labour, mass deportations, imprisonment without trial, forgery, assassination, the bombing of civilians – which does not change its moral colour when it is committed by ‘our’ side. [Think of last Summer's riots in Marxist-led Cities and States].“Every nationalist is haunted by the belief that the past can be altered. He spends part of his time in a fantasy world in which things happen as they should – in which, for example, the Spanish Armada was a success or the Russian Revolution was crushed in 1918 – and he will transfer fragments of this world to the history books whenever possible. Much of the propagandist writing of our time amounts to plain forgery. Material facts are suppressed, dates altered, quotations removed from their context and doctored so as to change their meaning. Events which, it is felt, ought not to have happened are left unmentioned and ultimately denied. . . . [P]ropaganda is, of course, to influence contemporary opinion, but those who rewrite history do probably believe with part of their minds that they are actually thrusting facts into the past. “Indifference to objective truth is encouraged by the sealing-off of one part of the world from another, which makes it harder and harder to discover what is actually happening. There can often be a genuine doubt about the most enormous events. . . . One has no way of verifying the facts, one is not even fully certain that they have happened, and one is always presented with totally different interpretations from different sources. . . . The general uncertainty as to what is really happening makes it easier to cling to lunatic beliefs. Since nothing is ever quite proved or disproved, the most unmistakable fact can be impudently denied. Moreover, although endlessly brooding on power, victory, defeat, revenge, the nationalist is often somewhat uninterested in what happens in the real world. What he wants is to feel that his own unit is getting the better of some other unit, and he can more easily do this by scoring off an adversary than by examining the facts to see whether they support him. All nationalist controversy is at the debating-society level. It is always entirely inconclusive since each contestant invariably believes himself to have won the victory. Some nationalists are not far from schizophrenia, living quite happily amid dreams of power and conquest which have no connexion with the physical world.”Jamelle Bouie should be careful of whom he cites for support when he demeans and debases a reputable news host and the Prime Minister of a Nation.Bouie defers to the Neoliberal Globalist propagandist messaging that “Orbán's Hungary is corrupt, repressive and authoritarian, a place where democracy is little more than window dressing and the state exists to plunder the public on behalf of a tiny ruling elite.” But consider what Hungary when through in the mid-Twentieth Century, as reported in History.com:“A spontaneous national uprising that began 12 days before in Hungary is viciously crushed by Soviet tanks and troops on November 4, 1956. Thousands were killed and wounded and nearly a quarter-million Hungarians fled the country.The problems in Hungary began in October 1956, when thousands of protesters took to the streets demanding a more democratic political system and freedom from Soviet oppression. In response, Communist Party officials appointed Imre Nagy, a former premier who had been dismissed from the party for his criticisms of Stalinist policies, as the new premier. Nagy tried to restore peace and asked the Soviets to withdraw their troops. The Soviets did so, but Nagy then tried to push the Hungarian revolt forward by abolishing one-party rule. He also announced that Hungary was withdrawing from the Warsaw Pact (the Soviet bloc’s equivalent of NATO).On November 4, 1956, Soviet tanks rolled into Budapest to crush, once and for all, the national uprising. Vicious street fighting broke out, but the Soviets’ great power ensured victory. At 5:20 a.m., Hungarian Prime Minister Imre Nagy announced the invasion to the nation in a grim, 35-second broadcast, declaring: “Our troops are fighting. The Government is in place.” Within hours, though, Nagy sought asylum at the Yugoslav Embassy in Budapest. He was captured shortly thereafter and executed two years later. Nagy’s former colleague and imminent replacement, János Kádár, who had been flown secretly from Moscow to the city of Szolnok, 60 miles southeast of the capital, prepared to take power with Moscow’s backing.The Soviet action stunned many people in the West. Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev had pledged a retreat from the Stalinist policies and repression of the past, but the violent actions in Budapest suggested otherwise. An estimated 2,500 Hungarians died and 200,000 more fled as refugees. Sporadic armed resistance, strikes and mass arrests continued for months thereafter, causing substantial economic disruption. Inaction on the part of the United States angered and frustrated many Hungarians. Voice of America radio broadcasts and speeches by President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles had recently suggested that the United States supported the “liberation” of “captive peoples” in communist nations. Yet, as Soviet tanks bore down on the protesters, the United States did nothing beyond issuing public statements of sympathy for their plight.” The people of Hungary know their history, and their parents and grandparents knew tyranny firsthand and the history of brutal Soviet oppression and subjugation won't be forgotten. It was no less the oppression of an independent sovereign Nation that is once again under attack, but not from Orbán. Rather this oppression is coming from the EU. It may not be through military force that the EU's Globalists Transnational Government, dictating policy from Brussels, has sought to oppress Hungary and the other nations of the EU that have opposed the usurpation of foreign authority on national sovereignty, but these overseers in Brussels have no less sought unlawfully to impose their iron rule upon Hungary, and the people of Hungary rejected that. Is it so wrong to admire one Nation's resolve against tyranny? But, Leftist writers like Jamelle Bouie are obviously oblivious to what it is in a Country that truly constitutes a trend, a direction toward tyranny. Bouie says,

“But at this moment in American life, it’s conservatives who have set their sights abroad. Parts of the movement have even adopted a kind of anti-Americanism, a contempt for the United States as it exists. These conservatives still call themselves “patriots” — and disdain their opponents as “traitors” — but theirs is an abstract loyalty to an idealized country. “When they contemplate the actual United States,” Beauchamp wrote in Vox, “they are filled with scorn.”

It makes sense that as this tendency develops, so too does the yearning for a country that can be hailed as a model and a lodestar — the soaring and gilded counterpoint to our fallen and decadent society.”

But that too is projection. And sooner or later, the conservatives who hail Hungary under Orban as an attractive alternative to the United States will see that their vision of that country is as false as their image of this one is.”

