NEW YORK MAYOR ERIC ADAMS: DOES HE OR DOESN’T HE —CARRY A HANDGUN THAT IS? SHOULD IT MATTER?

NEW YORK CITY MAYOR ERIC ADAMS IS NO SAVIOR OF THE CITY AFTER THE IGNOMINIOUS, AND DISASTROUS REIGN OF BILL DE BLASIO, AN UNAPOLOGETIC COMMUNIST; HE IS JUST ANOTHER CONJURER, CHARLATAN, AND LIAR.

PART ONE

During his Mayoral run, Eric Adams asserted he would carry a handgun for self-defense once he became Mayor in lieu of reliance on a special police security detail.The New York Post, for one, reported, back in January 2020, that,“Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams, a former cop, said Thursday that he’d pack heat if elected mayor in 2021 rather than waste taxpayer money by having his own security detail like Mayor Bill de Blasio and his predecessors.“Yes I will, number one,’ Adams told the FAQ NYC podcast when asked if he’d pack a firearm as mayor.‘And number two, I won’t have a security detail. If the city is safe, the mayor shouldn’t have a security detail with him. He should be walking the street by himself.’” Jump forward to March 26, 2022.In a news story titled, “Did Adams follow through on his campaign promise to carry a gun as mayor?”, 1010 News had this to say about Eric Adams’ remarks:“Now, as the mayor of New York City, he still has a security detail and demonstrated at a press conference Friday that he’s not walking around armed.When asked at a traffic safety event if he followed through on his promise, he smiled and opened his jacket to demonstrate he’s not carrying a gun.‘I stated that if I receive a threat from my intel that states there’s a real threat that I would make that determination. Intel protects me,’ said Adams. ‘If I feel the need to do so then I would do so.’[But] His quote from 2020 does not leave much room for interpretation, even if Adams would like to clarify his intent now.A host for the ‘FAQ NYC’ podcast [had] asked him ‘As mayor would you carry a firearm on you even with a security detail?’Adams responded ‘Yes I will, number one, and number two, I won’t have a security detail. If the city’s safe, the mayor shouldn’t have a security detail with him. He should be walking the street by himself.’” See also the article in Arbalest Quarrel, titled, “NYPD Officer Shootings Draw Attention To Mayor Eric Adams’ Plans To Make NYS Safe: What Will He Do?”, posted on January 23, 2022. What is a person to make of Adams’ inconsistent remarks?Is the Mayor a hypocrite? Of course. There’s no way for Adams’ to slither around this, try as he might; try as he has.But, then, should anyone be surprised? After all, hypocrisy is a character trait of all politicians. It defines them, and not in a good way.The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines the word, ‘hypocrite,’ as a ‘person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.’ But there is much more to the word than that. The ancient Greeks from whom the word, ‘hypocrite’ derived perceived a hypocrite to be a heinous individual, deserving of contempt. The Merrian Webster Dictionary goes to some length in discussing the etymology of the word:“A number of different things might pop to mind when we hear the word hypocrite. Maybe it’s a politician caught in a scandal; maybe it’s a religious leader doing something counter to their creed; maybe it’s a scheming and conniving character featured in soap operas. But it’s likely that the one thing that doesn’t come to mind is the theater.The word hypocrite ultimately came into English from the Greek word hypokrites, which means ‘an actor’ or ‘a stage player.’ The Greek word itself is a compound noun: it’s made up of two Greek words that literally translate as ‘an interpreter from underneath.’ That bizarre compound makes more sense when you know that the actors in ancient Greek theater wore large masks to mark which character they were playing, and so they interpreted the story from underneath their masks. The Greek word took on an extended meaning to refer to any person who was wearing a figurative mask and pretending to be someone or something they were not. This sense was taken into medieval French and then into English, where it showed up with its earlier spelling, ypocrite, in 13th-century religious texts to refer to someone who pretends to be morally good or pious in order to deceive others. (Hypocrite gained its initial h- by the 16th century.) It took a surprisingly long time for hypocrite to gain its more general meaning that we use today [as pointed out supra] ‘a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.’” See also the Arbalest Quarrel article, titled, “Truth and Hypocrisy: Bill of Rights Betrayal,” posted on February 18, 2014, one of our first articles. In another Arbalest Quarrel article, posted, five days later, titled, “NY SAFE Advocate and Gun Hypocrite Ferguson: Is the Story Over? Not by a Long Shot,” we dealt further with the notion of ‘hypocrisy.’ Of ‘hypocrisy’ we said, in pertinent part, in that article:“A person who lies does not honor his fellows. No one should lie as a matter of practice. But those who know their words affect the lives of millions of others should be especially mindful of the impact of their words. Those who impact the lives of millions of people through lies are particularly heinous individuals. They do not honor their fellow man. And by failing to honor their fellow man they themselves are not honorable and are not worthy of honor.”Hypocrisy is rife in American politics. Politicians are cut from the same cloth, and Eric Adams, the present New York City Mayor, is no different.Politicians are all consummate actors, but they are actors whose words and actions impact the lives of the citizenry, unlike theater actors whose fictions are confined to the stage.Mayor Adams says he carries a handgun but does not. He says he does not employ an NYPD security detail but he does.Of course, whether or not Adams’ carries a gun when walking around the City is really beside the point. As a retired NYPD police officer, he'd have no trouble obtaining the necessary credentials to do so, anyway. That, unfortunately, cannot be said of the average American citizen who resides in the City. Perhaps a decision in the Bruen case will change that.And, as for Adams’ foregoing an NYPD security detail, the remark is false bravado. The City isn’t any safer under his watch than it was under that of his predecessor, Bill de Blasio. Hence the Mayor’s desire for and need for a security detail exists. Adams is acutely aware of the constant dangers that innocent human beings face in the urban jungle—New York City. Crime continues to surge.As this article goes to publication, March 27, 2022, the New York Post writes: “Major crime and gun violence in the Big Apple have shown no signs of slowing as Mayor Eric Adams pushes people to get back to work and attempts to clean up the subway system.New police data shows that serious crime is up nearly 14 percent this year as of Sunday, compared to the same period in 2020 — when the city was bustling before COVID-19.The early crime trends this year present a challenge for Adams, who last week called for workers to return to New York City — promising a safer city. . . .There have been 300 more serious assaults this year, compared to 2020 — 2,994 versus 2690, an 11.3 percent increase, according to the data released Monday.Burglaries are up 6.6 percent from 1,908 to 2,034 and grand larcenies up 7 percent from 3,753 to 6,763, the data shows.Shootings have also surged nearly 60 percent from pre-pandemic times, from 97 to 154 incidents.There have been 300 more serious assaults this year, compared to 2020 — 2,994 versus 2690, an 11.3 percent increase, according to the data released Monday.Burglaries are up 6.6 percent from 1,908 to 2,034 and grand larcenies up 7 percent from 3,753 to 6,763, the data shows.Shootings have also surged nearly 60 percent from pre-pandemic times, from 97 to 154 incidents.”In light of these troubling crime statistics what is particularly troubling,  galling, and damning is not the content of Adams’ remarks concerning his personal security but the fact that he dared to lie to the public about it, and did so blatantly, casually, with a smile on his face, no less. Has this man so little regard for the average, innocent law-abiding, New York City resident who, unlike him, has no access to police protection and who is denied,out-of-hand, the natural right of armed defense? Does this  Mayor know, or even care, that the average New York City resident must suffer the reality of masses of violent, vile animals, roaming, undeterred, through the streets, subways, train stations, and business establishments of a concrete jungle every day, looking to injure, maim, and kill innocent people—among them, senior citizens and even toddlers? In most of America, the citizenry wouldn't tolerate, for one moment, the horrific conditions existent in and allowed to fester in New York City.And, so, Mayor Adams resorts to lies. And, if he can flippantly lie about one thing, would he not lie about other things—serious matters affecting the physical safety, security, and well-being of the lives of all innocent New York City residents—matters that go beyond those affecting his own life and well-being.Adams brands himself as the “Compassionate Capitalist” ostensibly to distinguish and distance himself from his predecessor, Bill de Blasio. Did Adams come up with that expression, or did his image-makers invoke it, perhaps during a public relations brainstorming strategy session?New Yorkers are constantly confronted with dissimulation, not solutions to real, urgent, and intractable problems. Plans, initiatives, blueprints for action, are little more than shadow play; a ruse; an elaborate, carefully choreographed, managed, and executed masquerade to delude the public. Superficiality overshadows substance at every turn. Everything stays the same; status quo. This is fine for the powers that be, but not for the commonalty.In the next article, we lay this bare, as we continue our exploration of New York City's newly minted Mayor, Eric Adams.____________________________________Copyright © 2022 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.   

NOTHING IS MORE CONSEQUENTIAL TO THE PRESERVATION OF OUR NATION AND THE WORLD THAN IMMEDIATE DE-ESCALATION OF TENSION BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES/NATO AND RUSSIA!

In the midst of the present crisis in Europe, some Americans do retain perspective.We, at the Arbalest Quarrel, a website started in 2014 to cut through the chatter, fluff, hyperbole, outright nonsense, and disingenuousness of the usual news coverage and of news commentary, see well that the present conflict between Russia and Ukraine didn’t start yesterday, but can be traced to many upheavals in the past: some quite recent, going back to 2014; some earlier, to the first years of the 21^st Century; others going back thirty years, to the early 1990s; and some going back much further in time; a century ago, to the period of the first world war.A couple of things about Russia and Ukraine are clear:

• Ukraine is a region that has always suffered political and social convulsions; and
• Russia’s ties to and interests in Ukraine have been ever apparent, always unbroken, profoundly earnest and acute, and inherently inextricable.

