Archive for the 'Politics' Category

Called silencers or “mufflers” in the deliberations on the NFA, a redditor has done good work trying to find why suppressors were included in the NFA.  As we’ve noted the discussions waxed emotional and did in fact mention them as covered under the NFA, but again, no reason is given.

It appears that the reason for the inclusion of silencers in the National Firearms Act of 1934 is completely unknown to the official record. The NFA was cooked up in the Department of Justice and advocated for by Hon. Homer S. Cummings, Attorney General of the United States and (especially) Hon. Joseph B. Keenan Assistant Attorney General, Department of Justice. I have been unable to find any credible source outlining the reason silencers were included in the NFA, and this knowledge likely died with Cummings, Keenan, and their staff. If anyone can point me to a credible source, I’d love to see it.

And of course, no reason will be forthcoming.  The redditor also notes that the NRA supported the NFA.  How sad.

I routinely publish articles outlining current gun control bills, and in these same article advocate action by lovers of liberty.  One such article was this one concerning constitutional carry being dead in Texas this term.

A few of the comments tend towards the fatalistic view, there is nothing we can do, or the notion that we just violate the laws until such time as civil war begins.

These views are shortsighted and myopic.  There will never be a time when politics isn’t considered warfare, or a time when warfare is absent or void of politics.  Warfare and politics are different manifestations of the same thing.  Conflict.

They may be different gradations of conflict and conflict resolution, different pressure points, or different avenues of force, but there has never been and never will be in world history an even, clear, demarcation or bifurcation between warfare and politics.

There isn’t now even in the U.S.  George Webb (Swiegart) who famously has the series on YouTube, made a good point on one recent video.  The State Department is an arm of the CIA.  They are the visible arm, the political arm, but an arm nonetheless.

If you don’t understand this point, you need to go back and study the Chinese thesis Unrestricted Warfare.  And if you still don’t understand my point, study it again, and again, and again until you do.

Folks, we must be thinking men.

Oathkeepers has a very interesting, almost riveting, piece up on recent work to infiltrate violent protest organizations.  There is a lot of information on their methods and results.  My general comment is that these oathkeepers are very committed and this cost them a lot of time, money and sleep.  My hat is off to them.  I have more specific questions below.

Here is a snippet, and from this I hope you go on over to Oathkeepers to get the rest of the story.  Thanks to reader Blake for sending this my way.

The liberal socialists are primarily coming out of our higher education system. They are comprised of professors, students and under-employed graduates. They are primarily white with a roughly equal split between male/female. They are not militant. They are willing to conduct blockades, marches and sit-ins.

The communists are a much broader spectrum of society with a strong leaning towards immigration issues. The communists actively recruit from a wide pool of candidates, including liberal socialists, the LBGT community, the environmental activists and the anti-white racist groups (Black Lives Matter, La Raza, Islamic Fundamentalists, etc.). They have a significant number of minorities in their ranks and they are militant in their operations and planning. The communists encourage independent action of their members to assimilate members from groups like Black Lives Matter, La Raza and other less militant organizations like ANSWER Coalition. They have no ethical boundaries. To communists, the ends always justify the means. They will do everything that the liberal socialist do in order to protest an issue and always take it one step further. They are not inclined to conduct direct actions.

The anarchists are by far the most dangerous of these groups. They are organized like militias. They actively train and practice their operations. They have discipline and zero tolerance for weakness. They have a number of former military personnel providing expertise to enhance security, logistics and martial arts capabilities. The majority are physical fit, military age males. They are primarily white with few minority members. Their leadership tends to be either former military, a proven leader from the occupy movement or a highly educated alpha-male. They are far more capable than their recent activities would demonstrate. They have formed community defense organizations and are idolized for their willingness to take action from the other groups discussed above. They are however anarchists that despise communism as much as they despise capitalism. They see patriots and constitutionalists as their primary enemy. To them, everyone is a NAZI or a fascist unless they are an anarchist. There is no debate allowed on these issues, ever. They operate under various names, but the vast majority identify with the anti-fascist movement. With the election of President Trump, their membership has increased exponentially. There are at least 50,000 nationwide. They have been able to assimilate much of the “occupy” and “black-bloc” movements. Most of what these organizations accomplish are classified as direct actions. They will participate in a protest or a march, but they are not big fans of passive resistance.

Ideologically, I think I understand the first two groups very well.  It’s the third group that puzzles me.  I don’t understand anarchists, so maybe in the comments section someone can explain them to me.

Let’s me clear and not whitewash this.  True anarchy isn’t something this group of “anarchists” has ever seen.  No sugar coating, anarchy is going without an electrical power grid – forever.  It’s going without food delivery, it’s going without medical care, it’s having no potable sources of water.