“Projection”? Really? That notion is absurd. What it is that draws Americans' attention to Hungary, and why many Americans admire Hungary, is not due to the psychological device of “projection” that the Times' writer Jamelle Bouie recites in his Op-Ed, but to the fact that this small Nation has taken a stand against unlawful usurpation of power by the EU, as political power belongs solely to Hungary, and rightfully so since Hungary is an independent sovereign Nation. It IS Hungary's will to resist unlawful encroachment of power that Americans find a thing to emulate. As Hungary has gained its independence from the Neoliberal Globalist forces in Brussels that dare to crush Hungary's independence, the United States has begun a process of decline in all aspects, politically, socially, economically, militarily, geopolitically, juridically, as those same Neoliberal Globalist forces, together with the Neo-Marxist rabble, seeks to unwind all sovereign, independent Western nation-states and to subsume them in a new transnational world order. The Neoliberal Globalist (these so-called) ‘elites’ and Internationalist Neo-Marxists have taken their cue from the EU, which is what they emulate and seek to replicate in the U.S.: A transnationalist governmental scheme, embracing all the major Western nation-states. In this scheme, there exist no national borders and no defined national identity. These powerful forces that crush seek no less than the annihilation of a powerful, independent sovereign Nation-State, one framed as a free Constitutional Republic in which the citizenry are sole sovereign, and whose power and authority as sole sovereign over Nation and Government derive from and are grounded in a carefully considered, extraordinary Constitution, establishing a Government with clearly defined and demarcated powers, all the rest of which, including Natural Rights existing intrinsically in Man, several of which are codified in the Nation's Bill of Rights, are reserved alone to the several States and to the People. This, the Leftists' Internationalist Marxist intellectual elite and the Neoliberal Globalist elites intend to obliterate. They see this as a good thing and with Donald Trump who sought to preserve the Nation in the form the founders created, callously swept aside through a rigged election, the forces that crush have wasted no time dismantling the U.S. Constitution, erasing all vestige of the Nation's past, destroying the Nation's culture along with the Nation's Judeo-Christian ethic, insinuating itself into every political, quasi-political, and semi-political structure, and institution of State, Federal, and local Government, compelling all private organizations and businesses to prostrate themselves to the new world order to be, deliberately destabilizing society, confounding the public, and denying to the common man the unfettered exercise of his or her natural Rights. This, they see as ‘Liberal Democracy’, something to be applauded.But, the trend toward ‘Liberal Democracy’ is nothing more than a seeming innocuous code for the annihilation of the Nation-State, and the creation of a new political, social, economic, and cultural structure to embrace the entirety of western civilization. The depth and breadth of this audacious effort to reconfigure the entirety of Western Civilization is not confined to Europe or to the U.S. or to the Commonwealth Nations. It embraces the entirety of Western Civilization—it amounts to the most audacious reconfiguration of Western Civilization yet conceived, resulting not in freeing the populations of the West, but, perversely, subjugating those populations, reducing them to abject poverty and to the strictest of control. And to this day, it is remarkable the ease to which the Press and social media redefine concepts or create new concepts out of whole cloth and refer to freedom fighters, such as Orban of Hungary, and Mateusz Morawiecki of Poland, and, yes, Donald Trump, too, as autocrats and despots and authoritarians.It is easy for the seditious Press to point to specific leaders who seek to save their Nations from the insidious encroachment of international Marxism and Neoliberal Globalism, for the public never sees the faces of the true rulers. They guard their secrecy jealously. The public only sees the faces of their current crop of puppets—whom their propaganda organs extol as righteous beacons of “liberal democracy: people like Angela Merkel of Germany, Emmanuel Macron of France, the European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen; and other western puppet leaders of the secretive ruling “elite” Rothschild clan, et.al., including marionettes such as Justin Trudeau of Canada, Jacinda Ardern of New Zealand; and, in our own Country, don’t you know—the decrepit, cardboard cutout mannequins of the secretive “elites,” Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.The U.S. is being similarly attacked by the toady media outlets of the Neoliberal Globalists' hidden leaders, and the U.S. is headed for the same usurpation of Nation-State independence as the nations of the EU, despite the apparent pushback in some countries. This unlawful usurpation of power is happening simultaneously throughout the globe.The eventual shakeout, if it comes to pass, will see the political, social, economic, cultural, and juridical structures of government much different than in the past few centuries. The “nation-state” construct will be dissolved. Through the embrace of and charade of economic Neoliberal globalism and Neo-Marxism, the world will be carved up between two ascendant unstoppable totalitarian regimes: on the one hand, a vast Communist Chinese empire and, and, on the other, a reconstituted, completely transformed West, brought under a single, uniform, unified, monolithic supra-national totalitarian governing structure. An uneasy truce will exist between the two, with fractures occurring from time to time, as inevitable flareups and squabbles between the two salient empires occur in parts of Asia, Africa, and the Middle East.For, a reconstituted, completely transformed West, brought under a single, uniform, unified, monolithic supra-national totalitarian governing structure to be able to successfully, withstand, if at all, the military, economic, and geopolitical might of Communist China, the West's Neoliberal Globalist elites understand that the linchpin for creating a formidable transnational totalitarian Western empire or bloc rests with bringing the EU into the fold of the U.S. and likely that would require Russia as well. China will continue its attempts to neutralize the military and economic power of the U.S. The unleashing of the Communist Chinese Coronavirus plague bioweapon on the world—predominately targeting the U.S., an act of war if there ever was one—has devastated