Russia’s incursion into Crimea in 2014, and more recently a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, is the direct result of conscious decisions of political leaders in Ukraine and Brussels, and of the United States as well.Those decisions resulted in a sequence of events, some planned for and anticipated; others not.Mishaps arose from those decisions; some not envisioned perhaps, but, as they materialized, definitely not wanted.The oratory of politicians, echoed in many major news organs of late, casts the present conflict, as it casts all conflicts, in overly simplistic, deceptive Manichean terms: A battle between good and evil.Unfortunately, many Americans fall prey to Manichaeism, having been psychologically conditioned to do so.Through seductive messaging, selective dissemination of information, and carefully crafted and tempered narratives, many Americans acquiesce to policies that have a deep, negative, long-term effect on their lives, and, by extension, on the lives of the rest of us who are not so easily prone to psychic manipulation.This is nothing new. Many members of the public have previously succumbed to such deceptive messaging of Government leaders and its echo chamber: the legacy Press.Consider America’s misadventure in the Middle East.The consequences of the U.S.-Mideast conflict, at once familiar and disturbing, were predictable: destabilization of the region; disruption, displacement, and senseless loss of civilian life and of the life of our soldiers; the squandering of the Nation’s wealth and resources; not insignificant economic harm; and attendant weakening of our own national security.The same inevitability of outcomes due to geopolitical machinations of Brussels and the United States is apparent in the current situation in Ukraine.The Press bombards the public daily with talk and imagery of the brutishness of Vladimir Putin; of the valor of Volodymyr Zelensky; of the heroic struggle of the Ukrainian people against the onslaught of Russian military; and of the coming oppression of the Ukrainian people under Putin/Russian rule.But little if any mention is made of the political interests of and plight of ethnic Russians in Ukraine, who represent a substantial minority of the population. And no mention is made of political and social upheaval that has plagued Ukraine in the last twenty or thirty years, or of Russia’s close political ties to the Country during that same period, and well before.And there is no mention of Brussel’s own expansionism eastward and of the concomitant impact on Putin’s expansionist impulses westward, driven in part no doubt by not unreasonable concerns over attenuation of Russia’s territorial security interests.Yet, the Biden Administration and the Press analogize this conflict simplistically and insufferably to a schoolroom situation, describing it in sharp dualistic terms of a “bad guy,” Russia, who bullies a weak, innocent, “good guy,” Ukraine. In doing this, the Administration and the Press treat the public like kindergarteners or as outright idiots.Consider Kamala Harris explanation of the Ukrainian crisis:“So Ukraine is a country in Europe. It exists next to another country called Russia. Russia is a bigger country. Russia is a powerful country. Russia decided to invade a smaller country called Ukraine. So, basically, that’s wrong.” ~ from the “Daily Wire” To whom is Harris addressing this polemic? One might reasonably wonder, ponder, and posit, and ask: “who, really, should wear the ‘dunce cap?’”Is Harris behaving deliberately condescendingly? Or, is she simply a moron, a person who has little if any comprehension and appreciation of world affairs and of European history, and discloses that fact painfully, if unintentionally?But the Press echoes the same frivolous, vacuous message; vociferously, stridently, and inelegantly, with each passing day.Because of this simplistic, silly messaging, many Americans—all too many, who do little reflection—have once again acquiesced to the seductive call: to protect Ukrainian people who yearn for democracy against an evil oppressor, Russia. That, anyway, is the message. That is what Americans are told, and it has had the desired effect.Americans inculcate the meme that Russia and Putin are evil, and that, apparently, is all they need to know about Russia. And the expression, ‘democracy,’ overused in discourse and never defined by either the Press or Government officials, has lost whatever import and purport it once had. The expression has devolved into banality.But to the matter at hand: to what end is the United States called upon to render aid to Ukraine? How far is American assistance to Ukraine, expected to go? And most importantly, how does Russia perceive the United States Government’s insertion into Ukrainian-Russian affairs and what will Russia’s response to America be?Somewhere in the American psyche, there is a justifiable wariness, despite the constant drumbeat by the Press and by some in Congress who call for more action, including military action against Russia. It is fortunate that most Americans resist that. But some people do not.At least one person, the irrepressible Lindsey Graham, a Republican U.S. Senator no less, has called for Putin’s assassination. That absurd, reprehensible remark alludes unmistakably to a call for “regime change.” And what, after all, is this thing, “regime change?” It is a bit of American Governmental argot; an utterance at once peculiar, presumptuous, loathsome, and anachronistic.  Not to be outdone by Graham, the obsequious and droll GOP Representative Adam Kinzinger has called for a U.S. enforced a no-fly zone over Ukraine. He goes on to explain that no one should worry, that this does not portend incursion of American troops in Russia. Oh, really? Is not the call for a U.S.-enforced no-fly zone over Ukraine a transparently blatant threat and challenge directed to Russia?If the Biden Administration were, in fact, to institute such a U.S. enforced no-fly zone in a Russian military zone of operation, i.e., Ukraine, the mere issuance of the order, whether acted upon or not, would amount to a declaration of war by the U.S. against Russia. That isn’t supposition. That is a fact.Such statements by Graham and Kinzinger are both unconscionable and moronic. How might Putin react to them, coming from members of the United States Congress?So absurd are they, one could only hope that Putin would be amused rather than enraged by them, delivered as they are by a couple of buffoons who would do well to perform where they can do no harm: in a circus, perhaps, or in an asylum for the criminally insane, but not in the halls of the U.S. Congress.Fortunately, the Biden Administration isn’t taking advice from either Graham or Kinzinger, and the Administration absolutely should not.Yet, the Biden Administration should be forceful in pointing out the need for forbearance by both members of Congress and the Press in reining in their strident calls for vengeance against Russia. The Administration has not done that. Remarks from his communications’ people to date are dry, laconic, perfunctory.Russia cannot and should not be likened to a Country in the Middle East or to one in Africa or to one in South America; nor, to any other Country in the world, apart from CCP China.Russia, like the U.S. and China, has a massive nuclear arsenal. And Putin is not one to bluff. He is prepared to use it.The present crisis is really one that should be allowed to play out between Russia and Ukraine. But America’s blatant insinuation of itself into this drama has grave ramifications and portents we should not ignore.There are two crises playing out today. One is between Russia and Ukraine. That crisis is overt—war. Everyone knows that.But there is another crisis. This other one is tacit. It is one that ought to be of much greater concern to the American people and to the world. A latent crisis between two superpowers, Russia and the U.S., is where serious tension rests. That is where the focus should be directed and concerted efforts to reduce tension should be made.CCP China, which will be venturing into Taiwan—that is a foregone conclusion—is watching closely the U.S. Government’s reaction to the present crisis unfolding in Europe. The American public, though is not; too caught up as it is, attending to irrelevant rhetorical flourishes, pontifications, fallacious moralistic polemics, and irreverent ramblings from the Press, social media, cable and broadcast news and from Congress—some involving Russia and Ukraine, and others relegated to superficial asides, boiled down to one imbecilic bromide, the new dogma of the Neo-Marxist movement in America: “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.”This dogma, utilized by masters of brainwashing, originated in United Nations’ pacts, treaties, and position papers, where it is found, albeit with some effort, buried here and there, in seemingly erudite but deliberately abstruse, and muddled language, to hide ignoble intentions.Codified as a single imperative, “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion,” persistently relentlessly repeated, it is a mantra designed to rot out the brain, down to the core of one’s being; infecting every institution of America; permeating every facet and layer of American society.This mantra, a thing designed to induce a trance in every American, is also a policy directive, worming its way into every policy aim of the Biden Administration. The infusion of “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion,” into the psyche of people, superimposed over reason and sanity, heralds an improbable and absurd world reality.How, then, can Americans be expected to think clearly? Obviously, they cannot. Indoctrination teams train them to react, not to think. To perform like trained seals, not to reason, deduce, and conceptualize as human beings.Should Americans, then, be surprised that this Nation and the world fall perilously and precipitously close to nuclear war?The failure of the American people to appreciate that the world stands at the precipice of a nuclear conflagration is disheartening and disconcerting. Of what is America to gain from vacuous, political rhetoric and pseudo-moralistic sophistry pertaining to the fate of Ukraine in the face of incipient nuclear annihilation of the planet. Some people argue that Putin will push beyond the boundaries of Ukraine. But do we know that for certain? They conceive failure to stop Putin’s advance in Ukraine is a thing to be likened to Neville Chamberlain’s lame responses to Hitler’s advances in Europe. But there were no nuclear missiles in existence back in the 1930s. What should be of concern to us, at the moment, is an appreciation of the nuclear arsenals present in Russia and the United States. And we should be mindful of Russia’s historical ties to Ukraine. Ukraine isn’t the place for either the United States or NATO to establish a red line against Russian military advancement. Russia fears justifiable containment fears by the EU, NATO, and the United States. It doesn’t want the EU or NATO on its doorstep anymore than the United States wanted or would permit the Soviet Union on its doorstep, in Cuba.The use of even one tactical nuclear bomb in Ukraine or any instance of, or perception of, direct U.S. military involvement in Ukraine against Russia on behalf of Ukraine, will lead inevitably, irrevocably to global thermonuclear war. That brute and dire fact should not be lost on anyone.Armed conflict is messy. Anything can happen. There are too many variables. Even a computer algorithm cannot catalog them all or decipher the myriad patterns at play. History tells us that war gets out of hand and messy very quickly, tactically and strategically. And, both the war and America’s conduct in it should give one pause.  On the front page of The New York Times, Sunday, March 6, 2022, a reporter writes,“President Vladimir V. Putin warned on Saturday that crippling economic sanctions imposed by the West were ‘akin to a declaration of war,’ as the Russian military pummeled civilian targets and continued shelling near the first protected routes intended to allow besieged Ukrainians to flee, apparently violating a cease-fire that had been agreed to only hours earlier.” So, here the New York Times acknowledges Russia’s warning to the U.S. and to the EU and NATO to stay clear of interfering with the conflict, but then the Times reverts to form with a rabble-rousing remark intended to incite hatred in the minds of America toward Russia, despite Putin’s clear warning.In the same article, the Times writes,“Mr. Putin, in his first extended remarks since the start of the war, threatened to fully absorb Ukraine, the former Soviet republic of nearly 44 million people that declared its independence 30 years ago.‘The current leadership needs to understand that if they continue doing what they are doing, they risk the future of Ukrainian statehood,’ he said. Mr. Putin added that Moscow would view any Western attempts to impose a no-fly zone over Ukraine as ‘participating in the armed conflict’ against Russia.As Mr. Putin doubled down on his threats against Ukraine and the West, Mr. Zelensky spoke with more than 300 members of the United States Congress on Saturday. He implored them to impose a no-fly zone and to send military jets to his country, according to lawmakers on the call.”The words, “current leadership” that Putin refers to may seem vague, but definitely includes Brussel’s EU, NATO, and the U.S. Government, and it doesn’t appear that they are listening.Concurrently with the posting of the Times article, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken informs the public, as reported in the Daily Mail that,“Ukraine's government has a contingency plan in place if President Volodymyr Zelensky is killed during the Russian invasion, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken revealed on Sunday. Zelensky survived three assassination attempts by Russian-backed groups just this week, the Times reported on Friday. During an interview with CBS News' Face the Nation on Sunday, Blinken was asked if Russian leader Vladimir Putin would face 'consequences' for Zelensky's murder?’ host Margaret Brennan added.Blinken first praised Zelensky and other Kyiv officials as ‘the embodiment of this incredibly brave Ukrainian people.'‘The Ukrainians have plans in place—that I’m not going to talk about or get into any details on—to make sure that there is what we would call ‘continuity of government’ one way or another. And let me leave it at that,’ he answered.”  Blinken’s use of the phrase, ‘continuity of government’ is mystifying and troubling in two respects.First, Blinken is hinting that the United States, EU, and NATO will not permit Putin to take control of Ukraine, even as it is eminently clear that Putin intends to do just that. So, there it is, a bright red line. The U.S./EU/NATO intends to clash head-on with Russia, over Ukraine even though Ukraine is not a member of either the EU or NATO, and notwithstanding that Ukraine is of no practical security concern for the United States and never was.Second, the expression, ‘continuity of government’ is an expression utilized by the U.S. Government in connection with imminent catastrophe, primarily, nuclear war. One official White House Government website is devoted to just that subject, with the specific heading “Continuity of Government.” In pertinent part, the website lays out that:“Since the days of the Cold War, the United States has had a plan in place to continue the operation of the government following a catastrophic attack on the nation’s capital. The 2007 ‘National Security Presidential Directive 51’ directs the geographic dispersion of leadership, staff, and infrastructure in order to maintain the functions of the United States Government in the event the nation’s capital is “decapitated” by a terrorist attack.Buried deep within the 102-page National Continuity Plan is the strategy for the mass evacuation and relocation of every federal government agency including The White House and the military in response to an exceptional catastrophic event within the National Capital Region. Each agency is required to have a detailed Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) in place.Following a catastrophic national emergency, the President, or his successor can authorize the establishment of a temporary ‘Shadow government’ to maintain control of the essential functions of the Federal Government. President Bush activated the shadow government on September 11, 2001, shortly after the second attack on the World Trade Center.Every federal agency has designated key individuals to be part of an ‘Emergency Relocation Group’. These ERGs are assigned to an alternate secure location on a rotating basis and are ready to take over the duty of supporting the National Essential Functions of this nation in an emergency.”Most unsettling, issuance of the “Continuity of Government” order includes “Supplanting the United States Constitution” and by logical implication, that means suspension of fundamental rights, including the most important natural law right of all, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.”On reflection, one can see the puppetmasters, who control the Biden Administration, utilizing both the Ukraine crisis and the Freedom Convoy, making its way to D.C., as pretexts to invoke “COG” here at home. If that should occur, the American people will come to understand—must come to the realization, horrible and ugly, but indisputable as it is—that they have lost their Country; that Joe Biden is nothing more than, and never was anything more than, the titular head of a Government.This senile, abjectly corrupt “President of the United States.” He serves as a convenient placeholder and caretaker for the Nation. That is all he is and ever was: merely the custodian for a Nation that no longer belongs to the American people; a Nation no longer deemed to be a free Constitutional Republic.The western Globalists who control Brussels and NATO intend to supplant the sovereignty of the American people over the Federal Government, along with the overt de facto dissolution of the United States as an independent sovereign Nation-State. See article in unlimited hangout.“Though often discussed in relation to nuclear war or a similarly chaotic scenario, ‘Continuity of Government’ plans can be triggered even by popular, nonviolent opposition to an unpopular war abroad. It exists solely to keep the current system in place, regardless of the cost [and it includes “Main Core”] ‘A database of Americans, who, often for the slightest and most trivial reason, are considered unfriendly, and who, in a time of panic might be incarcerated. The database can identify and locate perceived ‘enemies of the state’ almost instantaneously.’ ” Secretary of State Blinken’s use of the phrase ‘Continuity of Government’ (COG) isn’t accidental. Even as Blinken uses that phrase in connection with Ukraine, the import of his remarks implicates the United States as well, for U.S./NATO confrontation with Russia is implicit in his remarks.The similarity of the Ukrainian-Russian crisis of 2022 to the Cuban-Missile crisis of 1962 is clear and categorical and ought not to be casually dismissed or cavalierly denied.But, for that one very public and very brief episode, the world stood at the brink of nuclear annihilation. Never since have Russia, China, or the U.S. confronted each other militarily. Military confrontation and challenges were conducted obliquely through minor proxies only, and for good reason. Dire outcomes were to be avoided and they were avoided. This was understood by all three major nuclear powers.If the American Press ever juxtaposes the 1962 Cuban-missile crisis with the 2022 Ukrainian crisis, we have yet to see it, and why is that? Only Russia has done so and, although the words of Russia’s deputy foreign minister were measured, the message conveyed by those words was clear and unequivocal and clearly directed to the United States Government.“Russia’s deputy foreign minister has compared Moscow’s standoff with the West over a possible invasion of Ukraine to the Cuban Missile Crisis, the tense 1962 confrontation between the US and the Soviet Union that led the world to the brink of nuclear war.Asked if he was exaggerating by comparing the Ukraine situation to the stalemate over the deployment of Soviet missiles in Cuba, Sergei Ryabkov said, ‘No, not too much,’ Russian media reported Monday.” ~ from the New York Post.And Vladimir Putin himself has purportedly said words to the effect that “a world without Russia would be no world at all.” The language might be cryptic. Its import is not.Whatever political, geopolitical, or economic interest the EU or the U.S. may have or think it has in Ukraine, nothing—absolutely nothing—is more consequential to the preservation of this Nation and the world than immediate de-escalation of tension between the U.S./NATO/EU and Russia.We do not see this happening, but it should; indeed, it must.If there are back channels between the U.S. Government and Russia, the public should gain some intimation of this; some assurance that the United States and Russia are in constant communication. But it is apparent the two are not. The U.S. and NATO intend to repel Russia from Ukraine. And Russia intends to press forward, claiming Ukraine as Russian territory or, at least, as a Russian-controlled region/orbit that serves as a buffer to inhibit EU expansion into Eastern Europe. Both the U.S./NATO alliance and Russia are headed on a collision course.The controlling issue in Ukraine is one of power and who controls the landmass of Ukraine.Given the stakes involved—the possibility of a nuclear conflagration—one must infer this has nothing to do with “democracy” and the sovereign independence of Ukraine. The Ukrainian people, and Zelensky, too, are nothing more than pawns. Their welfare is only a pretext for U.S./NATO/EU expansionism in the East. The two mighty powers, the U.S./NATO/EU on the one hand and Russia on the other are in a contest for control over Eastern Europe. It is anyone’s guess where CCP China stands in relation to this.Under Trump’s tutelage, it is unlikely Russia would have ventured into Ukraine. And if it had done so, Trump would have let the American public and, hence, the world know, and in no uncertain terms, that there would be no military confrontation between Russia and the U.S. over the fate of Ukraine—ever.  Trump sought to reconfirm and cement the United States standing as a true independent, sovereign Nation-State, in a world controlled by powerful, wealthy Neo-Globalist/Neo-Marxist elites whose aim is the dissolution of all western nation-states. They seek no less than the destruction of the very concept of ‘citizenship’ and of the concept of independent sovereign nation-state construct.The end goal of these secretive global “elites” is to see the establishment of a universal, transnational, multicultural, neo-feudalist corporate/financial/political/social empire, sans all geographical boundaries.Trump sought to spare the Nation from that fate. But Trump is no longer President of the United States. Powerful interests have seen to that. This Nation now has Joe Biden; a mentally weak, effete, ineffectual leader, if one can use the descriptor ‘leader’ in any meaningful sense. And the absence of Trump and the ensconcing of Biden into the Executive Branch of Government as titular head of the Nation has made all the difference. The fate of the Country is now in the hands of powerful interests who intend to destroy it.Whatever is going on behind the scenes, Joe Biden is the face of America projected to the world. And, to a lesser extent, his understudy, Kamala Harris, is also the face of America projected to the world.But what it is that is projected does not warrant respect nor engender confidence.Such things as strength, reason, stability, and integrity are sorely lacking here. And that noticeable lack justifiably frightens at least some of us and does so on many levels. It should frighten all of us._____________________________________Copyright © 2022 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.  

AMERICANS WHO FEARED TRUMP DANGEROUS TO OUR NATION AND THE WORLD NOW FACE THE HORROR OF FORCES FOR A NEW WORLD ORDER/“OPEN SOCIETY”

Americans should take heed of the actions of Trudeau’s Government: for what has been taking shape over there has repercussions over here.Biden is in bed with Trudeau. That fact should not be lost on anyone. The two are operating out of the same playbook and their policies as directed to the populations of their respective Countries have become demonstrably more heavy-handed since the Biden stooge walked into the Executive Suite of Government.Instead of openly and vehemently condemning Trudeau’s overbearing and illegal response to the Canadian Truckers’ protest, declaring martial law through the invocation of Canada’s Emergencies Act—that, incidentally up until the 15th of February 2022, had never been invoked—the Biden Administration demonstrated a noticeable and awkward silence toward it, establishing the Administration’s clear if tacit acceptance of it.Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said nothing about it; nor did Biden’s Press Secretary Jen Psaki say anything concerning it.But, the unequivocal message—“My Administration agrees with you and stands ready to assist you,”—came out loudly and boldly and clearly through the Government’s propaganda news and media organs of the so-called  “Free Press.”This did not escape the attention of Constitutional law expert, Jonathan Turley, a civil libertarian of the classical sort, as is Alan Dershowitz, and not as the ACLU now pretends to be.On his website Turley roundly—and justifiably—condemned CNN and MSNBC commentators for their boisterous, haranguing oratory:“I have previously lamented what I call ‘the age of rage’ and how many seem addicted to rage in our society. That was evident this week as many vented against groups ranging from the Canadian truckers to the unvaccinated. CNN analyst Juliette Kayyem seemed to suggest vigilantism as a proper response to the Canadian protesters while James Carville said that he wanted to punch the unvaccinated. . . . The heated rhetoric highlights the danger of past demands from the left for censoring or prosecuting others for violent speech.On her Twitter account, Kayyem responded to a Wall Street Journal article on the gridlock caused by the truckers: ‘The convoy protest, applauded by right-wing media as a ‘freedom protest,’ is an economic and security issue now. The Ambassador Bridge link constitutes 28% of annual trade movement between US and Canada. Slash the tires, empty gas tanks, arrest the drivers, and move the trucks.’For his part, Carville longs for even more personal satisfaction, saying that anyone without a vaccine was a ‘piece of s–t’ and he wanted to punch them in the face.These snarling, violent comments are all-too-common in today’s environment. However, they also raise the question of how we treat violent speech. Various Democrats are calling for the disqualification of members of Congress, and former President Donald Trump, for their comments made before the January 6th riot. Some members have brought lawsuits over allegations that such speeches constituted incitement for insurrection.”Turley is right. Unfortunately, the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist propagandists easily sway public opinion by oversimplifying complex socio-historical issues to obtain a desired emotional response from the gullible public. Now jump ahead a few weeks.Consider the debacle over Ukraine. Through constant proselytizing by compliant media, see, e.g., an article from CNN, the American public is now overwhelmingly supportive of America taking increasingly strong measures against Russia. Such is the nature of propaganda:

• Simple simplistic, repetitious messaging and use of simple buzz words;
• Conveyed to the public via air of bold, flamboyant, boisterous, righteous indignation and anger;
• Reinforced through a series of graphic photographs—
• —All directed toward inducing, in the public, a mindless, rabid, one-note emotional response to the dictates of a Government that is simply manipulating the people for its own nefarious purposes and the public buys the nonsense——happily jumping off the Cliff like Lemmings. But, the precipice of this cliff is unlike any other. In a conventional world war, horrific as the first and second world wars were, a conventional world would be as nothing compared to a global thermonuclear holocaust.