If there is anarchy, that means that workers cannot get to the power stations to generate electricity because the roads have all been torn up and there are thieves and robbers and shooters on the roads everywhere, at least until the ammunition runs out.  If there is anarchy, petrol cannot get to stations and so there is no means to get workers to the hospitals.  You go without medical care – forever.  It means that you had better have a means to remove turbidity from the water and enough chlorine that you can decontaminate it after filtering.  And it means that you will need to ensconce near a water source.

You will need to find your own food sources, and soon enough the deer, feral hogs and black bears will have been culled or gone into hiding.  Sooner or later the survivors will be hunting dogs to eat.  So I think we’ve painted the picture well enough.

Where do these “anarchists” come from?  Is this a group of FPS gamers who think the world is really like that, but who decided that they would be inconsistent with their worldview and ride buses or aircraft to their staging location for their riots?  How will they riot when there is no more fuel for travel?  Where do they eat, the local restaurants?  Do they realize that if they are successful, there will be more places to eat like that?

Seriously.  It occurs to me that they cannot have a consistent or well-crafted world view, and they cannot have peered into the future to see an end state for their rioting.  What do they want?  What are they after?  What is the end state for them?

I do not understand the anarchists.

KTVH:

WICHITA, Kan. (AP) — A federal judge on Tuesday rejected arguments that a Kansas law can shield from federal prosecution anyone owning firearms made, sold and kept in the state — a ruling that casts doubt on the legality of similar laws passed in nine states across the nation.

The decision handed down by U.S. District Judge J. Thomas Marten allows federal firearms charges against Shane Cox and Jeremy Kettler to stand. The ruling clears the way for their sentencing on Monday.

Jurors in November returned eight guilty verdicts against Cox, the owner of Tough Guys gun store in Chanute, under the National Firearms Act for illegally making and marketing unregistered firearms, including a short-barreled rifle and gun silencers. Kettler was found guilty on one count of possession of an unregistered silencer.

The Kansas Second Amendment Protection Act, which passed in 2013, says firearms, accessories and ammunition manufactured and kept within the borders of Kansas are exempt from federal gun control laws. Kansas modeled its law on a Montana law that an appeals court has found to be invalid, according to court filings.

Similar firearm nullification laws have been signed into law in nine states. In addition to Montana and Kansas, other states having them include Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and Wyoming, according to Everytown For Gun Safety, which advocates common-sense gun control laws.

Noting the significant interest the case against Cox and Kettler has generated in Kansas and beyond, Marten wrote in his 13-page decision that he is bound to uphold the U.S. Constitution and laws as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court and the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. The judge then proceeded to cite those earlier rulings in rejecting every constitutional argument raised by the defense in the Kansas gun case.

“As a district court judge, I am not empowered to do what I think is most fair — I am bound to follow the law,” Marten wrote.

Defense attorneys argued that the National Firearms Act — a part of the Internal Revenue code enacted under Congress’ power to levy taxes — is unconstitutional because it amounts to “regulatory punishment” rather than imposition of a valid federal tax. They also contended that the federal law violated the Second Amendment as well as Tenth Amendment state rights protections of the U.S. Constitution.

But Marten was unpersuaded, noting that the nation’s highest court ruled 80 years ago that the National Firearms Act is valid exercise of Congressional taxing power. As such, it supersedes a state law, he said. Marten also rejected the Second Amendment arguments raised.

This has been a horrible disaster for not only the defendants but for the concept of nullification generally.  As we’ve discussed before, state legislators who make nullification laws for the purpose of making a statement of protest before the voters are cowards and are doing no service to anyone except themselves.

Second, the jury had their turn at the wheel as well.  Apparently, they weren’t ready to see the states put the federal government in its place.  But the ideas that this tax would have ever occurred, or that the federal government had the right to legislate anything concerning firearms would have been considered abominable 150 years ago.  Unfortunately, there are too many collectivists among us today to trust that jury nullification would be an effective remedy against federal power.  Again.  Consider this.  A jury of their peers had a shot at this and refused to do anything about it other than kowtow to the federal government.

Finally, the federal judge found that they broke federal laws.  What else do you expect a federal judge to do?  For state lawmakers to have any effect with these laws, much more needs to be done.  An education needs to take place with the people, and laws need to be enacted that essentially prevents federal agents from doing the job of arresting people like the defendants.  Throw a few fedgov agents in the state penitentiary with the general prison population for attempting to arrest the defendants, and you might have a different outcome.

Finally, the state police would have to be on board and ready to conduct whatever operations the governor needs in order to prevent federal policing in this matter, up to and including things like imprisoning federal agents (such as the IRS) if the fedgov attempted to use those employees as punitive agents.  Of course, from here it could go to withholding federal education funds, the state withholding taxes to the fedgov, and on and on it escalates.

Like I said to state lawmakers, unless you’re serious about nullification, don’t bother with the drama shows.  You’re just a preening coward.