the economy of the U.S. and has provided the impetus for exerting Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist control over the thought and action of the citizenry. The Neoliberal Globalist “elites” were likely in on this which might explain the odd reticence in engaging in a serious investigation of China’s conduct from the inception: involving gain of function research, of which Dr. Anthony Fauci was clearly aware of, and has much to explain to the American people. See, e.g., Fox News story on this, and Wall Street Journal report. This would suggest that the Neoliberal Globalist elites, along with the Neo-Marxists in Congress knowingly, willingly compromised the security of the Nation to amass personal wealth. In other words, the Globalists in the U.S. allowed China to treat their Companies, along with the U.S. Government as a commodity to be traded like any other commodity on the open market. China preyed upon this weakness in America's business and Government leaders; an insatiable lust to amass personal wealth even at the expense of the well-being of the Nation. The well-being of the American public and compliance with our Nation's laws and Constitution apparently doesn't factor into the equation. They have sold out the Nation. Communist China is the Nation's enemy, not merely an economic, military, and geopolitical competitor. Article 3, Sections 3 and 4 of the U.S. Constitution sets forth that:“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.”What might be done were Congress itself and the Executive Branch of Government complicit in committing treason? Who is it that might give testimony under oath against a member of Congress or of others in High Office? The Constitution doesn't seem to provide for this eventuality, given the sheer scope and audaciousness of the offense. In fact, it is only through the effects of and tremendous scale of the harm done that any American should see the harm that has been done to the Nation, the U.S. Constitution, and to the American people. But, perhaps it is precisely because of the massive scale of the harm that many Americans fail to take appreciable notice of the extent of it or, one might say that these events are less to be construed as incalculably horrific human misery compounded one tragedy + one tragedy + one tragedy, and so on, each to be pondered, but merely to be seen as a matter of banal Government statistics. In an article published on the website reason on January 7, 2009, the writer, Ronald Bailey, writes:“ ‘The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic.’That's what Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin allegedly once said to U.S. ambassador Averill Harriman. And Stalin was an expert on the topic since his regime killed as many 43 million people. It turns out that the mustachioed murderer may have been expressing an acute insight into human psychology. Earlier this week, the Washington Post's always interesting Department of Human Behavior columnist Shankar Vedantam reported on the research of University of Oregon professor Paul Slovic who looked at how people respond to humanitarian tragedies. As Vedantam explains:In a rational world, we should care twice as much about a tragedy affecting 100 people as about one affecting 50. We ought to care 80,000 times as much when a tragedy involves 4 million lives rather than 50. But Slovic has proved in experiments that this is not how the mind works.When a tragedy claims many lives, we often care less than if a tragedy claims only a few lives. When there are many victims, we find it easier to look the other way.Virtually by definition, the central feature of humanitarian disasters and genocide is that there are a large number of victims’‘The first life lost is very precious, but we don't react very much to the difference between 88 deaths and 87 deaths," Slovic said in an interview. ‘You don't feel worse about 88 than you do about 87.’”The inexorable weakening of the U.S. economy, the death of hundreds of thousands in this Country due to the unleashing of the Chinese Communist Coronavirus in the U.S., whether through reckless or depraved indifference or through cold, calculated deliberation, and as its after-effects are still much with us, and with the rapid unraveling of the social order through the machinations of a well-coordinated and well-funded Neo-Marxist reeducation campaign affecting every institution of our Nation, even our military, and through this Harris-Biden Administration's deliberate, calculated unleashing of millions of destitute illegal aliens into and throughout our Country, many of them diseased—all this human misery and all this major calamity confronting the Country in a Post-Trump Nation bespeaks treachery to Country, to Constitution, and to the citizenry by myriads of humanoid creatures in High Government Office, in the Press, in social media, in our Nation's institution of public education, in high finance, and in academia, that is of another order of magnitude.A backlash, which the Neoliberal Globalists and Neo-Marxist Internationalists must surely have seen coming, is unlikely to forestall the inexorable dissolution of a free Constitutional Republic, unless Republican legislators—and not the Cheney/Romney/Kinzinger et.al. sort—regain control of Congress in 2022, and the Constitution remains intact. Otherwise, this Nation will continue down the road to dissolution—its skeletal remains to be consolidated with and absorbed into the skeletal remains of the other major Western Nation States. But in the Nation’s death throes a bloodbath is likely to ensue. Americans will not readily surrender their firearms. It is because the U.S. has a well-drafted Constitution—and the longest surviving Constitution of the modern Nation-State and one grounded on the tenets of Individualism—that the adherents of Collectivism, i.e., the Neo-Marxists and Neoliberal Globalist elites find frustratingly and confoundingly difficult to contend with, despite the powers they wield in America and those they continue to gather up.Enough Americans, tens of millions of Americans—fortunate to have been spared academic indoctrination—resist attempts to dismantle a Free Constitutional Republic—all this in spite of the ever-increasing usurpation of power of the federal Government; the disintegration of a truly independent Press; the entrenchment of Neo-Marxist dogma in society; and the rabid attempt to federalize Constitutional structures historically belonging to and reserved to the several States, under the Tenth Amendment: control of public education; protecting the public health’s and providing for the public’s safety; conducting elections free from federal government interference; making marriage laws; punishing criminals; establishing local governments; and providing police and