Yet, it appears that this is where the world is headed. The response of the American public toward the debacle in Ukraine is just what the Rothschild Banking Dynasty puppetmasters want as they drum up public enthusiasm and support for ventures that operate against the common peoples’ interests, innocent Americans at home, innocent Ukrainians abroad, and, yes, innocent Russians, too—along with billions of other innocent people. The expansive reach, power, and influence of the Rothschild Dynasty along with its deca/centi-billionaire Neoliberal Globalist compatriots and minions, operate unchecked with abandon throughout the world. Although this is well-guarded, secretive, and insistently denied, the extensive wealth and power of these creatures is tangible, real, sinister, and venomous, and they have no reluctance in using their dominance to get what they want. And, the common people of the United States and Canada, especially, ignore this at their peril. The Rothschild Dynasty and their many captains and lieutenants control NATO, the global military arm of Europe and North America. And, they control the EU, their political, social, economic, cultural, and juridical arm. And, of course, they created the central banking system in the early 1600s, and it has since proliferated around the world, becoming monolithic and all-encompassing, with some researchers estimating their wealth to exceed 100 trillion dollars. See e.g., articles in csglobe.com, handlebar-online.com, and schengenvisainfo.com.  The shape of things to come shows jockeying for power among three trans-global dominant geopolitical forces: one, the so-called western “liberal-democratic” countries comprising, the EU, the Commonwealth Nations, and the United States; two, CCP China; and, three, Russia. You will note that CCP China and Russia have flexed their muscle most noticeably since the physical, emotional, mental wreck of a man, Joe Biden, was planted in the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government. This didn’t happen on Trump’s watch. The world was safer and the U.S. was stronger: militarily, economically, and geopolitically. Under the Trump Presidency, the Nation regained its stature as a dominant superpower, and the U.S. engaged in no new foreign military ventures; nor did the world face conflicts on the world stage, the like of which we are seeing today.  The present crisis in Ukraine didn’t have to happen and wouldn’t have happened under a Trump Presidency. Trump did keep and—had he not been prevented from serving a second term in Office—would likely have continued to keep a lid on China’s global ambitions in Asia and the South Pacific; would have kept Russia contained and pacified, and would have kept the EU’s House of Rothschild in check. But, neither the Rothschilds and its minions, nor CCP China intended to be constrained by a world kept in fragile balance by Trump. China, intending to become a mighty empire in the 21^st Century, and the western alliance nations and nation-groups—comprising the EU, the Commonwealth Nations, and the United States, under the western neo-liberal Globalist/Neo-Marxist ruling “elites,” presided over by the House of Rothschild—had great and grave ambitions. So, China and the west’s ruling class hatched their plan to prevent Trump from serving a second term in office. This was necessary, for the American people, who had calmly slept as the Country was quietly, and inexorably and unlawfully being taken from them, were awakening to the monstrous treachery directed against them. The American people had come to realize their true potential under a Trump Presidency. They had reawakened to their heritage and to their Country’s rightful place in the world as a power to be reckoned with, an independent, sovereign Nation under the heel of no foreign power. And they gained awareness, as well, of their sovereignty over Government. CCP China and the Rothschild Dynasty would not stand for that; would have none of it.Having underestimated Trump’s fortitude and resilience, while in Office, impervious to elaborate, unprecedented, diabolical and reprehensible, attempts to unseat him—never before seen in the annals of American history—the Neoliberal Globalist/Neo-Marxist overlords went to work, hatching an ambitious plot to purloin the election away from Trump. The Attorney General at the time, William Barr, knew of this, but wouldn’t investigate obvious reasonable allegations and evidence for it. The legacy Press and social media ridiculed and dismissed out-of-hand, all mention of it, and censored all information about it. And the Courts, all the way up to the Roberts U.S. Supreme Court, would allow for no challenge to it.And, the collaboration of powerful, wealthy, well-organized forces did defeat Trump. And the American people and the peoples of the world are now paying the price for this. Through the machinations of China, the House of Rothschild, and fifth columnists here at home—in U.S. Government, academia, social media, business, and finance—the American people have what they wanted—a compliant milk-toast, ostensibly presiding over the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government. Joe Biden is physically and emotionally weak; docile and obviously senile; irredeemably corrupt; wholly compromised. And this is the way Biden comes across to the American people, and to the peoples and leaders of the nations of the world. More to the point, this is the way Biden was meant to come across; is meant to come across. One sees this in his manner, his speech, in his bearing; in the way he carries himself. This debilitative state of mind, body, and spirit is precisely what a Country should not expect of a leader; certainly should not want in a leader. The American people do not deserve this. They do not deserve him. Should Americans and the rest of the world weep for Biden? Should we forgive him his catastrophic failings; his serious character flaws? No! Biden still has enough mind and brainpower remaining to know he is utterly unfit as a leader. Yet, he has allowed himself to serve as a placeholder, a messenger boy for the totalitarian forces lurking and operating behind the scenes who use him as a public face: a harlequin—beneficial for their purposes but harmful to the common people. Whither Russia? The Rothschild propagandists have presented Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in simplistic terms: a Manichean battle of GOOD vs. EVIL. The propagandists in the Press and social media have created the illusion of Ukraine as a free, independent, liberal democratic Country bludgeoned by a drunken beast, a despotic Russia, that thirsts for power and lusts for territory. This is the message the seditious Press presents to the public, and it is the message the puppet, Biden, delivered to the American people, and it is of a piece of what the American people witnessed in Biden’s inaugural address to the American people, and in what the American people witnessed in Biden’s recent State of the Union Address.HOW THE AMERICAN PUBLIC IS SWAYED TO ACCEPT DANGEROUS POLICY DECISIONS THROUGH CAREFULLY CRAFTED MESSAGING“In Joe Biden’s inauguration speech [and in his recent State of the Union speech] we can find standard emotional and rational stratagems that form its persuasive strategy to obtain the public’s approval. The techniques and themes used by the President are the same identified in the modern principles of commercial advertising, of the persuasion theory and of the propaganda discourses, in particular from war propaganda. These techniques and themes consist in revealing a problem in order to suggest the solution, the repetition and the simplicity of the message, the use of a colloquial language and of significant and easily understandable symbols, the participation or the quote of testimonials, the bandwagon effect, the necessity of provoking emotional responses, the plain folks appeal, the card-stacking and the use of glittering words. The attention to the choice of the most persuasive words to express the author’s ideas, to defend an ideal and to restore American identity is impressive. These stereotyped formulas are also used to simplify situations with no need of argumentation.” ~ Abstract of the article titled, “Joe Biden’s Inauguration Speech: A Persuasive Narrative,” By Dr. Pier Paolo Pedrini University of Lugano Global Journal of Human-Social Science: A Arts & Humanities - Psychology Volume 21 Issue 4 Version 1.0 Year 2021 Type: Double Blind Peer Reviewed International Research Journal Publisher: Global Journals Online ISSN: 2249-460x & Print ISSN: 0975-587Yes, Russia invaded Ukraine, and, given that fact, and with four years of venomous vitriol poured on Russia and Trump (curiously not so, with China), the American public has been psychologically conditioned to detest Putin and Russia—made all the easier where one Country invades another through military, naval, and airpower. But the motivation for Putin’s thrust into Ukraine, is, on reflection, not so easily dismissed as the irrational impulse of a crazed madman, as the mainstream Press portrays it. There is much more going on here. And if Putin is an evil player in this, there are others as well, not least of all, Joe Biden, and powerful forces behind the scenes that direct his words and actions and those of others in NATO and the EU. Something complex and sinister is afoot. There is a lot of blame to go around in the matter of the Ukrainian crisis. And the crisis of today in the European Theater is the outgrowth of events occurring twenty years ago.Regardless of how the shills and propaganda organs of the EU, and of the Commonwealth Nations, and of the U.S. “spin this,” what is transpiring in Europe, as played out, at the moment, in Ukraine, is a struggle between two behemoths, the Rothschild Dynasty and Russia. Both seek to accumulate territory in the process of empire-building, but, in Russia’s case, there is also the desire for security. The Rothschild Dynasty seeks to control all of Europe, and to contain, constrain and threaten Russia through its presence at Russia’s doorstep. Putin recognizes the threat from the House of Rothschild/EU and seeks to create a buffer between it and the Rothschild/EU through the acquisition of more territory in Ukraine and the Baltic region, hearkening back to the power of the Soviet Union, in the previous century. With recent talk of bringing Ukraine into NATO, Putin sees this as a further threat to the security of Russia, and an insult as well.IMPORTANT FACTS: RUSSIA AND UKRAINE IN THE 21^ST CENTURY

• CIRCA 2000——PUTIN ASKS TO JOIN NATO AND IS REBUFFED

“Vladimir Putin wanted Russia to join NATO but did not want his country to have to go through the usual application process and stand in line ‘with a lot of countries that don’t matter’, according to a former secretary general of the transatlantic alliance.George Robertson, a former Labour defence secretary who led NATO between 1999 and 2003, said Putin made it clear at their first meeting that he wanted Russia to be part of western Europe. ‘They wanted to be part of that secure, stable prosperous west that Russia was out of at the time,’ he said.The Labour peer recalled an early meeting with Putin, who became Russian president in 2000. Putin said: ‘When are you going to invite us to join NATO?’ And [Robertson] said: ‘Well, we don’t invite people to join NATO, they apply to join NATO.’ And he said: ‘Well, we’re not standing in line with a lot of countries that don’t matter.’The account chimes with what Putin told the late David Frost in a BBC interview shortly before he was first inaugurated as Russian president more than 21 years ago. Putin told Frost he would not rule out joining NATO ‘if and when Russia’s views are taken into account as those of an equal partner’.He told Frost it was hard for him to visualize NATO as an enemy. ‘Russia is part of the European culture. And I cannot imagine my own country in isolation from Europe and what we often call the civilized world.’” From an article in the British newspaper, The Guardian, November 4, 2021. 

• 2004——ORANGE REVOLUTION IN UKRAINE; NATO EXPANSION IN THE BALTIC STATES

“After the Orange Revolution street protests in Ukraine in 2004, Putin became increasingly suspicious of the west, which he blamed for funding pro-democracy NGOs. He was further angered by NATO’s continuing expansion into central and eastern Europe: Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Slovenia, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania chose to join the alliance in 2004; Croatia and Albania followed in 2009. Georgia and Ukraine were promised membership in 2008 but have remained outside.” Id.

• 2010——U.S. OBAMA MEDDLES IN THE AFFAIRS OF UKRAINE

“There is an abundance of outrage in the United States about Russia’s alleged meddling in the 2016 presidential election. Multiple investigations are taking place, and Moscow’s conduct was a major justification for the sanctions legislation that Congress just passed. Some furious political figures and members of the media insist that the Putin government’s interference constitutes an act of war. One especially agitated House member even compared it explicitly to the Pearl Harbor and 9/11 attacks.Such umbrage might be more credible if the United States refrained from engaging in similar conduct. But the historical record shows that Washington has meddled in the political affairs of dozens of countries—including many democracies. An egregious example occurred in Ukraine during the Euromaidan Revolution of 2014.Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych was not an admirable character. After his election in 2010, he used patronage and other instruments of state power in a flagrant fashion to the advantage of his political party. That high‐​handed behavior and legendary corruption alienated large portions of Ukraine’s population. As the Ukrainian economy languished and fell farther and farther behind those of Poland and other East European neighbors that had implemented significant market‐​oriented reforms, public anger at Yanukovych mounted. When he rejected the European Union’s terms for an association agreement in late 2013, in favor of a Russian offer, angry demonstrators filled Kiev’s Independence Square, known as the Maidan, as well as sites in other cities.Despite his leadership defects and character flaws, Yanukovych had been duly elected in balloting that international observers considered reasonably free and fair—about the best standard one can hope for outside the mature Western democracies [if one can say the 2020 U.S. Presidential election was fair and aboveboard; it wasn’t]. A decent respect for democratic institutions and procedures meant that he ought to be able to serve out his lawful term as president, which would end in 2016.The extent of the Obama administration’s meddling in Ukraine’s politics was breathtaking.Neither the domestic opposition nor Washington and its European Union allies behaved in that fashion. Instead, Western leaders made it clear that they supported the efforts of demonstrators to force Yanukovych to reverse course and approve the EU agreement or, if he would not do so, to remove the president before his term expired. Sen. John McCain (R‑AZ), the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, went to Kiev to show solidarity with the Euromaidan activists. McCain dined with opposition leaders, including members of the ultra right‐​wing Svoboda Party, and later appeared on stage in Maidan Square during a mass rally. He stood shoulder to shoulder with Svoboda leader Oleg Tyagnibok.” ~ From an article appearing in CATO Institute, on August 6, 2017, titled, “America’s Ukraine Hypocrisy.” 

• 2014——“THE EUROMAIDAN” EVIDENCE OF U.S. INVOLVEMENT TO OVERTHROW YANUKOVYCH

“McCain’s actions were a model of diplomatic restraint compared to the conduct of Victoria Nuland, the assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian Affairs. As Ukraine’s political crisis deepened, Nuland and her subordinates became more brazen in favoring the anti‐​Yanukovych demonstrators. Nuland noted in a speech to the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation on December 13, 2013, that she had traveled to Ukraine three times in the weeks following the start of the demonstrations. Visiting the Maidan on December 5, she handed out cookies to demonstrators and expressed support for their cause.The extent of the Obama administration’s meddling in Ukraine’s politics was breathtaking. Russian intelligence intercepted and leaked to the international media a Nuland telephone call in which she and U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Geoffey Pyatt discussed in detail their preferences for specific personnel in a post‐​Yanukovych government. The U.S‑favored candidates included Arseniy Yatsenyuk, the man who became prime minister once Yanukovych was ousted from power. During the telephone call, Nuland stated enthusiastically that ‘Yats is the guy” who would do the best job.Nuland and Pyatt were engaged in such planning at a time when Yanukovych was still Ukraine’s lawful president. It was startling to have diplomatic representatives of a foreign country—and a country that routinely touts the need to respect democratic processes and the sovereignty of other nations—to be scheming about removing an elected government and replacing it with officials meriting U.S. approval.Washington’s conduct not only constituted meddling, it bordered on micromanagement. At one point, Pyatt mentioned the complex dynamic among the three principal opposition leaders, Yatsenyuk, Oleh Tyahnybok, and Vitali Klitschko. Both Pyatt and Nuland wanted to keep Tyahnybok and Klitschko out of an interim government. In the former case, they worried about his extremist ties; in the latter, they seemed to want him to wait and make a bid for office on a longer‐​term basis. Nuland stated that ‘I don’t think Klitsch should go into the government. I don’t think it’s necessary.’ She added that what Yatseniuk needed ‘is Klitsch and Tyanhybok on the outside.’The two diplomats also were prepared to escalate the already extensive U.S. involvement in Ukraine’s political turbulence. Pyatt stated bluntly that ‘we want to try to get somebody with an international personality to come out here and help to midwife this thing [the political transition].’ Nuland clearly had Vice President Joe Biden in mind for that role. Noting that the vice president’s national security adviser was in direct contact with her, Nuland related that she told him “probably tomorrow for an atta‐​boy and to get the details to stick. So Biden’s willing.’Both the Obama administration and most of the American news media portrayed the Euromaidan Revolution as a spontaneous, popular uprising against a corrupt and brutal government.A February 24, 2014, Washington Post editorial celebrated the Maidan demonstrators and their successful campaign to overthrow Yanukovych. The ‘moves were democratic,’ the Washington Post concluded, and ‘Kiev is now controlled by pro‐​Western parties.’It was a grotesque distortion to portray the events in Ukraine as a purely indigenous, popular uprising. The Nuland‐​Pyatt telephone conversation and other actions confirm that the United States was considerably more than a passive observer to the turbulence. Instead, U.S. officials were blatantly meddling in Ukraine. Such conduct was utterly improper. The United States had no right to try to orchestrate political outcomes in another country—especially one on the border of another great power. It is no wonder that Russia reacted badly to the unconstitutional ouster of an elected, pro‐​Russian government—an ouster that occurred not only with Washington’s blessing, but apparently with its assistance.” Id. ~ From article appearing in CATO Institute, on August 6, 2017, titled, “America’s Ukraine Hypocrisy; see also article of March 3, 2014 in the Leftist news organization “Democracy Now.”See, also, the article in “Ordo abc chao,” “Former US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland testifying during a hearing on Policy Response to Russian Interference in the 2016 US Elections before the Senate Intelligence Committee at Capitol Hill in Washington (June 20, 2018)January 5, 2021, it was reported that, to serve as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, then President-elect Joe Biden would nominate Victoria Nuland, who had a complicated history of involvement in exacerbating tensions in Ukraine, by aligning with far-right and Neo-Nazis groups, in pursuit of the US and NATO’s interests in the region. An article in Salon, titled ‘Who is Victoria Nuland? A really bad idea as a key player in Biden's foreign policy team,’ explained:Who is Victoria Nuland? Most Americans have never heard of her, because the U.S. corporate media's foreign policy coverage is a wasteland. Most Americans have no idea that President-elect Biden's pick for deputy secretary of state for political affairs is stuck in the quicksand of 1950s U.S.-Russia Cold War politics and dreams of continued NATO expansion, an arms race on steroids and further encirclement of Russia.  In addition to serving as US Permanent Representative to NATO from 2005 to 2008, Nuland has also been a member of the board of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). Putin has come to recognize that the United States and NATO have made use of Western NGOs and social media attacks, orchestrated from abroad under the pretext of supporting democracy, combating electoral fraud or the corruption of the targeted regimes, to catalyze uprisings such as the Color Revolutions and the Arab Spring. The leading NGOs include the NED, as well as the International Republican Institute (IRI) and Freedom House, which are largely supported by government funds, and billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundations (OSF). The NED, an organization often described as an accessory to American intelligence, and which has been financially supported by Richard Mellon Scaife, who has long-standing ties to the CIA and also funded the Heritage Foundation. The first president of the NED confessed to the Washington Post that “a lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.” Acknowledgment of America’s actions has resulted in a growing worldwide trend of governments seeking to limit and delegitimize foreign funding to local NGOs, including not only Russia, but also India, Ethiopia, Hungary, Qatar, Egypt and Israel. At home, the United States’ actions are excused by the perception that the imposition of democracy is not objectionable because it is not just an American, or Western ideal, but a universal one. As indicated by Robert W. Merry in The Atlantic, given the sizeable expenditures that go into such projects, such intrusion ‘is a foreign-policy issue that deserves more attention than it is getting in American discourse.’ Even if these accusations were to be made public, the general view is, as Merry noted, ‘that these NGO activists are merely doing what comes naturally to those who believe American democratic structures represent universal values that should be embraced universally throughout the world.’ However, numerous critics have confirmed that NGOs have ‘acted as interest groups rather than as promoters of universal standards, and as tools of US foreign policy rather than as local representatives of the ‘global conscience’ or ‘transnational civil society.’ The truth is that the US State Department cannot divulge what are covert foreign policy tactics, and the work of NGOs provide them plausible deniability.’ [Also note connection with the Rothschild/Soros ‘Open Society’ agenda] Formerly the Open Society Institute, the OSF was founded in 1993 by Soros to financially support civil society groups around the world, with a stated aim of advancing justice, education, public health and independent media. In 1991, the Soros Foundation Budapest merged with the Fondation pour une Entraide Intellectuelle Européenne, an affiliate of the CIA’s Cold War front, the Congress for Cultural Freedom (CCF). Open Society Institute was created in the United States in 1993 to support the Soros foundations in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union.” And see the articles in Adara Press and stuartbramhall.wordpress.com. The last article points to a documentary about the 2013 CIA sponsored coup in 2013. {SURPRISE— “SORRY: THE DOCUMENTARY NO LONGER EXISTS”}

• 2022—UKRAINE AS A MEMBER OF NATO—UKRAINE’S WISH AND RUSSIA’S NIGHTMARE.