David Codrea:

“As long as the courts back the coup, any Trump supporters who take to the streets and exercise a very literal interpretation of their Second Amendment rights—to form a militia and fight government tyranny—don’t stand much of a chance,” Pearl asserts, just like he knows what he’s talking about. “The federal government is usually hesitant to use force against armed groups like the Bundys, but those groups never pose an existential threat to the dominant regime.”

“If it were really a high-stakes situation where they thought their regime was at risk, they would’ve been toast,” Pearl’s advisor, University of Chicago law professor Tom Ginsburg assures him.

I’m always astonished at the degree of confidence the progressives have in the government, the ability to maintain order, and the viability of the military and LEOs as stability operations in a country as vast as the U.S., and where every citizen must be assumed to be armed with multiple firearms.

These “scholars” don’t understand the concepts of 4th generation warfare.  So let’s pose a thought experiment.  Suppose someone were to destroy the Catskill Aqueduct, the Catskill/Delaware UV disinfection facility, or New York City water tunnels 1, 2 or 3?  Not the entire thing, but just a portion, thus flooding vast portions of land, possibly urban terrain, collapsing interstitial earthen structures, and preventing water to the approximately ten million New York residents who depend on that route for water supply?

It would take the entire U.S. Marine Corps to conduct viable stability operations to New York, and many of the enlisted Marines would refuse to do it.  This is just New York, not every other major urban center or the rural lands of America.  Note well.  I’m not advocating such a thing.  In fact, I specifically advocate against something horrible like that.  But civil wars and insurgencies are ugly things, and if we’ve learned nothing else from Iraq and Afghanistan, we’ve learned that the counterinsurgency theorists had it all wrong and vastly overestimated their capabilities.

These “scholars” should be careful what they ask for, and if anyone is investigated for sedition or put on any lists, it should be the progs.  They hate America.  We patriots are the most patient and patriotic people around.  But don’t doubt for a minute that the U.S. government always did and even now governs America because the people themselves keep it in power.  The U.S. government only exists by the permission of the American citizens.  The day that is no longer the case will be hellish for everyone.

David Codrea:

What They Believe: A militia is a group of citizens who come together to protect the country, usually during an emergency. Some militia extremists, however, seek to violently attack or overthrow the U.S. government. Often calling themselves “patriots,” they believe the government has become corrupt, has overstepped its constitutional limits, or has not been able to protect the country against global dangers.

This is what interests the FBI.  No, I’m not making this up.  The CIA coupled with DynCorp and the Clinton Global Initiative is toppling countries and trafficking in weapons, money, oil and humans in Haiti and North Africa, and the ATF has trafficked weapons to the Mexican cartels, and the FBI is all in a faint over stateside militias.

The operative word here is “seek.”  Very few people actually seek something like that.  All peaceable men want to reconcile and are slow to anger.  But what we can conclude here is that if you believe in such a thing as the second amendment remedy, you’re an extremist and the FBI is interested in you.

And so the founding fathers would have been as well.  But no one cares about history any more – certainly not the FBI.

Jihad Watch:

Linda Sarsour, one of the organizers behind Saturday’s Women’s March, being held in Washington, D.C., was recently spotted at a large Muslim convention in Chicago posing for pictures with an accused financier for Hamas, the terrorist group.

Sarsour, the head of the Arab American Association of New York and an Obama White House “Champion of Change,” was speaking at last month’s 15th annual convention of the Muslim American Society and Islamic Circle of North America.

While there, she posed for a picture with Salah Sarsour, a member of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee and former Hamas operative who was jailed in Israel in the 1990s because of his alleged work for the terrorist group.

Salah Sarsour, who is also a board member of American Muslims for Palestine, served as a bodyguard of sorts at the convention for Sumeyye Erdogan Bayraktar, the daughter of Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

You know that these guys advocate female circumcision, right?  You’re on the wrong side of history, ladies.  Oh, and let’s not forget this.

Not my words because I haven’t studied it enough, but George has.  He refers a lot in this video to the Clinton endeavors in Arkansas.  If you have the time to do it (it’s almost two hours long), you can watch this video as the best analysis of the Clinton’s nefarious activities in Arkansas and the body count that continues to rise around the Clintons.  I’ve watched it.

George posts four videos for Monday.  Go watch them all.  I’ll only embed the first one, but in it George bets everything that if Steve Feinberg makes his way into the Trump administration, the entire investigation of the CIA, DynCorp and Clinton Foundation of war-making, oil plays, and drug and human trafficking will come to an end.  Of course, this would be a sad state of affairs, and God would punish our country for it.  Not just the leaders, but the country … corporately.  All of us.

Wikileaks:

NOTE: No present Wikileaks staff, including our editor, have medical, psychological or drug conditions which could lead to sudden death.

For the record, neither do I.