fire protection.Some powers, and the most important of late, relate to the controlling of borders. The Federal Government has the duty to protect the Nation’s borders from invasion. To the contrary, the Harris-Biden is openly inviting tidal waves of illegal aliens into our Country many of whom bear infectious diseases and deadly exotic pathogens; most of whom are destitute; all of whom are freeloaders; and too many of whom are murderous, psychopathic drug and sex traffickers or otherwise, incorrigible common criminals, including rapists, muggers, arsonists, child molesters, and other assorted lunatics.The present open border policy is not only inconsistent with federal statute it is a violation of the President’s oath of Office under Article 1, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution, and it is a violation of duties of both the President and Congress under Article 4, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution.Yet the present inhabitants of the Executive Branch of Government pretend the Constitution is infinitely malleable and can mean whatever they wish it to mean, or they simply dismiss the Constitution out-of-hand. That raises the question: who is the Chief Executive of the Nation? Article 2 of the Constitution makes clear that there is, at any one time, one and only one Chief Executive. And the Chief Executive IS the ultimate decider of policy of the Executive Branch. That person is expected to give Orders, not take them.The present occupier of the seat of U.S. President, Joe Biden, is merely the titular Head of State whether in fact he was legitimately elected U.S. President. And there is considerable reasonable doubt as to that. But one thing about Biden, there can be no reasonable doubt and that has to do with whom it is who is making the decisions.No one honestly believes this sorry excuse for the Head of the Greatest Nation on Earth is making any decision for himself apart from deciding the flavor of ice cream he has a hankering for on any given day. For serious doubt exists whether the man is capable of rational thought any longer when it comes to serious matters of State, or whether Biden truly cares about, or even has the capacity to care about, heavy matters of State.And Congress is no better. All too many members of Congress treat the blueprint of the Nation as an ossified relic that ought to be and at some point in time must be formally discarded, and in the interim these Marxists interpret the Constitution Congress in any fanciful way they wish, or otherwise ignore the Constitution’s strictures outright, especially those strictures involving that aspect of the Constitution referred to as the Bill of Rights.We know the Neo-Marxist Congress and the true policymakers in the Executive Branch wish to scrap the Bill of Rights. They do not conceive of the Rights as codifications of natural law anyway. They do not accept the Bill of Rights as a set of fundamental, primordial rights existent in man before the creation of the Republic.Americans are witnessing the rapid decline and ultimate cessation of sacred Rights hitherto exercised. They are witnessing the de facto repeal of basic liberties that cannot lawfully be repealed or denied but are being de facto repealed or otherwise denied. And that portends the inevitable demise of the Republic; for once the Bill of Rights goes the Nation goes out with it. And there is evidence galore for this. We have already seen the Fourth Amendment's dictate against unreasonable searches and seizures essentially eradicated due to Congressional lack of oversight of both Government and of the Internet media monopolies and other technology companies that has resulted in the vacuuming up of every iota of electronic communication, and the attacks against the First Amendment's Right of Free Speech is well underway through censorship of books and curtailing of information on the world web that doesn't comport with the Neo-Marxist dogma and the fluid notions of liberal democracy that the Neoliberal Globalist elites wish to convey to the public. And the public is just beginning to obtain a glimpse of a concerted plan to curtail civilian citizen ownership of firearms, contrary to the dictates of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Implementation of this plan will probably begin in earnest in the coming months by Congressional Marxists, and the Harris-Biden Administration.Even during the first few days of the Harris-Biden Administration, Americans have seen the issuance of dozens of executive orders and other executive actions that the storefront mannequin Biden signed off one after the other. Congress, too, simply, is indifferent to or is defiant of the very laws it has enacted and is contemptuous of the dictates of the U.S. Constitution.The Marxist-controlled Democrat Party Congress is on board with or is one with the Harris-Biden Administration on its single-minded goal to dismantle the Republic. And most of the Republicans have themselves acquiesced or capitulated to or are in league with the Neo-Marxist game plan, if surreptitiously.As events unfold, it won’t be long before the U.S. becomes a hollowed-out shell of a Nation-State itself, not unlike most of those nations of the EU—ripe for a merger with the EU or whatever the EU eventually morphs into. And the remains of the major commonwealth Nations— Great Britain, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada will follow suit.Six months into the Harris-Biden Administration and we the Anti-American Neo-Marxist Counterrevolution in full swing. The Nation is rapidly transitioning from a healthy, independent sovereign Nation-State and free Constitutional Republic borne of the American Revolution of 1776 into a political, economic, social, and moral decrepitude. Tens of millions of Americans know this to be true.But, having unceremoniously ushered Donald Trump from High Office through the application of massive, unprecedented, and outrageous electoral chicanery, the Neo-Marxists and immensely powerful, well-organized, and incredibly wealthy Neoliberal Globalists are moving apace to destabilize society through a policy of open borders, control of the Federal Government, the Press, social media, the banks, the business sector, many State Governments, Marxist organizations such as the ACLU, and so on and so forth.At some point, Americans will have to take a stand to halt the plunder of their Nation and of their sacred Constitution, and of their sacred, inviolate Rights. Either they take a stand, or they shall lose everything and for all time: Country, Constitution, Liberty, their very Soul. And of that, there can be no reasonable doubt.___________________________________*Article substantially expanded, August 8, 2021___________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