See February 15, 2022 article in Al Jazeera:“The future of NATO, the transatlantic security alliance, is at the centre of the standoff between Russia and the West over Ukraine.Moscow wants guarantees that its neighbour, a former Soviet state, will be permanently barred from joining the United States-led alliance. It has also called for NATO to cease all military activity in Eastern Europe, blaming it for undermining security in the region.But Western leaders have rejected those demands. They have argued the Kremlin cannot be allowed an effective veto on Kyiv’s foreign policy decisions and defended NATO’s ‘open door policy’, which grants any European nation the right to ask to join.Amid the deadlock, here are five things you need to know about NATO:The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was founded in 1949, in the aftermath of World War II.The alliance was initially part of an effort by the US and its European allies to deter any expansion of the then-Soviet Union (USSR) and reduce the possibility of conflict on the continent by encouraging greater political integration between its powers.In the decades since, it has steadily expanded its orbit, bringing a swathe of central and eastern European states into its ranks after the USSR collapsed.This enlargement has troubled Moscow, which is wary of the Brussels-headquartered alliance edging ever closer to its borders and hemming it in from the West.NATO is comprised of 30 member states.Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom and the US were its founding members.The newest member state is North Macedonia, which joined in 2020.Three so-called partner countries – Ukraine, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Georgia – have declared their aspirations to become part of the alliance, which says its purpose is “to guarantee the freedom and security of its members through political and military means’.Ukraine has repeatedly stated its intention to become a NATO member state – an objective that is written into the country’s constitution.Joining the alliance would boost Ukraine’s defensive strength, because of NATO’s principle of collective defence. That principle – set out by Article 5 in NATO’s founding treaty –  means an attack against one ally is considered as an attack against all allies, committing them to protect one another.In 2008, NATO leaders promised Ukraine it would one day be given the opportunity to join the alliance. But despite deepening cooperation in the years since, there is thought to be little chance of that happening any time soon.Western powers are yet to be convinced Kyiv has done enough work to eradicate corruption and meet the other political, economic and military criteria required to enter the alliance, as set out in its 1995 Study on Enlargement.NATO’s members may also be wary of Ukraine joining their ranks while tensions with Moscow remain high, as such a move could draw them into a direct conflict with Russia in the event it launches an attack, because of the collective defence principle.On Monday, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said the issue was ‘not on the agenda’ following talks with Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv, despite Ukraine’s president restating his country’s membership ambition.All 30 NATO allies must unanimously approve a new country becoming part of the alliance.Putin has said it is now time for NATO’s waves of expansion to be reversed and for the alliance to guarantee that Ukraine never be allowed to become a member.He argues that the West has betrayed Moscow by breaking alleged verbal commitments made at the end of the Cold War that NATO would not expand eastwards. The alliance denies that any such promises were made.In a show of force, Russia has massed more than 100,000 troops around Ukraine’s borders and sent sweeping security demands to Washington and NATO.In response, the alliance, the US and its European allies have been scrambling to negotiate with Moscow and de-escalate the situation.But the high-stakes diplomatic efforts have borne little success. Washington and NATO have rejected the Kremlin’s central demands – that the alliance cease all military activity in Eastern Europe and Ukraine be barred from membership – while Russia has refused to budge on its requests.As tensions continue to simmer, Western leaders, including US President Joe Biden, have made clear they will not send troops to defend Ukraine in the event of a Russian invasion.But several of Kyiv’s allies in NATO, with the exception of Germany, have supplied Kyiv with weapons as it ramps up preparations to repel a potential incursion. Meanwhile, NATO has moved to reinforce its eastern flank with additional troops and military hardware.” ~from an article in Al Jazeera, February 15, 2022.______________________________________One burning question is: whether and to what extent sanctions on the Russian Central Bank can choke the financial life-blood out of Russia?” See articles in Economic Times. China is watching the Ukrainian conflict carefully. How that unfolds will impact the timing of and the nature and manner of CCP China's insinuation/incursion/invasion into Taiwan.  Notice how the U.S. has been reduced to a minor player in the remaking of geopolitical dominance in the world since Biden took office. The U.S. has become a docile little lamb. And that has emboldened both CCP China and Russia.The Rothschild Dynasty’s propagandists have thrust, into the psyche of the American public, a particular message: The Ukrainian people are fighting for freedom and liberty against a dangerous, monolithic, bestial aggressor, Russia. The purpose of this messaging is to get the American public on board with the game plan: war in Europe. This propaganda is as palpable and as insidious as it is ingenious. And, for this purpose, guns are now seen as a good thing. Vladimir Zelensky urges his people—both old and young—to take up arms against Vladimir Putin. And the Ukrainian police and military are now handing out “weapons of war,” i.e., selective fire rifles and submachine guns, to the commoners, like hotcakes. Isn’t that fascinating? The news media here at home, isn’t suggesting that guns are such a bad thing now even as one must wonder how a person who has never handled a firearm before would know how to handle a selective fire or fully automatic rifle. Breitbart says:“The Ukrainian Parliament greatly expanded the right to bear arms on the eve of the full-scale Russian invasion. A day later, when Russian troops began assaulting multiple major Ukrainian cities, President Volodymyr Zelensky announced the government would give anyone willing to fight the Russian military a weapon, no questions asked.Reznikov issued an update, shared by the Ukrainian armed forces on social media, stating that 18,000 firearms ‘and corresponding combat kits,’ meaning ammunition, were in the hands of Ukrainian citizens, and again inviting anyone willing to fight against the invasion to ask for weapons.”Apparently, when fighting for the benefit of the Rothschild dynasty, guns in the hands of the common people are okay. And any thought of a person accidentally shooting him or herself in the foot or of transforming from a Dr. Jekyll character into a psychotic Mr. Hyde and going on a rampage is of no moment. See ABC News report and report from Armstrong Economics on the arming of Ukrainian citizens.  See also report in Conservative Daily News ———:“Prior to the attack, Ukrainian officials took steps to help Ukrainian civilians protect themselves.‘Ukraine’s parliament on Wednesday voted to approve in the first reading a draft law which gives permission to Ukrainians to carry firearms and act in self-defense,’ Reuters reported.The 30-day emergency order, National Review reports, would ‘grant citizens the right to bear arms.’ It would also allow the government to conscript Ukrainians between the ages of 18 and 60, ‘adding nearly 200,000 troops to the country’s defense.’‘Next Time, Bear Arms Earlier’Permitting Ukrainians to arm themselves is a sensible measure. But as Charles Cooke points out at NRO, ‘it’s also a bit late.’While Ukraine has relatively loose gun control laws by European standards, estimates suggest only about 1.3 million firearms exist in the country, which has a population of some 43 million. This diminishes the chances of Ukrainian civilians being able to offer serious resistance, an idea that is hardly far-fetched, Stephen Gutowski points out at The Reload:‘. . . the history of warfare is rife with examples of smaller, weaker, and less organized forces besting even the greatest militaries in the world. From the American Revolution to Vietnam, Iraq, and multiple wars in Afghanistan, it isn’t difficult to find templates for how a Ukrainian resistance could eventually prevail if Russia attempts to capture and hold it.’It’s wonderful Ukrainian officials are finally extending the natural right to bear arms to its people. The only tragedy is that it took so long. Speaking on CNN, Nina Lvovna Khrushcheva, a professor of international affairs at the New School in New York, also said small arms could be decisive.‘If every Ukrainian takes a gun, Russians don’t have a prayer,’ she told John Berman. ‘I mean the military can fight, but . . . Ukrainians are really ready today.’Ukrainian leaders apparently agree. The government on Thursday took the unusual step of issuing thousands of automatic weapons to civilians, following the issuance of its emergency order. Unfortunately, the likelihood of serious resistance is low because the Ukrainian government embraced the right to bear arms so late.” —And what if Ukraine joins the EU, asks the leftist rag NPR? That will definitely serve to extend the Rothschild empire, but at what cost to stability in Europe and the world?  Is this supposed to deter Putin, as Rothschild-paid toady-commentators posit, or will it simply heighten Putin's resolve to take control over the entire Country? In fact the question is ridiculous. One major reason Putin invaded Ukraine was as a direct response and not unreasonable anger to the CIA/State Department-sponsored/instigated Euromaidan uprising of 2013. But, that little fact is absent from any discussion in Congress and in the seditious mainstream media. Yet, that fact is critical to understanding the present European crisis. Perhaps if the American people were presented with all the pertinent facts, they would not be a bit more circumspect in their harsh judgment of Putin. But, that would work against the agenda of the Neoliberal Globalist House of Rothschild and Soros and their minions. Recall the points made in this article, supra. Consider: the EU is the political, social, and economic arm of the Rothschild dynasty. NATO is its military arm. Although not every member of the EU is a member of NATO, nonetheless, the EU has developed its own military as a parallel construct to NATO to protect all EU member states. See article in worldview.stratfor.com. And see article in eeas.europa.eu. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/case-eu-defense/Likely an EU military arm would at some point merge with NATO. See article in americanprogress.org. By the way, as pointed out by the website influence watch, “The Center for American Progress Action Fund (CAP Action), established in July 2003 by longtime Clinton family confidant John Podesta, liberal billionaire George Soros, and a handful of other former Washington, D.C. Democrats and Clinton administration officials, is a leading force in progressive media as the publisher of the left-wing blog Think Progress.” This Soros/Rothschild NGA is pushing to embroil the U.S. into the thick of the Ukraine/Russia conflict. The U.S. has never faced off against Russia or China directly, and for good reason. Each of these Nations has enough nuclear weaponry to destroy the world many times over. That doesn't faze Soros and the Rothschilds in their lust to control all of Europe, and much of the rest of the world. But, the American people should see these creatures for what they are: ruthless, greedy, wrathful killers, no less so than Putin or Xi Jinping.Not surprisingly, the Soros/Rothschild machine is tied to the Democrat Party. See article on the website, Legal Insurrection.“The Center for American Progress (CAP), the George Soros funded Democratic messaging machine, runs the aggressive Think Progress website.Think Progress is obsessed with attacking the Tea Party movement as racist, the Koch Brothers as evil manipulators, and Clarence Thomas as corrupt. Think Progress blogger Matthew Yglesias helped ignite the false story that Sarah Palin’s electoral map was connected to the Gabrielle Giffords shooting.Think Progress is the public face of CAP, dominating news cycles with its relentless attacks on anyone who opposes Obama.CAP, which was run for years by former Clinton adviser John Podesta, now is run by a former Obama campaign staffer, Neera Tanden.Now the White House is bringing a senior CAP strategist Jennifer Palmieri into the White House to help prepare for the 2012 campaign.  As reported by Glenn Thrush at Politico:The White House is bringing onboard high-octane Clinton administration  veteran Jennifer Palmieri , a top official at the progressive Center for  American Progress think tank, to beef up its communications unit heading into  2012, POLITICO has learned.Palmieri , who currently serves as president of CAP’s political action fund  and as a senior vice president at the parent organization, replaces former  deputy communications director Jennifer Psaki, who left for the private sector  earlier this fall.A senior Obama campaign official now runs CAP and Think Progress.  A senior CAP strategist now helps run the 2012 campaign from inside the White House.  The full embrace of CAP and Think Progress by the White House is just another sign that 2012 will be the nastiest campaign ever, with the truth the first victim.The merger of the White House and Think Progress is just about complete.  Think Progress is in control, or is the Obama campaign, or is there no difference anymore?”Naturally, the messaging is geared to impress the American people that, Putin's incursion into Ukraine is destined to fail. Below is a recent bit of propaganda put forth by the Soros Globalist Open Society Think Progress website:“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has turned into a quagmire for Russian President Vladimir Putin. Russia is now engaged in a war it cannot win. No matter how events play out on the battlefield, Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is a strategic disaster for Russia.The inept Russian military advances and the strong performance from Ukraine’s forces have given Ukraine an incredibly dangerous weapon in war: belief. Ukrainian forces have fought valiantly and withstood Russian incursions. Ukraine has now mobilized as a country to fight and have imposed significant losses on Russian forces. Though it is difficult to assess casualty figures, NBC reported that U.S. and Ukrainian officials both estimate nearly 6,000 deaths compared to official Russian figures at nearly 500. Even if the numbers at the lower end are accurate, that would still amount to a substantial toll. The losses for Russia may worsen, as the war shifts to a more violent phase, with Russian forces trying to take major Ukrainian cities, where they will likely face tremendous resistance.U.S. and Ukrainian officials both estimate nearly 6,000 deaths compared to official Russian figures at nearly 500. Even if the numbers at the lower end are accurate, that would still amount to a substantial toll.Even if Russian forces abruptly take Kyiv or destroy Ukraine militarily, such tactical victories on the battlefield will do little to help Russia govern Ukraine. Politically, Ukraine is lost for Russia. Potential military success won’t make this any less of a political disaster for Russia. It is not just the military resistance to ‘Russian forces that should worry Putin—just as significant are the peaceful protests that are playing out in small towns “seized’ by Russian forces. It is very hard to see how a pro-Russian puppet regime will govern the country. Any installed regime will need the support of a massive security apparatus to terrify the population, arrest dissidents, and brutally suppress any insurgency. There is little doubt that Putin would be willing to proceed down this path. But it is difficult to see how he can do so practically. The military force sent to invade Ukraine might be large enough to take the country, but it is not large enough to govern it.”To control Ukraine, Russia will have to have support from actors on the ground—politicians, police, and other security forces. In the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the United States had some significant popular support from the oppressed Shia majority and was removing a reviled dictator. It is difficult, if not impossible, to see widespread Ukrainian acceptance of a Russian occupation and a pro-Russian leader. Comprehensive Russian military success on the battlefield, coupled with significant financial enticements, might entice some in Ukraine to support such a regime. But given that Ukrainian society has already mobilized for war, there will doubtless be people that keep up the fight and resort to an insurgent campaign to increase the costs of Russia’s occupation. No matter what, Ukraine will be a huge economic and military drain for the Kremlin.”But, who are the Rothschilds and Soros attempting to convince here? Putin or the American people? Putin won't be deterred. And, it is clear from the above commentary, that the House of Rothschild and George Soros know that Ukraine will fall to Russia, and that Putin does not intend to stop at Eastern Ukraine. He intends to take over the entire Country. For Putin this would mean, one, creation of a buffer zone from the EU and NATO onto the doorstep of Russia, two, extension of Russia's own empire; and three, payback for the CIA/U.S. State Department Euromaidan coup that brought a Rothschild puppet into control of Ukraine after deposing Putin's own puppet, Yanukovych, and replacing him with the CIA/U.S. State Department/Rothschild puppet, Turchynov. The Rothschild disinformation machine says that the Euromaidan was a popular protest that had nothing to do with foreign interference. See, the following narrative from euvsdisinfo.eu:“Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative depicting the 2013-14 protests in Kyiv as a coup d’état orchestrated by the West. There was no coup d’état in Ukraine. The onset of the Euromaidan protests was a spontaneous and endogenous reaction by numerous segments of the Ukrainian population to former President Yanukovych’s sudden withdrawal from the promised Association Agreement with the European Union in November 2013. The protesters’ demands included constitutional reform, a stronger role for parliament, the formation of a government of national unity, an end to corruption, early presidential elections and an end to violence.” The Rothschild disinformation machine says that the Euromaidan was a popular protest that had nothing to do with foreign interference. But the CIA would hardly advertise its dirty work. But its MO is all over this and it isn't the first time. See article on CIA involvement in instigating protests in Chile and in Iran, infra.Unlike the afore-referenced article, there is a well-researched and well-reasoned essay by Martin Armstrong on Ukrainian history, from the early 21st Century to the present, on his website Armstrong Economics, that also makes light of CIA involvement in the Euromaidan. Armstrong stresses the corruption endemic in Ukraine that is its own clear evidence of little need for the CIA to topple Yanukovych, as there was reason enough for the people to be sufficiently enraged by the Yanukovych regime to get rid of him, but the Nuland conversation with Geoffrey Pyatt doesn't negate the inference of CIA involvement, as western Neoliberal Globalist expansionism throughout the EU and in much of the rest of the world, together with a lengthy history of U.S. State Department/CIA/Rothschild involvement in empire-building around the world, is well established and not to be denied. The U.S. State Department/CIA/Rothschild wanted Yanukovych gone, and, with it, Kremlin influence, and the Neoliberal Globalists would do whatever was required to help that along.  And, one must wonder how Zelensky, who, as Armstrong says, is a comedian and actor with no prior political experience happened to become prime minister isn't adequately explained. And, it turns out that Zelensky is as ruthless and as corrupt as any of his predecessors. Quite some comedian that Zelensky!Armstrong writes, “After Viktor Yanukovych was removed from power in early 2014 during the 2014 Ukrainian Revolution, the chairman of parliament Oleksandr Turchynov was appointed to the role of acting president. The Ukrainian people were very upset for they believed that there would be no real change. You MUST draw a line between what the people did and what the West did afterward. These people who attribute everything to an all-powerful CIA plot have NO personal knowledge of anything and spew out their opinion as if it were fact. The whole “Fuck the EU!” comment by Victoria Nuland phoning with Geoffrey Pyatt was reported on February 7th, 2014 and it only illustrates that there were efforts to gain control of the situation in Ukraine, but it does not demonstrate that the CIA organized the revolution from the start. Yanukovych fled Ukraine on February 22, 2014, just about 3 months from the beginning of the protests.Yanukovych was an oligarch and his police were shaking down businesses and forcing them to pay his two sons. He was running Ukraine the same way oligarchs ran Russia. You obey their commands or you die. If you had a business that was really doing well, Yanukovych and his sons would confiscate it. That is what caused the people to rise up, it was nothing the CIA managed to do. I had personal friends on the barricades. I was deeply concerned for their safety and was in regular contact offering my advice.I can tell you that the West installed the leaders thereafter and the people were told if they dared to revolt against them, they would lose all support from both the EU and the USA. The puppet president, Oleksandr Turchynov served as the acting president from February 23 until June 7, 2014, and was the only person in Ukrainian history to serve in the role. During his tenure, Turchynov was addressed as “acting president” by other Ukrainian politicians and the media.This was followed by a questionable 2014 election which took place on May 25th, with businessman Petro Poroshenko claiming to have won just over 54% percent of the vote. Yulia Tymoshenko was the runner-up with around 13%. Poroshenko was sworn in as president on June 7th, 2014. Poroshenko was a Ukrainian billionaire businessman known as the ‘Chocolate King’. However, our direct sources at the time in the East made it plain that they were unable to vote as the polling stations were destroyed by the pro-Russian terrorists/tourists. Those who would have voted in the East may have voted for Poroshenko because the general feeling was they needed a President who would have a majority vote with no run-offs to prevent civil war.Nonetheless, Poroshenko was also a seasoned politician. He has served as the Minister of Foreign Affairs from 2009 to 2010, and as the Minister of Trade and Economic Development in 2012. From 2007 until 2012, he headed the Council of Ukraine’s National Bank. He is pro-West for economic freedom. The fact that he was a billionaire who has created businesses rather than inherited them or filled his pockets like Viktor Yanukovych, was good for he was seen as someone who would not rob the treasury and b beyond potential bribes. Yanukovych was not poor, but he was not a businessman in reality. Still, Ukraine’s east remained caught in a torrent of violence that was maturing into a civil war that we are really seeing today. This was a major challenge that tested Poroshenko who had promised to navigate between Russia and the West. But the fighting continued as the separatist rebellion in the Donets Basin continued. Poro­shenko said at the time:“The first steps of our entire team at the beginning of the presidency will concentrate on ending the war, ending the chaos, ending the disorder and bringing peace to Ukrainian soil, to a united, single Ukraine,” at a victory rally Sunday. “Our decisive actions will bring this result fairly quickly.”Poroshenko has also said he wants to lead Ukraine to closer ties with the European Union. During his speeches, Poroshenko on numerous occasions has called the war in East Ukraine a “Patriotic War”, yet did not initiate implementation of martial law. Nevertheless, the violence that prevented many citizens in eastern Ukraine from voting, demonstrates the old anti-democratic attitude there. It is their way or no way – sheer dictatorship. Separatists in the region had vowed to disrupt the vote, and they largely succeeded in shutting that down knowing they would lose. If the vote would have been for leaving Ukraine at the time, then they would have made sure the people voted. But that was not the case.Putin said a day before Ukraine voted that Russia would “cooperate with the authorities that will come to power as a result of the election,” but he added that he continued to consider Yanukovich the legitimate president of the country. Eventually, on June 18, 2015, Yanukovych was officially deprived of the title of President of Ukraine retroactively.Poroshenko set up an offshore company in the British Virgin Islands to shelter his taxes from the sale of his company. Leaked documents from the Panama Papers from 2016 revealed that Poroshenko registered the company, Prime Asset Partners Ltd, on August 21st, 2014. He denied any wrongdoing and his legal firm, Avellum, overseeing the sale of Roshen, Poroshenko’s confectionery company, said that “any allegations of tax evasion are groundless”. The anti-corruption group Transparency International believes that the “creation of businesses while serving as president is a direct violation of the constitution”. His name was cited in the list of politicians named in “Paradise Papers” allegations.This allegation of tax evasion arose during the 2019 election which took place on March 31st, with a run-off on April 21st. As a result of this election, Volodymyr Zelensky, a former actor and comedian with no prior political experience became the sixth President of Ukraine with 73% of the popular vote in the run-off against the incumbent Petro Poroshenko.Within months of the election, on December 20th, 2019, Ukrainian law enforcement raided both Poroshenko’s party headquarters and gym on the orders of President Zelensky who has turned out to be ruthless and a questionable head of state. The raid was intended to eliminate any possible influence of Poroshenko going forward. It was used to launch criminal investigations focused of alleged theft of servers with classified information and tax evasion which is now always called money laundering. Zelensky outright accused Poroshenko of state treason, aiding terrorist organizations, and financing terrorism due to allegedly organizing the purchase of coal from separatist-controlled areas of Ukraine together with pro-Russian politician Viktor Medvedchuk. Poroshenko denied the allegations, calling them “fabricated, politically motivated, and black PR directed against [Zelensky’s] political opponents”.One thing that no serious historian would quibble about is the nature of the Ukrainian Government. It is corrupt to its core, and if the Country is to be described as a democracy as the Press in this Country constantly informs Americans, then there is nothing about democracy to recommend it. Ukraine is a textbook example of the failings of any notion of direct democracy as a form of Government that Democrats incessantly wax poetic about. It is mob rule. And, if the U.S. is to take its cue from Ukraine, this Country will become much like it. That is reason enough for Americans to usher the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Democrats out of Congress and contain the beast of the Administrative Deep State with all appreciable speed.The Neoliberal Globalist Rothschild elites have used the Ukrainian/Russian debacle to entangle the United States more fully into the spider web of the EU/UN conglomerate, and are also using the crisis in Ukraine to deflect from the serious problems at home on every critical policy issue. There is nothing for the American public to be content about it in the Biden/Pelosi agenda. And embroiling the U.S. in the affairs of Europe will do nothing to extricate our Country from our own problems and will only draw us into a serious catastrophic reckoning with Russia that will draw us and the world one step closer to a nuclear catastrophe. By inserting its military into Ukraine did Putin fall into a Rothschild trap, binding the U.S. more closely with the EU and bringing Ukraine inevitably into the fold of the EU? The Rothschilds pushed Putin against a wall. And innocent Ukrainian people are paying the price. And, more Europeans, as well as Americans, may well pay the price for the Neoliberal Globalists' grandiose ambition to control the entire seemingly free world: the quest to bring to fruition an extensive world-wide neo-feudal empire going under the peculiarly innocuous name of the Open Society. If the Rothschilds deliberately pushed Putin's back to the wall on Ukraine, he didn't have much of a choice as to how to extricate Russia other than to move against it, as failure to do so would have seen that nation eventually becoming an EU and or NATO member anyway, and Russia would be facing nuclear-tipped missiles looking down its throat. This could all have been avoided if the CIA/U.S. State Department hadn't instigated or, have, at the very least a hand in the Euromaidan protest in 2013. But, Americans have seen this all before. It is the Modus Operandi of the Rothschild-backed CIA/U.S. State Department policy arm of global conquest and it does nothing to promote world stability but, rather, for the benefit of short-term financial gain and all for the hope of long-term geopolitical gang, global instability is the ultimate result. Look to history. See, e.g., article in the Mosaddegh Foundation.