7/28/21 7/28/21

IS THE SECOND AMENDMENT RACIST? SOME “THINKERS” TELL US IT IS.

ANOTHER CRAZY MARXIST NOTION ABOUT THE ORIGIN OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT

PART THREE

“Gun violence is a public health crisis in communities of color, and the Second Amendment has roots in slavery.” —opening remark in an article titled, “Racial equity agenda must include gun control,” as published in the Leftist website, “Crosscut,” on March 8, 2021.In tandem with the incendiary myth of “critical race theory,” thrust on the public and on our children by a Marxist-controlled Federal Government, a Marxist-controlled public educational system, a seditious, legacy Press, a Marxist-inspired Press, and an arrogant Marxist academia, there is the erroneous and dangerous myth by the Nation’s Obstructors and Destructors that the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights has its roots in racism: “The Second Amendment is deeply rooted in America’s racist past, and fundamentally connected to the killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and others. But to make this connection, one must be a “strict constructionist,” someone who looks beyond the Constitution’s written word to the underlying motives of the founders.At the Second Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, in 1787, Southern delegates were fearful the U.S. Constitution they were drafting would restrict their right to own, sell and transport slaves. In response, Northern delegates crafted a document in which nearly one-quarter of the clauses appeased the slaveholding South, and the words “slave” or “slavery” never appeared. The Second Amendment was key among these appeasements.Patrick Henry, a Virginia slaveholder, opposed ratifying the Constitution, fearing it would cede state control of slave patrols (politely called “militias” by the founders) to the federal government. James Madison, favoring ratification, said in a debate with Henry, “If the country be invaded, a state may go to war, but cannot suppress insurrection. If there should happen an insurrection of slaves, the country cannot be said to be invaded. They cannot, therefore, suppress it without the interposition of Congress.”Take either side, Henry’s or Madison’s, local or federal, and the same fundamental issue remained: preserve slavery at all costs.” Id., supraThis, in essence, as set forth in Ford’s article, is the rationale behind the myth perpetrated and perpetuated by America’s Neo-Marxist zealots, i.e.: “Since the Second Amendment is to be perceived as inherently racist, it must be abolished.”On its face, this is a bizarre, absurd notion, hard to take seriously, but a dangerous one nonetheless because there are many in this Nation who do take it seriously. It is bubbling up and through the Nation, permeating the Nation's universities, seeping into the grade schools and high schools, embracing, as well, the equally ludicrous idea that the United States is a Nation of white Race Oppressors and of black slave Oppressed. And, although the Neo-Marxists are loath, these days, to use the phrase, “Critical Race Theory,” in the Press and on broadcast and cable news, given the groundswell against this propaganda, now that the public is well-aware of the intent of the Marxists to indoctrinate the Nation's youth, it cannot be denied that “Critical Race Theory” lies at the core of the “1619 Project,” which IS the new comprehensive lesson plan to replace the traditional teaching of history in our Nation's public schools. “Critical Race Theory” is the salient idea at the core of the Neo-Marxist 1619 Project. See article in CATO.This new attack against the Second Amendment is predicated on the inane theory that the right of the people to keep and bear arms was created by Racist white men to keep oppressed black men enslaved. This idea is of a piece with everything else that Neo-Marxists fault America for: the entirety of our Nation's history, heritage, and culture that they seek to tear down, to pave the way for the shell of what it remains of a once-proud, powerful, and wealthy and healthy, and exuberant independent, sovereign Nation and a free, sovereign people, to be merged into a transformative, transnationalist, Neo-Marxist, Globalist political, economic, social, and cultural governmental scheme, reducing the citizenry as a whole to a sad existence of poverty, misery, and, curiously enough, slavery, too.But of all the schemes falling under the irrepressible, boisterous Neo-Marxist mantra of “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion,” it is the elimination of the Second Amendment that is absolutely essential to the Neo-Marxist game plan if their Counterrevolution to the American Revolution of 1776 is to have a concrete effect and lasting success. This little but insistent fact about the need to get rid of the fundamental, unalienable, immutable, illimitable right codified in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is papered over by America’s Neo-Marxists.Claiming the Second Amendment has its roots in racism is simply one more avenue of attack America’s Neo-Marxist leverage against a Country forged on the tenets of Individualism and on a Judeo-Christian Ethic, the predicate basis of the U.S. Constitution; the blueprint of a truly free Republic in which the American citizenry itself is the sole sovereign, and those that serve in Government are the Nation’s mere caretakers.Marxists will make any preposterous argument they can and will undertake any action they can get away with to undermine both a free Constitutional Republic and the indomitable spirit of the American people. And these Marxists are moving ahead quickly, clearly fearful of what the 2022 midterm elections foreordain. So, whether or not the Neo-Marxists believe the nonsense they spout is really beside the point. They apparently think that, or, perhaps, they simply hope that the majority of Americans will swallow this nonsense. And this will be the Marxists' downfall. They take it as axiomatic that most Americans are either uninterested, passive absorbers of banalities and inanities or are abject morons who will uncritically trust whatever it is they hear on the “news.” But this is part and parcel of Marxist thinking.

AS LONG AS AMERICANS REMAIN ARMED AND TRUE TO THEIR HISTORY, HERITAGE, CULTURE, AND MORAL PRECEPTS, AND REJECT, OUTRIGHT, THE INANITY OF THE MARXIST MESSAGING, THE MARXISTS WILL FAIL.

The concepts of a free Constitutional Republic, and a free, independent, sovereign Nation, and an American citizenry as the Nation’s sole sovereign were all borne of the American Revolution of 1776 and these concepts became concrete; a reality; the essential backbone of the United States of America. A free Constitutional Republic, and a free, independent, sovereign Nation, and an American citizenry as sole sovereign—are all seated in fact—resting in the psyche of the American citizenry, residing forever in ancestral memory; and are not so easily dislodged from ascendency, so long as the American people remain armed.It was firearms in the hands of steadfast Americans that won the American Revolution of 1776, and it will be by dint of firearms in the hands of steadfast, resolute, American citizens now, 250 years later, that Americans will be able to preserve their free Republic, their liberty, and their sovereignty against a horrific, usurpacious, rapacious, abrasive, sanctimonious Marxist-led Government; and against this Marxist Government’s fellow travelers in the legacy Press, in social media, in academia, in sports and entertainment; and against an astonishingly gullible, insular, malignant Marxist mob. Mammoth evil forces have a firm hold over our Country, metastasizing rapidly throughout its length, and breadth, and depth.Only through the preservation of an armed citizenry will Americans be able to successfully resist this Anti-American Marxist Counterrevolution of 21^st Century. And these Marxist Anti-American Counterrevolutionaries know this all too well. They are very aware of the indomitability and invincibility of an armed citizenry, and they know they must crush Americans' resolve if they are to succeed in their goal of annihilating every vestige of America's past.

A TRULY MONUMENTAL STRUGGLE IS UPON US.

Some Middle Class and Upper-Middle Class Americans who have bought into the myth that the Trump Presidency was the root of all evil—as foisted on the American people by a seditious, obsequious Press, a malevolent, audacious Democrat Party leadership and their hangers-on, by a pompous, academia, and by a rapacious, angry, rabid mob of Marxist and Anarchist BLM and ANTIFA types, and spoiled college-educated children well- trained and versed in the Marxist ideology, wearing the Marxism Badge as if it were a designer bracelet or necklace—are slowly but, assuredly, coming to their senses, discerning the full extent of their error, realizing they have been played for dupes all along, as they see what a Marxist-controlled Government, not the Trump Presidency, has wrought: common criminals, and lunatics, and psychopaths running amok; our Southern Border opened to over one million-plus illegal aliens, and murderous drug cartels, in clear violation of our our immigration laws, and many of these aliens infected with the Chinese Communist Coronavirus, and all of them being shipped, throughout our Country, by our own military; ICE agents and Custom and Border Protection agents being handcuffed, denied the ability to perform their federal statutory duties, requiring them to protect the Nation's borders and the interior or of our Country; community police officers throughout the Country thoroughly demoralized, defunded, and undermanned; the economy floundering through runaway inflation; millions of American citizens treated as pariahs in their own Country; our National Security threatened by a dangerous and emboldened Chinese Communist regime; the family unit and traditional religion being denigrated; the Marxist Harris-Biden Administration and the Marxist-Democrat Party getting set to pass a multi-trillion dollar give-away package to friendly State Governments so they can continue their profligate spending habits; destruction of our energy self-sufficiency under the guise of protecting the Climate. . . and on, and on. Many of these Middle and Upper-Middle Class households who claim a liberal-minded pedigree are leaving their Marxist States in droves, realizing too late that, voting into Office seemingly enlightened politicians, have, through their seemingly oh so lofty moral values transformed their communities into garbage dumps, and they leave the poorest families to contend with the mess as they leave for more idyllic areas in Florida, Texas, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho, and others, so they can destroy those States too, with their ostensibly well-meaning liberal attitudes. Soon there will be nowhere left for these people to move to. Hopefully, many more of these liberal, holy-than-thou people, will come to their senses and think twice before voting more Marxist-Democrats into Office.The threat to a free Republic and to Democratic principles was never threatened through Trump's Presidency. He sought to preserve the Nation in the form the founders gave to us and he was moving the Nation in that direction after the disaster wrought by his immediate predecessor, Barack Obama, and no less by George Bush and Bill Clinton. It was, rather, in the feverish rant of those who sought to rid themselves of Trump, knowing the threat he posed to them and to their goal of a one-world Marxist Governmental scheme, in which Americans would be reduced to poverty and subjugation, that the continuation of a free Constitutional Republic and the application of Democratic principles was, and, at present, IS, truly threatened. These Marxists have been attacking the Bill of Rights head-on, unabashedly, incessantly, relentlessly, remorselessly. And, with the aid of their fellow travelers in the Press, and in social media, they have been succeeding on several fronts.Speech is censored; the fundamental Right to be free from the insidious, pervasive, perfidious encroachment and insinuation of the Government and of monolithic, mercenary corporations, now operating at the behest of Government, into the private life of the citizenry is continuously threatened, and may be difficult if well-nigh impossible to safeguard against. But will Americans surrender their access to firearms? To date, despite decades of attempts by the Marxists to effectively defeat the fundamental, unalienable, natural, and sacred Right of the people to keep and bear arms, these Marxists have been able to dislodge firearms from the civilian citizenry and have been unable to change Americans' attitudes and perceptions toward firearms and toward the absolute right of Americans to own and possess them for purpose of self-defense and to thwart the onset of tyranny.Yet, Marxists in Congress and the Marxist Harris-Biden Administration continue to flaunt both statute and the U.S. Constitution, with abandon, and they are indefatigable in their intent to wrest Americans’ firearms from them. But can they meet with success on that front, as they have met with success on denial of Americans' Right to be free from Unreasonable Searches and Seizures under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and as they are meeting with apparent success in denying Americans' their fundamental Right of free Speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as the Government, through a few compliant and sympathetic technology monopolists, has made substantial inroads in undercutting Americans' Right to speak their mind, free from Government and social media interference?Americans are beset by tidal forces intent on destroying not only the structural foundations of the Nation as a free Constitutional Republic, along with the Nation’s long-standing political, social, and educational institutions, but are intent on destroying the very ancestral memory of the people of the United States. To that end, the Marxists find it necessary to undercut the Bill of Rights and especially to annihilate the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms, which is codified in the Second Amendment.The existence of an armed citizenry is antithetical to those who espouse Collectivism, in any of its many iterations, e.g., be it Marxism, Socialism, Communism on the Left or Fascism on the Right; for, Collectivism requires subjugation of the masses to the will of a strong centralized authority. An armed citizenry, in its very inception, poses an imminent, intrinsic threat to that centralized authority and so cannot be tolerated.The political, social, economic, financial, cultural, and juridical structure of Government and society that this Nation's Anti-American Neo-Marxists envision and that they are working toward is grounded on the tenets of COLLECTIVISM.The Arbalest Quarrel has written extensively about the two polar-opposite ideologies, INDIVIDUALISM VERSUS COLLECTIVISM; meticulously laying out the specific precepts, principles, and tenets of both, laying bare the differences, demonstrating that there can be no compromise between the two ideologies.See, e.g., the article titled, “The Modern American Civil War: A Clash of Ideologies,” posted on our website on October 6, 2018. Is it any wonder that the present Grand Pretenders and Great Imposters Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, presiding in the Executive Suite of Government, along with their retinue of secretive policymakers, the true power brokers orchestrating and choreographing Joe Biden’s and Kamala Harris’ every move, would emulate the Authoritarian EU Government in Brussels, and would tread ever so cautiously when confronting the Communist Chinese Regime in Beijing, with whom they share a similar goal: complete mastery over their respective populations?And, slowly, inexorably, they are drawing a noose around the ultimate failsafe against tyranny: the right of the people to keep and bear arms.To date, the Marxists have been working gingerly around the edges in attacking the Second Amendment, since Biden and Harris, through chicanery, assumed the Article 2 Authority. But, as with every other aspect of American life and as with every sacred fundamental, unalienable right that Americans cherish, they, through their secretive Marxist handlers, are assiduously going after civilian citizen ownership and possession of firearms and, of late, with much more than the usual customary jealous, audacious zeal. They are trying their damnedest to now tie the most cherished of Americans' rights—and the most important to the maintenance of a free Constitutional Republic and to the sovereignty of the American citizenry—to the ever familiar, noxious notion of “racism.” This latest charge is as repugnant as it is absurd.But will the power of the seditious, legacy Press and of the monopolists of social media and of the internet in fomenting and provoking substantial rage against the very notion of an armed citizenry, provide conditions sufficient for military and police action against tens of millions of armed Americans? And, what then? Will Americans “call or fold”?Whether the Marxist Counterrevolution to the American Revolution of 1776 yet succeeds in this Country, it will come down to that ultimate decision of a game of poker, but with the highest stakes on the table: Preservation of, or the loss of, a free Constitutional Republic and a free sovereign people.____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