“The 1953 Iranian coup d'état (known in Iran as the 28 Mordad coup) saw the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh on 19 August 1953 and the installation of a military government. This coup was orchestrated by the intelligence agencies of the United Kingdom and the United States under the name TPAJAX Project. The result of this event was that under the direct orders of Mohammad-Rezā Shāh Pahlavi, the administration of the country got out of the hands of the parliament to find itself under the supervision of an illegitimate government.  The establishment of this power was under major support of its foreign allies until its overthrow in 1979.

In 1951, Iran's oil industry was nationalized with near-unanimous support of Iran's parliament in a bill introduced by Mossadegh, who led the oil commission of the parliament. Iran's oil had been controlled by the British-owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC) under license, and was only a source of little revenue for the country. Popular discontent with the AIOC began in the late 1940s as a large segment of Iran's public and a number of politicians saw the company as exploitative and a vestige of British imperialism. Despite Mosaddegh's popular support, Britain was unwilling to negotiate its single most valuable foreign asset, and instigated a worldwide boycott of Iranian oil to pressure Iran economically. Initially, Britain mobilized its military to seize control of the Abadan oil refinery, the world's largest, but Prime Minister Clement Attlee opted instead to tighten the economic boycott while using Iranian agents to undermine Mosaddegh's government. With a change to more conservative governments in both Britain and the United States, Churchill and the U.S. Eisenhower administration decided to overthrow Iran's government though the previous U.S. Truman administration had opposed a coup.” See also article on the website History.

American propaganda messaging and film played up the regime of the Shah of Iran as an example of modern industrialization in a third-world Country. It was nothing of the sort. Underneath the veneer of democracy and modern industrialization the Country was a brutal torture chamber. And, the result was something much worse than a regime under the Socialist, Mosaddegh, whose great crime, was a cooperative relationship with the Soviet Union. Soon the U.S. and Europe, tired of their puppet, instigated or simply allowed matters in Iran to get out of hand. And, worse than either the Shah or Mosaddegh before him, Iran fell into a ruthless theocracy under the Ayatollah Khomeini. See article in the New American. And the U.S. is suffering the consequences from that, for over forty years now.Also in the 1950s, the CIA engineered a coup in Chile that brought the brutal dictatorship of General Augusto Pinochet to power.And some sources say that the CIA was also instrumental in placing Iraq's Saddam Hussein into power:“US intelligence helped Saddam's Ba`ath Party seize power for the first time in 1963. Evidence suggests that Saddam was on the CIA payroll as early as 1959, when he participated in a failed assassination attempt against Iraqi strongman Abd al-Karim Qassem. In the 1980s, the US and Britain backed Saddam in the war against Iran, giving Iraq arms, money, satellite intelligence, and even chemical & bio-weapon precursors. As many as 90 US military advisors supported Iraqi forces and helped pick targets for Iraqi air and missile attacks.” See also GPF archive:“The last time Donald Rumsfeld saw Saddam Hussein, he gave him a cordial handshake. The date was almost 20 years ago, Dec. 20, 1983; an official Iraqi television crew recorded the historic moment.The once and future Defense secretary, at the time a private citizen, had been sent by President Ronald Reagan to Baghdad as a special envoy. Saddam Hussein, armed with a pistol on his hip, seemed ‘vigorous and confident,’ according to a now declassified State Department cable obtained by NEWSWEEK. Rumsfeld ‘conveyed the President's greetings and expressed his pleasure at being in Baghdad,’ wrote the notetaker. Then the two men got down to business, talking about the need to improve relations between their two countries.Like most foreign-policy insiders, Rumsfeld was aware that Saddam was a murderous thug who supported terrorists and was trying to build a nuclear weapon. (The Israelis had already bombed Iraq's nuclear reactor at Osirak.) But at the time, America's big worry was Iran, not Iraq. The Reagan administration feared that the Iranian revolutionaries who had overthrown the shah (and taken hostage American diplomats for 444 days in 1979-81) would overrun the Middle East and its vital oilfields. On the-theory that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, the Reaganites were seeking to support Iraq in a long and bloody war against Iran. The meeting between Rumsfeld and Saddam was consequential: for the next five years, until Iran finally capitulated, the United States backed Saddam's armies with military intelligence, economic aid and covert supplies of munitions.FORMER ALLIESRumsfeld is not the first American diplomat to wish for the demise of a former ally. After all, before the cold war, the Soviet Union was America's partner against Hitler in World War II. In the real world, as the saying goes, nations have no permanent friends, just permanent interests. Nonetheless, Rumsfeld's long-ago interlude with Saddam is a reminder that today's friend can be tomorrow's mortal threat. As President George W. Bush and his war cabinet ponder Saddam's successor's regime, they would do well to contemplate how and why the last three presidents allowed the Butcher of Baghdad to stay in power so long.The history of America's relations with Saddam is one of the sorrier tales in American foreign policy. Time and again, America turned a blind eye to Saddam's predations, saw him as the lesser evil or flinched at the chance to unseat him. No single policymaker or administration deserves blame for creating, or at least tolerating, a monster; many of their decisions seemed reasonable at the time. Even so, there are moments in this clumsy dance with the Devil that make one cringe. It is hard to believe that, during most of the 1980s, America knowingly permitted the Iraq Atomic Energy Commission to import bacterial cultures that might be used to build biological weapons. But it happened.America's past stumbles, while embarrassing, are not an argument for inaction in the future. Saddam probably is the ‘grave and gathering danger’ described by President Bush in his speech to the United Nations last week. It may also be true that ‘whoever replaces Saddam is not going to be worse,’ as a senior administration official put it to NEWSWEEK. But the story of how America helped create a Frankenstein monster it now wishes to strangle is sobering. It illustrates the power of wishful thinking, as well as the iron law of unintended consequences.”The history of CIA/State Department machinations in the affairs of other Countries is long, disheartening, ignoble, and, ultimately, disastrous for our Nation's long-term security. The very notion of ‘regime change’ as foreign policy is presumptuous and arrogant, and, regardless of how the Press spins it, any relationship to the desire to promote this, thing, ‘democracy,’ is a damnable lie. The CIA/State Department toadies of the House of Rothschild wish to maintain control of Ukraine, but the reason for it has nothing to do with promoting democracy which doesn't exist in Ukraine anyway. The goal is to extend the reach of the Rothschilds' control over the remains of western nation-states. A ruthless dictator is far easier to control than that of a civil libertarian leader whose goal is less his own glorification, and more the motivation of the denizens of his Country to succeed in a myriad of fields. A neo-feudal empire cannot long survive where the average citizen is empowered to control his own destiny and seeks to ensure that nothing his Government does will interfere with control over his own selfhood. The larger a feudal empire grows, the more rigid and uniform in structure it must be. The Neoliberal Globalists view billions of commoners as random bits of energy that have to be brought under a strict, regimented system lest the entire system become unwieldy and collapse as people seek to make their own way in the world to maximize their personal potential. That was the basis for the success of the United States for centuries and that is precisely what the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalists don't want. The Biden Administration's policies are all directed to dumbing down the population for the purpose of maximizing control over the populace.And, what do such policies do for the American people? Nothing beneficial for them. But, don’t we have a say in our own destiny? President Trump wanted to keep our Nation neutral, thereby strengthening it against a takeover by either the House of Rothschild or China. That singular policy objective has gone by the board under the Biden Administration, whose policies, not surprisingly, mirror the objectives of the United Nations and the EU, and do not benefit the American citizenry.Both the Rothschild Dynasty and CCP China had their own reasons to shunt Trump and the American people who supported him aside, and that is exactly what has happened. A strong, independent, sovereign United States has no place in a Collectivist Dystopian world.Those Americans who thought Trump dangerous to the security of the Country have ironically opened themselves up, and the rest of us along with them, to true danger, immeasurable grief, and horror, at the hands of the toadies of both Xi Jinping and the Rothschilds who are both vying for control over the U.S. _________________________________WHERE IS THE UNITED STATES AND THE WORLD HEADED UNDER THE “PUNCH AND JUDY SHOW” THAT THE LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD—THE UNITED STATES—HAS METAMORPHOSED INTO?Controlling information access, curbing dissent, curtailment of privacy, destroying the right to own personal property, reducing the commonalty to a state of abject poverty through Federal Reserve monetary policy and U.S. Department of Treasury fiscal policy machinations, insinuation into the commonalty’s health and financial records, and confiscation of the commonalty’s firearms—these are the vehicles through which the House of Rothschild its minions intend to bring to fruition their grandiose supra-transnational, multicultural, neo-feudal empire spanning the globe: a new world order qua “Open Society.”A massive global Triumvirate is taking shape, an arrangement among three powerful blocs:

• The Rothschild Dynasty’s “Free World”/“Open Society,” consolidating power and control over the remains of the EU, the Commonwealth Nations, and the Countries of North and South America
• CCP China, controlling Asia, the Indo-Pacific Region; 
• Russia, controlling its great landmass and the Baltic Region of Europe, extending its own empire and hoping to create a firm buffer against the weight of the Rothschild Dynasty’s Euro/Atlantic global empire. See article in Carnegieendowment.org

Africa, the Middle East region, and the Arctic and Antarctic regions, along with “Space Supremacy,” are up for grabs.Can the commonalty of Canada and the United States retain sovereignty and independence as the Rothschild western neo-feudal Global empire and CCP China clash for dominance over North America? Our best chance to do so would have been with Trump. That is not possible with the present Administration, whose goes are antithetical to an ascendant, strong, United States.The common people of Canada have no control over the greater world, as fought over by the Rothschilds, CCP China, and Russia. But, if the concept of sovereign independent nation-state is to survive the coming cataclysm as both CCP China and the Rothschilds fight for domination over North America, it is incumbent on the common peoples of both Countries that they first recognize the vise-grip around them. They have caught on to the grand scheme—saying “enough already.”The Canadian people realize that Justin Trudeau is merely a “pretty-boy,” effeminate sop; a figurehead, controlled by and buffeted by both the House of Rothschild and CCP China. Neither of those two powers have any interest in securing the welfare of Canadians. The common people of Canada are simply viewed as expendable dross to the Rothschields and to China.And Americans are presently stuck with Joe Biden: a vacuous husk, barely functioning, barely able to communicate intelligibly the script handed to him, but serving as a convenient focal point for the Country as the Rothschild Dynasty consolidates control over all the apparatuses of the Federal Government and attempts to exert complete control over the States in defiance of the doctrine of federalism.But, the citizenry of the U.S. and the Canadian subjects of the Crown in Canada have one strength that the Hoi Polloi throughout the rest of the world don’t have. They are armed. And both the Trudeau Government and the Biden Administration intend to disarm their Country’s citizenry, as they must although this is easier said than done. Yet, the fact remains: the Rothschild neo-feudal empire/“Open Society” cannot come to fruition until all sovereign nation-states collapse. And that cannot happen either to Canada or to the United States as long as the common people are armed.Both we, the common people, and the Neoliberal Globalist ruling elite know that the world is at a crossroads; an inflection point.The Globalist elites must suppress armed resistance. This is no easy task.  Canadians and Americans alike are becoming justifiably increasingly anxious and restless at the clear loss of their fundamental liberties.Clearly, the Globalist overlords want and need to exert dominance over the two major Nations of North America as they have gained dominance over most nations of the EU. But it is much more difficult. Canada, a British Commonwealth Nation, while tied to the English Monarchy is not tied to the EU. And the Government of the U.S. is tied neither to the English Monarchy nor is it tied to Brussels.The impact of the American Revolution of 1776 cannot be convincingly denied, nor ever overturned through overt means, i.e., through a Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist Counterrevolution.Rebellion against tyranny—the predicate basis for the American Revolution is firmly rooted in the soul of most Americans and cannot be easily removed; nor can the American Revolution be overturned easily through covert means. And, while the Bill of Rights of Canada says nothing of a right of the people to keep and bear arms, it is arms they do in fact bear and will not easily surrender them, even in the absence of a well-defined natural law tradition of a right of self-defense against tyranny through force of arms.The U.S. is different. We have such a tradition. The Globalist puppetmasters know this full well and they have, through time, constructed, developed, and implemented elaborate, comprehensive, and intensive social engineering programs to destabilize American society and to disassemble societal institutions grounded in the right of the people to bear arms against tyranny. And the American people have seen that tyranny is in evidence through the erosion of fundamental freedoms and liberties.Through the implementation of intensive and expansive psychological conditioning programs designed to rewire the psyche of the American citizenry, Americans are being methodically conditioned to repudiate their history, heritage, culture, and Christian ethos. Much attention has been directed to and considerable energy expended in attempting to undermine the public’s veneration for their fundamental freedoms and to undercut their undying belief in the value of liberty and eradicate the very notion that the armed citizenry could in fact defeat a determined Government in battle. Americans did succeed once before against a formidable and ruthless power and, if the people retain their will, they can do so again.To weaken the American people's resolve and to undermine their faith in the sanctity and inviolability of Self upon which the will to resist tyranny proceeds, is a time-consuming, and costly enterprise.Even with advances in psychological and neurological conditioning and even with the means to target hundreds of millions of people through the vehicle of the “smartphone” and internet, the forces that crush entire countries and people alike may still fail to destroy the will of Americans. For, once the concepts of freedom and liberty take hold in the psyche of the individual and in one’s ancestral memory, they are difficult things, indeed, to dislodge._____________________________________Copyright © 2022 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved. 

MARTIAL LAW IN CANADA; CAN IT HAPPEN IN THE UNITED STATES?

THE GLOBALISTS’ PUPPET JUSTIN TRUDEAU DECLARED MARTIAL LAW IN CANADA; CAN IT HAPPEN HERE IN THE U.S.?

PART ONE

Americans should not only be concerned with but greatly alarmed by Trudeau’s declaration of martial law in Canada. His actions over there have repercussions here, a Nation that resides next door.A declaration of martial law could happen here, but the presence of tens of millions of armed citizens operates as an extraordinarily powerful deterrent against the imposition of it if the Government’s inducement for it were grounded on the notion the armed citizenry itself posed an imminent threat to it.Yet, given the nature of events at home in the U.S. this past year, under a feckless, corrupt, inept, idiotic Administration and an equally feckless corrupt Democrat-Party controlled Congress, the Government could attempt it. If the Biden Administration is that stupid, a bloodbath would ensue—no doubt about that. But it will be the Government’s call. The Government will have to be the instigator of violence against the American people.Americans will not suffer tyranny. That much is clear. The question is how far will this Government go in testing the citizenry's patience? At what point would the Government feel brazen enough to take the risk by pushing the American people against a wall?There are forces both here and abroad that would love to see the Biden Administration call for martial law, as the Trudeau Government did, notwithstanding here, as there,  lack of sound reason—or even flimsy pretext—to do so. Americans have certainly witnessed in the last few years a clear and callous constriction of their fundamental rights and liberties. But the Federal Government hasn’t dared to strangle a person’s life by freezing his or her bank account—at least not yet. And, a truck strike, such as the one in Canada, is not likely to result in anything of the sort occurring here in the U.S. for the very reason that tens of millions of Americans possess firearms. The Canadian citizenry does not. Americans would not tolerate a massive attack on their ability to provide for themselves and their families as a means to subjugate them.Any attempt to destroy one’s life—and that includes an attempt to destroy one’s ability to make a living and having access to their monetary funds—is likely to be met with an equally harsh response by the American people. This is an application of Newton’s Third Law of Motion applied to society. Still, Americans must take notice of what just transpired in Canada. And an analysis of that is in order for there is an elaborate and unpleasant mosaic taking shape in the world—one that impacts all western nation-states.Recent events in Canada mark a major step forward in a massive, albeit secretive global enterprise that transects and transcends the needs, desires, and wishes of the commonalty of all western first-world countries. The goals of that global enterprise are incompatible with the needs, desires, and wishes of the common people of those countries.Canada’s Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, declared martial law in Canada a few days ago, on February 15, 2022. He delivered the declaration of martial law coolly, caustically, perfunctorily, in monotone as if reading a script prepared for him by others, which it undoubtedly was.This declaration of martial law could have been avoided if Trudeau had deigned to meet with spokespeople for the truckers, allowing them the courtesy of airing their justifiable grievances to which, as citizens, they were certainly entitled. That would have obviated the need for an irresponsible, horrific response to their strike—a peaceful act of civil disobedience. But, then, the declaration of martial law wasn't something to be avoided. It was precisely what Trudeau wanted—or rather, and more to the point, it was what those pulling Trudeau’s strings wanted. It was what the Neoliberal Globalist ruling elite wanted—the imposition of totalitarianism on Canada. And the Truckers' strike gave the Neoliberal Globalists the pretext they needed and wanted.Yet, truth to tell, totalitarianism already existed in Canada. The Canadian people didn't know that a week ago. Now they do. The declaration of martial law—i.e., invocation of Canada's Emergencies Act—simply made the fact of totalitarian rule in Canada transparent. The declaration of martial law was little more than a formality.And, the cruel assault of the RCMP and Ottawa’s police on both Canadian truckers and their supporters, that followed, only made the brutality of Totalitarianism, visited on the truckers and on their supporters, more emphatic.The obscene actions of the RCMP and Ottawa’s police simply punctuated the contentious, contemptuous attitude of the ruling Global “elite” toward the Canadian commonalty: a cold, calculated indifference toward the plight of the average Canadian citizen that manifested clearly, definitively as sheer loathing. The Government obviously gave the RCMP and Ottawa police carte blanche in its dealings with the truckers and its supporters. The message heard was loud and clear: “Do whatever you want out there!” And, giving in to the beast within them, they did just that. See, e.g., the story in Daily Mail, and article in Toronto Sun.Easy enough it surely was for Trudeau to declare martial law, sans Court order or Parliamentary consent. There was no hint of reluctance exhibited on his part.Still, the rationale for it from a legal sense, let alone ethical sense, is problematic and the implications of it for both Canada and other western nation-states, including, and especially ours, as Canada’s closest neighbor, is deeply troubling.This is no small matter. It marks an unprecedented step backward—to outright barbarism—and it is a dire omen for Americans.But, to think of Canada as a “democracy” that, through a set of unfortunate circumstances turned toward totalitarianism is false. Of course, the term ‘democracy,’—overused and bandied about ad nauseum as it is today, as, for example, among “Progressives” here in our own Country—has little, if anything, to recommend it either here or in Canada. And it is of little note in any event.Despite a hitherto close rapport with Canada, the fact remains that, in its governance, Canada isn’t like the United States, and never was.As a British Commonwealth Country, Canada is a Constitutional Monarchy. It is also described as a Parliamentary Democracy. On its public website, one learns that——“The Prime Minister heads the federal government based in Ottawa. [And at the moment that person is Justin Trudeau].

• the Queen or King of Canada is the head of state
• the Prime Minister is the head of government

The Governor General represents the Queen in Canada. The Sovereign appoints the Governor General on the Prime Minister’s advice. The appointment is usually for five years.”One thing Canada definitely isn’t is a “Republic.” The United States is a true Republic.Specifically, “The United States, under its Constitution, is a federal, representative, democratic republic, an indivisible union of 50 sovereign States.” See govinfo pdf. Unlike Canada, Australia, and New Zealand—there is no foreign head of state in the United States, whether of “royal blood” or not. Americans threw the yoke of tyranny off once and forever in the American Revolution of 1776.Unlike the Commonwealth Nations, our Constitution established three co-equal branches with carefully limited and demarcated powers and authority. This was calculated to keep the Nation’s Federal Government from descending into tyranny. This hasn’t worked out so well. But, then, the Framers of the Constitution wouldn’t be altogether surprised by this. They were not so naïve as to believe that carefully delineated and demarcated powers among three co-equal Branches would of itself prevent unscrupulous types from consolidating powers in two Branches of the Government and eventually in all three, and, upon accomplishing that, attempt to usurp from the American people the sovereignty over Government that belongs solely to them.Only the Bill of Rights would keep Government truly in check, and among those sacred, natural, illimitable, immutable, unalienable rights, the right of the people to keep and bear arms is the final arbiter of the power and authority of the American people over Government. If tyranny were to reign supreme over the American people it would only do so by clashing with the armed citizenry and vanquishing the citizenry in armed conflict.Application of martial law against a citizenry constitutes the erasure of the exalted values of civil liberties and a tacit declaration of war on one’s own citizenry. Western Countries talk glowingly of  “liberal democracy” as if such a thing were a godsend, even though it isn’t. It is merely a political trope of the ruling “elite” suggesting to the commonalty the existence of a beneficent, benevolent system of governance that hides a sinister aim—complete subjugation of the populations of all western nation-states.Just how illusive “democracy” was in Canada was made depressingly clear through the ease by which Canada’s civil liberties were summarily erased.And, what was the rationale and motivation for Trudeau’s invocation of Canada’s “Emergencies Act?”The Conservative Institute says this:“Canada’s embattled tyrant Justin Trudeau declared martial law Monday in a desperate bid to crush the truckers who have been protesting his COVID mandates for more than two weeks.Effectively labeling the protesters terrorists, Trudeau announced he would invoke a never-before-used law, the Emergencies Act, that would give him the power to ban public assembly and freeze the bank accounts of anyone helping the demonstrators.The Emergencies Act can only be invoked in a dire emergency” that ‘seriously endangers the lives, health or safety of Canadians.’ It has never been used in Canada’s history.By invoking it Monday, Trudeau was essentially declaring peaceful demonstrators who have blockaded the capital of Ottawa to demand an end to COVID restrictions an unprecedented threat to Canada’s security. He laid out a series of extreme measures to deal with the ‘threat.’Trudeau warned that protesters who fail to obey his orders could lose their vehicle insurance and have their personal bank accounts frozen without a court order. Tow truck drivers could also be coerced to cooperate in breaking up the demonstrations. The authoritarian measures, Trudeau said, are ‘necessary and responsible,‘ and would be ‘time-limited.’” See also the article in NY Post.Trudeau’s invocation of martial law in Canada does not, in his very utterance of it, speak of the need for it, but begs the question,“ ‘Can it truly be said the security of Canada is threatened by largely non-violent protests? Certainly, our sovereignty and territorial integrity are not at risk.’” See article in the New York Post, citing, “Leah West, an assistant professor at Carleton University in Ottawa,” who pointed out that “‘The federal government [of Canada] must consult with provinces and Cabinet must believe the protests rise to the level of a national emergency.’”And, there’s the rub. The territorial integrity of Canada was never at risk. Trudeau apparently never did this. He never consulted with the Parliament and with the Canadian Provinces, as he is required to do. In fact, Parliament would not have granted authority in any case. See article in Lifesitenews. Many critical questions are raised that have gone unanswered. “Conservative Party interim Leader Candice Bergen. . . suggested that Prime Minister’s antics were unneeded & making the situation worse, [asserting, on January 16, 2022] in the Canadian Parliament, ‘Yesterday, I noted that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau would have to get approval from the Canadian Parliament to enact the odious ‘Emergencies Act.’ Given the fact he heads a minority government and that many Canadian citizens support the goals of the Freedom Convoy protest, Members of Parliament may not be too keen to grant it.It appears I was right. Less than 24-hours after declaring wide-ranging powers, including terror finance laws to defund the trucker, Trudeau came to parliament to persuade them to support his move.’” “Trudeau responded with blather, completely dodging Bergen’s pointed queries. Bergen even noted that there were significant developments that negated the need to invoke the Act:

• The Coutts border between the US and Alberta has been cleared.
• The Ambassador Bridge is fully
• Ontario is ending its vaccine mandate.