7/3/21 7/3/21

ONLY THE PREPARED ARMED CITIZEN CAN DEFEND OUR FREE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC AGAINST THE MARXISTS

PART TWO

SOCIAL AND POLITICAL VOLATILITY AND UPHEAVAL IN AMERICA IS DELIBERATE

Perpetrating and perpetuating the myth of “systemic racism” in American society serves the Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist goal of creating volatility in society and social upheaval.The Harris-Biden Administration at the behest of their Neo-Marxist and Billionaire Globalist handlers, along with the Marxist Democrat Party leadership, need societal volatility—demand that volatility—if they are to succeed in overturning a free Constitutional Republic, transforming it into an obedient vessel of a in new Autocratic Marxist-Globalist world trans-superstate structure, spanning the entre globe.To that end, they have cunningly devised many strategies. One that they have had most success with involves the application of “race” and “racism” to everything Americans hold dear and holy, corrupting it, desecrating all of it—profanely, erroneously claiming that the very foundation of our Nation is rooted in the subjugation of Africans and their descendants.These Neo-Marxists have deliberately thrust on Americans a fairy tale surrounding slaves and slavery, claiming that race and racial identity is the defining feature of American society; that racism and the incitement of racial hatred are endemic to America; that “white extremism” and “white supremacism” are prevalent throughout society, endemic to the core of our Nation even though the fact of the matter is that white extremism and white supremacism is de minimis, representing no tenable threat to the stability of American society. Such instability and volatility that exists and is extant in the U.S. is that manufactured by Marxist Democrat Party leadership and the Harris-Biden Administration, itself, not by infinitesimally small and hardly influential groups like the KKK.The volatility and instability evident in society is a product of Government policy. It is seen in the Harris-Biden Administration’s open borders policy. It is seen in its dismissive attitude toward soaring violent crime permeating society and toward a curious permissive attitude held toward criminals and psychopathic and psychotic lunatics, given incredible latitude to prey on hapless, innocent Americans. And it is seen in the Administration’s cavalier attitude toward agitators belonging to rabid Marxist, Anarchist groups—in particular, “Black Lives Matter” and “Antifa” and other such groups—that have caused and continue to cause mayhem and substantial damage to the institutions of a free Republic. But, of extremist “racist” groups on the Right of the political spectrum, where are they? If the KKK and other “racist” hate groups have threatened a free Republic recently, where does evidence of the damage they cause exist? Answer: there is none. And of the January 6 disturbance at the U.S. Capitol Building, where does evidence exist of a “racist” motive; where does evidence of insurrection exist; a carefully designed, coordinated, and executed plan to take over the Government? Answer: There isn’t any.But Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, and her gang are busy at work manufacturing a narrative of white extremism and white racism behind the disturbance at the Capitol, even as such evidence THAT DOES EXIST, points to possible culpability on Pelosi’s own part in having allowed the disturbance to occur, so that she and the other Neo-Marxist Democrat leaders, along with the quiet acquiescence of the Republican Leaders, could use the disturbance as a pretext to institute autocratic actions against the entire Nation. See, e.g., article in en-volve and article in Forbes.The perpetration of, propagation of, and perpetuation the myth of “racism,” “race hatred,” “white extremism,” and “white supremacism” serves the Neo-Marxists’ and Neoliberal Globalists’ end goal: dismantling a free Republic and installing a Marxist totalitarian construct to replace it, to be merged eventually into a transformative transnational world governmental scheme.Thus, in propounding a basis to upend a free Constitutional Republic that Democrat Party Marxists and the Kamala Harris and Joe Biden marionettes desire to accomplish and fully intend to accomplish so long as they can maintain power, it behooves them to resort to chicanery to confuse Americans and to create dissension among Americans.And these Destructors of a free Nation-State—with the assistance of a loyal, avid legacy Press, and with the cooperation of Wall Street financiers and “Big Tech,” and with the FBI, DOJ, DHS, ATF, and other bloated Executive Branch Departments, bureaus, agencies, on their side, including the turgid intelligence apparatuses that are supposed to be accountable to the American people through Congress but aren’t—are pulling out all the stops to succeed in dismantling a free Republic so they can then erect a Marxist totalitarian regime, and they can accomplish that in short order to short-circuit the reelection of a populist President and populist Senators and House Representatives who would return the Country to its rightful heirs and owners: the American people.In much that the Democrat Marxists and the Executive Branch puppets do to bring about a rupture of society they must, at present, resort to psychological measures. Only later, once they have achieved their goal of undermining the confidence and will of most Americans, will they resort to violence to break the back of the remaining third of the Nation, tens of millions of American citizens who are well armed, and well versed in the use of firearms, and who are of the mindset and who have the wherewithal to defend themselves and their Country and their Countrymen against all enemies both foreign and domestic—including a repressive and oppressive Marxist regime.The salient tool of the propagandists is language and the manipulation of it to affect a desired response in the target population, a willing compliance to authority, and to obtain a desired outcome—the destruction of American culture and society and subjugation of the masses; ergo the Propagandist resorts to the manipulation of “race.” And he operates with complete abandon in generating volatility in society through the device of “systemic racism” and “white extremism.”