When Trudeau explained he was implementing the “Emergencies Act” for the safety of Canadians, he was booed loudly.  When he said he was demonstrating exemplary leadership, there were laughter and jeers.  The Speaker of Parliament had to step in to quiet the uproar several times.Interim Conservative Party leader Bergen made one exceptional point: What if what Trudeau is doing makes things worse?Indeed, the situation appears to be poised to be far more problematic as the truckers remain defiant.” See article on the website, legal insurrection.Indeed, the situation is problematic! Martial law shall exist in Canada indefinitely. The Neo-liberal Globalist masters have tightened the noose around Canada, just as they have done so in Australia, New Zealand, and as they are doing so in the EU. Only the U.S. remains obstinately, indefatigably resistant and defiant to despotic rule. Shall it remain so?_____________________________________Copyright © 2022 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

AMERICA'S BILL OF RIGHTS IN IMMINENT DANGER OF COLLAPSE

ROTHSCHILD GAME PLAN TO OVERTURN THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION: FIRST CONTROL SPEECH, THEN CONTROL GUNS

PART ONE

THE “OPEN SOCIETY”: CODE FOR TOTAL CONTROL OF MANKIND

Words are traps for the unwary. In the hands of the adept proselytizer, they can kill a person just as assuredly as a bullet through the brain, a knife through the heart, or a potassium cyanide capsule in the stomach. But words are more facile than guns, knives, or potassium cyanide. For words target the mind. They target the thoughts of men. In the hands of the skilled practitioner, words can sway the emotions, or stir the intellect. They can educate or indoctrinate. They can confuse or elucidate. They can inspire a person to act in a beneficial direction or can propel a person to rabid violence. They can motivate or demotivate. They can instill confidence and self-assurance or infuse timidity, passivity, and anxiety. They can generate pride of self and Country; or they can engender self-loathing and repudiation of the nobility of Self and Country.  Malicious, malevolent forces that crush nations know this, of course. In the age of the smartphone, these forces can reach billions of people in nanoseconds, and they have done so; and continue to do so: incessantly, noxiously, ramping up their messaging, and clamping down on dissent. Americans, especially, need to be cognizant of this, as the Nation is rapidly approaching an inflection point: The United States either survives as a true Free Constitutional Republic that the founders of our Republic gave us, or falls into ruin, never again to rise in prominence; never again to exist as a small bright beacon of hope and freedom in a broad, dark, dank strife-ridden world. The Country is at a dichotomous point in its history. The American people can, through a stout heart and a firm grip on their firearms, rekindle a zest in freedom and liberty—the rallying cry against the forces of tyranny. Or they can return to a state of internment, succumbing to defeatism fear, and doubt, constantly projected by the Neo-Marxist and Neoliberal Globalist instigators and agitators of the Rothschild dynasty. Since the earliest days of the Republic, the Rothschild internationalist banking dynasty expected to obtain and maintain complete control over the North American continent, and that included control over the English colonies in America, as their end-goal was and is world domination. That was always in their sight. The colonists didn’t much care to be a part of the Rothschilds’ game plan. They had other plans: freedom from tyranny and their Declaration of Independence from Tyranny made that singular aim crystal clear to those whose objective was and is the destruction of the Republic and the emergence of a one-world government, grounded on the tenets of Collectivism.Rothschilds’ first attempt at subjugating the American colonies was transparent and overt: the American Revolutionary War.Through its command of King George’s immense military, the banking dynasty sought to bring quickly to heel what it perceived as a mere ragtag band of malcontented colonists. That didn’t go so well. The Rothschild dynasty and their stooge, George III, lost control of the colonies.The physical loss of the colonies was painful enough for the Rothschild dynasty and for its principal toadies, King George III and the English Parliament. But more painful to the Rothschilds and for their stooges was the personal affront to their egos. So, from the nascent days of the American Republic, the Rothschild dynasty plotted, schemed, and machinated to bring the United States to its knees. And, in the ensuing years, they decided on a different tack to destroy the Country. They conjured up, and through the passing years and decades, they refined an entirely new plan to retake the Country. As overt use of the British military to defeat America’s patriots failed, the Rothschilds devised a covert plan. This one would take a goodly amount of time, money, and organizational ability, all of which they had and now their descendants have in marked abundance. They implemented a plan to destroy the Nation from within. The Rothschilds took under their wing a new and massive collection of underlings, situating them throughout the Federal and State Governments. They showered these sociopaths and rank opportunists with money and the trappings of power and let them loose on the Nation. The Rothschilds found it far easier to consolidate their power over and eventually did take control over, great swathes of western Europe. This included control of a few Baltic States as well, resulting in the creation of a new political, social, economic, and juridical structure: the European Union. But even as they controlled the Commonwealth Nations and even as they gained control over the EU, the prize jewel for them was and is the United States. The demoralization and debasement of the American people and the dismantling of the Republic remained, always, their first and primary focus.And, as the U.S. in time grew increasingly more powerful economically, militarily, geopolitically, and technologically, the Rothschild’s appetite for unfettered control over “the colonies” grew exponentially as well.They intend to remake and control all of western civilization, carving out their share of a world empire be controlled by them and Communist China. The Rothschilds' share of the spoils would include the remains of all western nation-states. And, since the turn of the 21^st Century, both they and their minions have instituted a particularly vicious and virulent, all-encompassing campaign to destroy the sovereignty and independence of these nation-states. But they don’t talk of a “new world order.” No! The catchword for world domination is cloaked in a seemingly innocuous phrase: “the Open Society.”The Rothschilds appointed their darling child, George Soros, to oversee this Herculean task to fuse western nation-states into a new world order, referred to euphemistically as the “Open Society,” to hide its sinister plot for world domination. Dig deep and you find the name George Soros plastered all over this Open Society effort. The Open Society isn’t the path to the liberation of mankind but to its total subjugation. It is a blueprint for the systematic subjugation of billions of people, worldwide, under the guise of liberation. It is a bold, elaborate, insidious plan for domination of all people and all countries. It is no less than a plot to install worldwide tyranny on the mass of humanity. And, it is coming faster than many Americans would like to think, even as they do feel it in their bones.The Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution has no place in the opprobrious Rothschild/Soros Open Society. The Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution has no place in a colossal world empire that seeks to control the lives of billions of people; must control such large masses of people if it is not to fall of its own ponderous weight. Such an enterprise requires unity of thought and expression of all people. There is no place in such a world for individual expression; no place for privacy. And there certainly is no place in such a world for armed citizens who prefer to control their own destiny, free from Government interference; free from militarized police harassment; free from the all-seeing eye of a colossal intelligence apparatus. And, the inklings of the positioning and emplacement of this mammoth beast overlaid on our free Constitutional Republic and on all western countries are all around us._________________________________

JUST HOW IMPORTANT ARE AMERICA’S FREEDOM TO DISSENT AND FREEDOM TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS? THEY ARE EVERYTHING TO OUR NATION’S SURVIVAL AS A FREE REPUBLIC!

PART TWO

With the advent of advances in information technology, the destructive forces of tyranny have gained proficiency in blanketing the national and international political and social landscapes of western nation-states, especially our own, with massive disinformation, misinformation, malinformation, mass censorship, and information blackout campaigns in a blatant attempt to control all thought and action, with the intent of weakening the resolve of free people to resist tyranny.Fissures have opened up in the EU. Hungary and Poland, in particular, have fought against the Rothschild EU. And, of late America’s closest neighbor to the North, Canada, has begun to rebel against tyranny. The Rothschild Government and legacy Press toadies both here and in Canada don’t like what they see. And as western nations have used the pretext of the CCP Coronavirus to clamp down on basic freedoms in both Countries and in western countries around the world, it is also becoming patently clear that these countries are working in concert. More to the point, it is clear that the Rothschild Biden and Trudeau stooges have been working in concert to destroy basic freedoms of the commonalty in both Countries. But the U.S. does have something that Canada and no other nation on Earth has—a true Bill of Rights. No tyranny can long persist where the commonalty bear firearms, as firearms are the only potent defense against predatory animal, predatory man, or predatory government. Both Nations have a Bill of Rights, but there is no mention explicit or implicit of a right of the people of Canada to keep and bear arms. And, even, as to the rights delineated, those rights do not exist as a thing beyond the power of Parliament to modify, abridge, or abrogate. This is clear in paragraph 2 (“Construction of Laws”) of Canada’s Bill of Rights “Part 1”):“Every law of Canada shall, unless it is expressly declared by an Act of the Parliament of Canada that it shall operate notwithstanding the Canadian Bill of Rights, be so construed and applied as not to abrogate, abridge or infringe or to authorize the abrogation, abridgment or infringement of any of the rights or freedoms herein recognized and declared, . . . .”  This means that the Parliament of Canada is the source of all laws of which “Rights” are in Canada are one such set of laws. Since all rights, in Canada, are construed as man-made laws of Parliament, those rights may be abrogated, abridged or infringed if “expressly declared by an Act of Parliament” to effectuate the intent to do so. And, even then, it hardly matters whether an express intent of Parliament to destroy a right exists or not. The Head stooge of Parliament, Justin Trudeau, doesn’t answer to the people or, for that matter, even to the ostensible representatives of the people in Parliament. He answers to his superiors.See, e.g., articles in LifeSite, Redvoice Media, and Breitbart.  Of course, here in the United States, the Great Stooge in Chief, Joe Biden, and the other Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist Rothschild Government shills and toadies don’t adhere to the dictates Congressional Statute, much less do they feel need to abide by the dictates of the Constitution—especially the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. They have systematically squashed the Freedom of Speech, and the attendant to Right of Free Speech, Freedom of Association. Both are in immediate peril.Exercise of the inalienable right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures no longer exists as it has been de facto repealed. See, e.g., report in Republic world and Fox News report.But, while the U.S. Government stooges routinely and perfunctorily ignore or dismiss fundamental rights and liberties, as well as Congressional Statutes, these stooges are hesitant to confiscate Americans’ firearms in bulk. They don’t dare do so, and that enrages the Government. In the interim Anti-American State and local Governments have taken up the slack to enact or attempt to enact a flurry of anti-Second Amendment stopgap measures to constrain and restrain the right of the people to keep and bear arms.And the Federal Government mulls over the use of Executive Orders, Congressional legislation, and promulgation of ATF Rules in defiance of both the Second Amendment guarantee and U.S. Supreme Court Heller and McDonald precedents.The Government is deliberately shaking a hornets’ nest.______________________________________

IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PROVOKING AMERICA’S ARMED CITIZENRY INTO OPEN CONFRONTATION?

PART THREE

As long as the majority of Americans cherish their God-given right to keep and bear firearms and as long as they make clear their intention to hold onto their firearms, regardless of Government strongarm tactics to disarm them, the forces that seek to dismantle a free Constitutional Republic must exercise caution and circumspection before commencing wholesale confiscation of the citizenry’s firearms. So, at the moment, they must resort to a war of words to ensnare the mind, and they are good at it. The puppet-masters propagandists are actively, avidly at work to change the public’s perception of firearms. They are attempting to instill fear and abhorrence of firearms in the psyche of the public, and are encouraging millions of Americans to turn on those Americans who intend to hold fast to their firearms. And the Government’s stooges, with the assistance of a sympathetic Press, have instilled an abhorrence of firearms in the mind of many average Americans. As many Americans don't see a purpose to having firearms and/or have a deep-seated personal distaste of them, the Government's psychological-conditioning program had no discernible effect on them other than to reinforce their internal stance against firearms and firearms possession. Still, tens of millions of Americans do possess firearms, and they see a need for them if only a personal need; a need attendant to self-defense and/or hunting and/or target shooting as a sport, unrelated to a check on the tyranny of Government, the salient need for an armed citizenry.The Government's propagandists hope to gradually wean most of these Americans off their desire to possess any firearms, as many of these Americans buy into the imbecilic notion that Americans don't need certain kinds of weapons, i.e., “weapons of war,” “assault weapons,” and component parts of such weapons for such purposes as hunting, target shooting, or self-defense. No mention is made at all of the need for adequate firearms to check, thwart, and repel tyranny and of the simple, basis right of Americans to keep and bear firearms, notwithstanding Government's objection to them.The fundamental right of the people to keep and bear arms—be those weapons shotguns, rifles, single-shot pistols, revolvers, semiautomatic firearms, select-fire weapons, submachine guns, and so forth—is not limited to what a government deigns to permit the American citizen to own and possess if any at all. The naiveté of those Americans who think otherwise, along with those Americans who have an inborn deep-seated repugnance of guns or otherwise simply see no need in having them, are attitudes that can very well result in the death of all of us as a free people as most Americans do realize the imminent danger of tyranny that is pressing down on our free Republic.And what, then, is to be made of us—tens of millions of Americans who remain—who recognize the imminent danger of tyranny and its inherent threat to the sovereignty of the American people over Government? Such Americans have resisted psychological conditioning and are immune to the dissembling of the puppet-masters propagandists.The Destroyers of freedom and liberty may feel confident enough to use strong-arm tactics against us. And there are still, a goodly number of us, tens of millions of Americans—who adamantly refuse to submit to Government tyranny. There are, playing out in the United States, two incompatible visions of the world. One might need seriously to consider: what happens when an irresistible force meets an equally immovable object. A bloodbath is likely to result. An irresistible force and an immovable object are both omnipotent. One cannot exist in the same universe as the other. The philosophical conjecture has real-world consequences. A free Constitutional Republic and a sovereign people either continue to exist or they cease to exist: The Rothschild/Soros Open Society new world order destroys this Nation and completely supplants the nation-state paradigm and subjugates the mass of mankind or the American people prevail, and the sanctity and inviolability of the human Soul vanquishes the ruthless forces that dare to crush man into submission. It is one or the other. They are polar opposites. They cannot co-exist in the same reality.If Americans prevail in the coming conflict, the Rothschild/Soros Reality will dissipate. Having secreted itself, unbidden, into the world of the Divine Creator, to wreak its havoc, it will ooze back into the nether, hell-universe from which it arose, and this Nation will at long last be done with it.And, so, matters, as they stand, are rapidly coalescing to a breaking point.It is no accident that one thoroughly contemptible member of Congress, Senator Adam Kinzinger, should recently exclaim that ‘civil war’ may be on the horizon. On the left-leaning website, Real Clear Politics, there is this: “Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) said we cannot trivialize the possibility of a civil war in an appearance on ‘The View’ on Thursday. Kinzinger said a modern-day civil war would include assassinations and armed groups moving against other armed groups.‘If you think somehow that this is going away or that you can downplay this, you can’t,’ Kinzinger said. ‘And I've got to tell you, in five or ten years history is going to judge this quite accurately by 99% of Americans that know the truth. I would not want to be on the side of lies and conspiracy right now. And that’s what we're fighting for is to make sure that our kids get the truth, unvarnished, in the history books that they learn from.’ Kinzinger speaks about his fear of a possible civil war based on the belief that the election was stolen by former President Donald Trump and his supporters.‘I think we have to recognize that possibility,’ Kinzinger said. ‘In the past, I’ve said, ‘Oh, we don’t want to talk about it because, you know, I don't want to make it likely.' Well, let’s look at where we are. A civil war isn't what it was in the 19th century. It's not state against state, blue against gray. It's going to be armed groups against armed groups, targeted assassination, violence.’‘That's what a 21st and 20th century civil war is,’ Kinzinger continued. ‘I don’t think we have to say, you know, we’re identifying now by our race, by our ethnic group, we're separating ourselves and we live in different realities. I don't think it’s too far of a bridge to think that’s a possibility, and I think we have to warn and talk about it so that we can recognize that and fight hard against it, and put our country over our parties because our survival actually matters.’”And, another weblog, with the quirky name, “Boing Boing,” says this: “Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill) warned CNN's Wolf Blitzer yesterday that whitewashing the insurrection is ‘extremely dangerous.’ So dangerous, in fact, that ‘if there was a word even more intense than 'dangerous' I would use that,’ he said.Of course the GOP's strategy of downplaying the attack on the Capitol has snowballed to avalanche proportion, with Trump now promising to pardon the insurrectionists if he becomes president again.Kinzinger told Blitzer that a year ago, he never would have said there was a chance of civil war. But now? ‘It is not a far thought, Wolf, that someday, some militia shows up somewhere to do something, and then some counter-militia shows up, and truly at that point that is how you end up in a civil war.’‘Am I hearing you right, Congressman? You fear, potentially, there could be a civil war here in the United States?’‘I do. . . . We would be naive to think it's not possible here…’ Kinzinger said. ‘Our basic survival is at stake, the basic survival of this democracy.’”See also the article in the British Guardian, and the article in Breitbart. Likely nothing comes out of Kinzinger’s mouth that the Rothschild clan’s puppet masters hadn’t conceived of and precipitated, and filtered down to its minions.With the 2022 November midterms rapidly approaching, and with Pelosi’s ability to milk the January 6 star chamber committee hearing is beginning to weary the public, even as the puppet Kinzinger attempts to jump-start the public’s attention on it, a new pretext to clamp down on the threat posed by tens of millions of armed citizens is needed. If all those “militias” don’t oblige the Destroyers of our Nation to take up arms against the Government on their own initiative, and if the puppet-masters cannot push Americans to commence armed conflict against Government tyranny—well that tyrannical Government may feel it necessary to manufacture a little “civil war” on its own to nudge conflict out into the open and thereby rationalize the confiscation of firearms en masse.  Don’t put it past them to do so! Given all that we have seen to date from this Government, anything is possible. But it must be on their heads, not ours if that should happen. Don’t be egged on by their words but by their actions. The forces that crush are desperate. They need to drive the public to desperation as well, but they need an ostensibly plausible excuse to let loose the police and military on the public.A free Constitutional Republic and a free, sovereign American people cannot falter and fall as long as the citizenry remains armed. But a major program to confiscate firearms in bulk cannot commence without a major pretext to disarm the citizenry. Kinzinger is one flunky who is attempting to infect the citizenry’s psyche with two viral memes: ‘civil war’ and ‘militias.’ Does the Tyrannical Federal Government want this? Perhaps. Does it feel confident it can succeed in it? Only if the majority of the citizenry is behind the Government on this.__________________________