WHY DO DEMOCRAT MARXISTS AND EXECUTIVE BRANCH PUPPETS SUFFOCATE AMERICANS WITH THESE LUDICROUS NOTIONS OF ‘RACE’ AND ‘RACISM AND ‘SYSTEMIC RACISM’?

The Marxists and Neoliberal Globalists utilize the vehicles of ‘race’ and ‘racism’ and ‘systemic racism’ because they know Americans are acutely sensitive to the concepts—hence the expansive use of these words to drive a wedge among Americans, to cause an ever-widening rift among Americans that cannot be bridged; to change Americans’ perceptions of themselves, to soften them up, and make Americans amenable to the transformative influences of Marxism. And the extensive, intensive use of these concepts in the media is having the desired effect.Thus, the worst elements among the so-called black race, go about rampaging, pillaging, and running amok, knowing full well the police will likely not arrest them, or if the police do arrest them, then the prosecutors will dismiss the charges against them, or the courts will find them not guilty, or merely slap them on the wrist if they are convicted of a criminal act at all.And the so-called white race finds itself uniformly scorned, ridiculed, shamed, and debased, in effect becoming a victim class itself, along with the “colored” race. And, in the end the entire American commonalty is brought low.

WHAT IS ‘RACE,’ REALLY, AND IS IT “REALLY” REAL?

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy says this about ‘race’:The concept of race has historically signified the division of humanity into a small number of groups based upon five criteria: (1) Races reflect some type of biological foundation, be it Aristotelian essences or modern genes; (2) This biological foundation generates discrete racial groupings, such that all and only all members of one race share a set of biological characteristics that are not shared by members of other races; (3) This biological foundation is inherited from generation to generation, allowing observers to identify an individual’s race through her ancestry or genealogy; (4) Genealogical investigation should identify each race’s geographic origin, typically in Africa, Europe, Asia, or North and South America; and (5) This inherited racial biological foundation manifests itself primarily in physical phenotypes, such as skin color, eye shape, hair texture, and bone structure, and perhaps also behavioral phenotypes, such as intelligence or delinquency.Both in the past and today, determining the boundaries of discrete races has proven to be most vexing and has led to great variations in the number of human races believed to be in existence. Thus, some thinkers categorized humans into only four distinct races (typically white or Caucasian, Black or African, yellow or Asian, and red or Native American), and downplayed any biological or phenotypical distinctions within racial groups (such as those between Scandinavians and Spaniards within the white or Caucasian race). Other thinkers classified humans into many more racial categories, for instance arguing that those humans “indigenous” to Europe could be distinguished into discrete Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean races.The ambiguities and confusion associated with determining the boundaries of racial categories have provoked a widespread scholarly consensus that discrete or essentialist races are socially constructed, not biologically real.” This Essentialist notion of race was taken as self-evident true, and it tore Germany and the rest of the world apart, leading to a conflagration commencing in 1939 with the outbreak of the Second world war.Curiously, the Great War from 1914 to 1918, also a conflagration, did not involve “race.” Many of Germany’s Jews fought alongside Germany’s non-Jews, seeing themselves as fervently German, no less so than the “Aryan” or “Nordic” German.Jump to present-day America. The use of ‘race’ as a weapon—this time by the Harris-Biden Administration and Marxist Democrats—are again on full disgusting and noxious display.The propagandists have taken a cue from the race proponents of Nazi Germany although with a decidedly peculiar twist.This time it isn’t the German Nordic white “Herrenmensch” who is extolled but the purportedly black “Untermensch,” albeit the rabid Anti-American Anti-white current head of the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ, Kristen Clarke, has unabashedly argued that it is the “black race” that is markedly superior to the “white race.” See article in LA Times, referring at the end of the article to remarks of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, which explains why Republicans opposed her confirmation to head the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ.

“In opposing her nomination, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said in a statement Monday that Clarke had a ‘long history of statements that place the nominee on, frankly, the far-left fringe of the political spectrum . . . This is not the right nominee for a crucial post at a crucial time. ’” See also article in the North State Journal:

“Kristen Clarke, Joe Biden’s nominee for assistant attorney general of the United States, once promoted racist pseudoscientific quackery, arguing that the human brain was structured in a way that makes Black people superior to white people, and that “human mental processes” in the brain have chemicals that imbue one race with “superior physical and mental abilities” and “spiritual abilities.”After confirmation, Clarke says, as reported in fox news, that she doesn’t “necessarily” hold to those beliefs. In other words, Clarke still professes a belief in this nonsense, but she cannot be overt and explicit about it. For those who would interject “race” into politics, then it must be faced head-on, rationally, logically, especially in those instances where one accepts the reality of “race” in a concrete, absolute biological sense, and dares to extol the righteousness and superiority of this or that “race.” But what we are seeing is that the would-be Destroyers of our Nation have used the concept of ‘race,’ and ‘racism’ and continue to use “race” and “racism” as an odious political device, a tool, a bludgeon, a battering ram directed against our Nation, against our People, and against our Constitution—with the aim of destroying all of it and replacing it with something loathsome, something detestable, reprehensible. And they seek to erect their evil societal construct to ensnare and enslave us all.____________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.