THERE IS NO FREEDOM AND LIBERTY WHERE A COUNTRY’S CITIZENRY IS DISARMED

PART FOUR

It is not by accident that the expressions, ‘Freedom’ and ‘Liberty are coming under fire. After all, Government, whether modeled as an outright dictatorship or as a benign, seemingly benevolent democratic construct, is a constant threat to the sanctity and inviolability of the human Soul. The Founders of our Federal Government knew this, and their meticulous construction of a Government that would function within a free Constitutional Republic, with all the safeguards employed in the Articles of the U.S. Constitution, though absolutely necessary to prevent tyranny, would not of itself be sufficient guard against tyranny.Where there is Government, even Representative Government, such as ours, there tyranny always lingers in the shadows. The Nation’s Bill of Rights alone prevents incursion of tyranny. And the Antifederalists demanded an express delineation of fundamental, immutable, unlimited God-given Rights, beyond the power of Government to modify, abrogate, deny or ignore.These fundamental, natural rights would serve alone as a shield, the ultimate safeguard against inevitable Government encroachment on freedom and liberty. For, the founders knew full well that, even a Government such as ours, with limited, carefully demarcated powers would eventually subvert the will of the people. And we are seeing that occurring and with rapidity now.Evidence of encroaching tyranny on our people is everywhere, and it is glaring.Information disseminated is deceptive. Dissent is heavily controlled or censored. Privacy is nonexistent. Petitions are denied out-of-hand. Average American citizens face unlawful detention. They have been systematically brutalized and ostracized for their political, social, and even religious beliefs. Government has infiltrated Americans’ associations and harassed its members, even attempting to seduce them into committing crimes so that they Government can shut them down.Government no longer even bothers to hide wide-range violations and abuses of fundamental rights and liberties. But a final lockdown on freedom and liberty eludes them. Government cannot so easily confiscate physical objects without escaping the notice of their deed. A citizen’s firearms cannot so easily be taken from him. But Government will try; is trying all the time to do just that—at the moment, through incremental efforts.And this Government, our Government is tiring of utilizing half-measures. The Government wants to seize the massive stockpile of citizenry’s firearms. This is no secret. The toadies have made the aim OF Government clear. But, the paramount question is——Can the U.S. Government really succeed in disarming the American populace?Can the U.S. Government as easily disarm the American populace as the Governments of the two Commonwealth Nations, New Zealand and Australia have been able to disarm their populations? This is not likely, since the two Commonwealth Countries, along with every other Country on Earth, apart from our own, do not recognize the God-given right of the people to keep and bear arms as a potent check on tyranny. The United States is the one holdout Nation.At some point the would-be Destroyers of our Country will try to disarm Americans, as try they must if the Rothschild/Soros “Open Society”  agenda is to succeed. Once push comes to shove, Americans are going to have to take a stand—all Americans, and we are rapidly moving to that fateful point. “Freedom” and “Liberty”  are not mere abstractions, even as tyrannical western Governments, including the Government of the European Union in Brussels, and those of the Commonwealth Nations, and, sadly, the present Government here at home in the U.S., now claim they are but that and nothing more. See the article on the Canadian CBC Radio website: “Freedom is a malleable term — one that's open to interpretation.”Perhaps it would seem so to tyrants that would have little if any use for it. But, had the Founders of our Republic thought “Freedom,” and its sacred kin, “Liberty,” so malleable as to be nothing more than phantasms, mere will-o'-the-wisps, they would hardly have risked their lives and well-being to attain them. Nor can “Freedom” and “Liberty” be perceived as so insubstantial that a towering edifice—the United States, a free Constitutional Republic, the envy of the world—would have existed and persisted for well over two hundred years. As John Adams, a Founding Father, and Second President of the United States said, “But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever.” _______________________________

FREE EXERCISE OF AMERICANS’ FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ARE DISSIPATING RAPIDLY: SPEECH, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, PRIVACY, FAIR AND EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW . . . WILL LOSS OF PROPERTY RIGHTS IN ONE’S FIREARMS BE NEXT?

PART FIVE

Americans have never been so close to losing “Freedom” and “Liberty” as they are at this very moment in time. And once lost, our “Freedom” and “Liberty” will, indeed, be lost forever. The forces that crush nations and people will see to it. As western “democracies” model themselves on the Collectivist example of Communist China, Americans should stop and think, and ask themselves: Is this what I really want? Am I so fearful of what my own Government has become that I will not take a stand against it when the time comes for action? Are those fundamental, sacred, unalienable, immutable, eternal, God-given Rights that the framers of a free Republic codified in the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution, so unimportant to me, so ephemeral, so “malleable,” I am willing to do without them; that I am willing to forsake them, lest I incur the wrath of Government—the wrath of a powerful, and hungry, and jealous Tyrant if I refuse to surrender them; to revoke them once and forevermore? This Government, this Federal Government, my Government, that has turned its back on me, that has taken my right to dissent, my right to associate with like-kind, my right to worship the one true God, my right to petition Government, and even my right to keep private to me my own cherished, secret thoughts from unreasonable search seizure—how much more will this Government, my Government demand of me? And I know the answer to that question before I even ask it. For, as long as I bear a firearm, I pose, in that very act, a visible threat to this Government, my Government. And so I know that, before long, this Government, my Government, will demand of me one final token, one more freedom to relinquish. It is a little thing really, as the Government tells me—a token of loyalty toward it, demonstrating my obeisance to it, that I may obtain absolution from it. I must surrender my firearms to this Government, my Government. And, if I refuse to do so, what then? This token requested of me is, I know, less a request than a demand—an order made to me. Either I capitulate to this creature that was created to serve me or I must face the consequences for my temerity. It is either this or that. The one or the other. There is no other way for me; no other choice to be given me. There is no way to split the difference. There is to be no negotiation in the matter, no time to mull over the matter. And there is to be no truce. The Government has made it all very clear to me: unconditional surrender. And, failure to comply is to risk indefinite detention, or, if recalcitrant, then to dare clash with the tyrant's mighty force. But, then, as to the latter, it has happened before. The Founders of our Republic took up the challenge, threw down the gauntlet and routed a mighty power that had strutted its invincibility.I will soon have to make my choice, as my forefathers once, long ago, had to make theirs. Surrender or fight. There are no half-measures here. To submit willingly to tyranny, or to do so grudgingly and half-heartedly, or to do so openly angrily—raging all the while—is, at the end of the day, all one and the same. Submission, however one does submit, is still to humble oneself before a Tyrant. At the end of the day, it is still submission. It is still self-deprecation. It is still prostration before a monstrous evil. And this Tyrannical Government cares not how I shall humble myself, how it is that I submit before it; only that I do so, and that I do so—completely,  irrevocably.It is singularly odd to contemplate, two hundred and forty years later, that we Americans have, in the first quarter of a new century, come full circle from that day, long ago, on July 2, 1776, when the Delegates to the Continental Congress met to sign the Declaration of Independence——— “By signing the Declaration of Independence, the delegates were putting their lives on the line. If they were to lose the war for independence, then the British government would execute them in a very painful and nasty way. Thus, although we do not know if Benjamin Franklin actually said, ‘we must all hang together, or . . .  we shall all hang separately,’ it is likely that that idea was in the minds of the delegates that day in July.”And now, despite the blatant lies of a seditious Press to the contrary, it is plain for all to see if they will but only look, that our own Government has dared to turn its back on its own people. It has turned its back on those very people to whom it was created for no other purpose than to serve. America's Founding Fathers would no doubt see some caustic irony in this and much more than a little concern, wondering whether their own courage, sacrifice, and perseverance—and that of tens of millions of other valiant American Patriots, who, in the intervening years, fought and died to preserve and strengthen an independent and sovereign Nation, a free Constitutional Republic, and a free and sovereign people—had all been in vain. This page in our Nation's wondrous history has yet to be written. How recorders of history do set this chapter down depends entirely on you and me: a chapter describing a free people that stood courageously, as one, against tyranny, or a chapter reduced to a footnote, little more than an afterthought, quickly jotted down, and just as quickly, forgotten. A small annotation that speaks of the humiliation of a once-great Nation and of a once-great people—of a once-great, and free, and sovereign people who did not take a stand against a Tyrant, but chose, instead, to grovel before it. And if they fail to stand against this Tyrant, they will then no further choices will be made by them, but only by the Tyrant, for them. If Americans fail to stand up against tyranny, they will be compelled to reap the consequences for their cowardice; consequences that affect not only themselves but their offspring, all those generations of Americans to come; for future generations will subsist as mere subservient vessels of tyranny in the gangrenous remains of what was once thought to be an imperishable Nation. These lost generations shall never taste of nor know of freedom and liberty, nor will they even recall the name, ‘American Citizen.’ We, Americans, have ample warning of the fate that awaits us if we choose wrong. A dire outcome can be avoided, today. Tomorrow will be too late. The choice to be made is yours and mine while it can be made, but only in this, the present moment. Be mindful that our Country is being taken from us. Be mindful of that. The noose over our Country and over our citizenry, and over our essential freedoms is tightening, slowly but inexorably. Be prepared to resist Tyranny.“Today may change tomorrow but once today is gone, tomorrow can only look back in sorrow that the warning was ignored.”*______________________________________*Portion of the closing narration from episode 141 of the original Twilight Zone Anthology, “Spur of the Moment.”_____________________________________Copyright © 2022 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

NYPD OFFICER SHOOTINGS DRAW ATTENTION TO MAYOR ERIC ADAMS’ PLANS TO MAKE NYC SAFE: WHAT WILL HE DO?

Five NYPD officers have been shot in the line of duty, only three weeks into the New Year in Eric Adams’ reign as New York City Mayor.Most recently, on January 21, 2022, a psychopath and recidivist criminal with multiple violent felony arrests in New York and other States, Lashawn McNeil, 47, on probation, shot two police officers in New York City. See New York Post article.Officer Jason Rivera, 22, died in the line of duty, and his partner, Officer Wilbert Mora, 27, is clinging to life. The officers had answered a call involving a domestic situation in Harlem.The wife of the slain officer posted a moving tribute to her husband. The killer also shot and wounded a third officer, who returned fire, hitting McNeil in the head and arm. The killer is in critical condition as of Saturday morning. See report in The New York Times.A helluva guy, isn’t he? Let’s wish him well. Maybe the City should erect a statue to him, just like the statue it erected to George Floyd, in Brooklyn—at the same time the City removed the statue of Teddy Roosevelt.George Floyd was a drug addict and small-time crook—another character worth emulating.Just think: If Floyd had not attempted to pass a counterfeit bill off on a grocery store clerk, he would still be alive. But, then, the Neo-Marxist Democrat Party would’ve had to bide its time, awaiting some other pretext to speed the destabilization of society. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi makes that point clear, for which her own cohorts slammed her—apparently for being too straightforward and literal. 

AMERICA'S NEO-MARXISTS RETAIN STRANGLEHOLD ON NEW YORK CITY

Neo-Marxists retain a nice, firm stranglehold on the City, even after one of their own—Bill de Blasio—has packed up his bags and departed from Gracie Mansion.The new Mayor, Eric Adams, had once served as an NYPD officer, retiring as a Captain.Unlike de Blasio, Eric Adams isn’t a rabid Communist but he is still subject to manipulation by those elements that helped get him elected and who seek the destruction of the City and the Country.This is clear enough from Adams’ own words, following the recent shooting of those two young police officers.And what did NYPD Captain Adams—now NYC Mayor—say to the City and the Country after the most recent shootings? Just this——“ ‘The police department is doing their job taking thousands of guns off the streets, yet each time you take a gun off, there’s a constant flow of new guns coming here. . . .‘And if we don’t coordinate to go after those gun dealers that are supplying large cities in America such as New York, we are losing the battle, and the federal government must step in and play a role in doing so.‘We need Washington to join us and act now to stop the flow of guns in New York City and cities like New York.’” See NY Post article.Later, Adams told Dana Bash, host on ABC’s Good Morning America:“‘We are able to stop terrorism in this city when state, federal and local law enforcement agencies shared information. . . .‘This is a sea of crime that has been fed by many rivers. . . . We have to dam those rivers.’” See report in NY Daily News.Honestly, is this what the City and the Country want or need to hear from the Mayor? Does the City and Country need to hear seemingly glowing, but vague and bland, or tiresome and nonsensical rhetoric, of Anti-Second Amendment zealots who wish to distract and deflect attention away from themselves and from a failed Criminal Justice System they, themselves, coldly, callously, calculatedly thrust on America?Obviously, the Neo-Marxist/Neoliberal Globalist puppet-masters had scripted Eric Adams’ words for him. And Adams dutifully regurgitated them. The words were contrived; all pretense. His intent was to keep New Yorkers in a perpetual state of passivity, apathy, and mental darkness.If Adams had truly sought to come across as a transformative figure, rather than as a carbon copy of the previous inept, yet smug de Blasio, he might have delivered something to stir the passions; to shake the public from its stupor and naivety. Adams might have said something like the following——

*********

“Criminals take notice: if you kill a ‘Cop,’ you’re going down! I will not tolerate murders and assaults or attempted murders and assaults on Cops on my watch. I am, this day, declaring war on Cop Killers and would-be Cop-killers.For twenty years I served proudly as a New York City Police Officer. My first obligation as Mayor is to the well-being of the people of the City, just as it was when I served as a New York City Police Officer and Captain. An attack on a New York City Police Officers is also an attack on every other good citizen of our community, and I will not tolerate it. Two years ago, after an assassination attempt on a fellow police officer, the Sergeants Benevolent Association wrote to my predecessor:“‘Mayor De Blasio, the members of the NYPD are declaring war on you. . . ! We do not respect you, DO NOT visit us in hospitals. You sold the NYPD to the vile creatures, the 1% who hate cops but vote for you. . . . NYPD cops have been assassinated because of you. . . . This isn’t over, Game on.’” [taken from an article appearing on the website, Right Edition] I am here to tell the Sergeants Benevolent Association that I have burned your words into memory. I am not de Blasio, nor do I choose to be. His days are over. In the next few weeks, I will be implementing my plan for a safe, secure, and thriving New York. That plan will include the following:

• The creation of police intelligence units and quick reaction forces to target organized crime, criminal gangs, and sociopaths that commit violent crimes against police officers and against innocent civilians;

• Encouraging City’s prosecutors to bring criminal charges against all violent offenders and to seek incarceration and, for repeat offenders, lengthy prison sentences;

• Encouraging all Branches of the City Government to swiftly draw up concrete, comprehensive, and robust plans to secure the City from the violence that has plagued it for so many years under the previous Administration;

• The Creation of task forces, mobilizing business and community leaders to assist my Office in developing zero-tolerance policies toward crime, vagrancy, and random violent acts committed by criminals, sociopaths, and psychotics against innocent citizens;

• The Complete overhaul of the New York City Licensing Division concerning the issuance of firearms and handguns licenses for retired police officers, licensed security guard companies, and civilians.

As a former police officer, I am able to carry a gun. But that doesn’t make me special. I believe all responsible, law-abiding citizens of New York City, no less than I, should be able to carry a handgun for self-defense. That is their fundamental right. That is why I am undertaking a complete overhaul of the New York City Licensing Division.During my campaign for Mayor, I was asked whether, as a former police officer, I would carry a firearm if I became Mayor. I answered, ‘Yes I will, number one. . . . ‘And number two, I won’t have a security detail. If the city is safe, the mayor shouldn’t have a security detail with him. He should be walking the street by himself.’  [from the New York Post]Now that I have been elected Mayor, I stand by those words. Unlike my predecessor, I intend to make our City safe. For far too long this City has had its priorities completely backward. The previous City Administration made its commitments to the wrong people, to the wrong groups, and to the wrong elements of society. This will all change on my watch. I will provide the impetus for a revitalized New York City—A City where people will want to live and feel safe and secure, where people wish to visit rather than avoid, and where businesses can grow and prosper.”

*********

Alas, in his public remarks Mayor Adams didn't say anything to suggest a sea-change from the prior disastrous Administration.During his conversation on ABCs Good Morning America, Mayor Adams did mention he will be rolling out a plan this week to take on the “gun violence.”We can’t know what that plan entails. We would hope whatever it is, it will include our aforesaid recommendations. But we have our doubts.Our concern is that, by Eric Adams’ use of the Neo-Marxists’ buzz-phrase, ‘gun violence,’ and by tying that phrase in with ‘[domestic] terrorism,’ and by constantly exclaiming and reiterating that “the federal government needs to step in and play a role,” Eric Adams is playing directly to the Harris-Biden Administration’s goal of Federal Government intrusion on State’s rights in violation of the Tenth Amendment and on the American peoples’ rights under both the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.The ball is now in your court, Mr. Mayor. We pray to God, you do the right thing for the people of New York City.As the Mayor of a major, prominent American City, what you do will set an example for good or ill not only for New York City but for the Country as a whole. You can kowtow to a rogue Federal Government or you can defend the Nation's Bill of Rights. But don't think for one moment you can play both ends against the middle. The public won't fall for it; not anymore._____________________________________Copyright © 2022 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

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.

Culture is one of the most important concepts within sociology because sociologists recognize that it plays a crucial role in our social lives. It is important for shaping social relationships, maintaining and challenging social order, determining how we make sense of the world and our place in it, and in shaping our everyday actions and experiences in society. It is composed of both non-material and material things.”

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.  

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.  

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. 

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.

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.

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.     

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.   

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.

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.            

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.

______________________________________Copyright © 2021 Roger J Katz (Towne Criour), Stephen L. D’Andrilli (Publius) All Rights Reserved.

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 the 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.

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. 

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.

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.