Main Contents

Hillary Clinton Wants Your Guns!

Brother Nathanael Channel, BroVids

Hillary Clinton Wants Your Guns!
September 20, 2016 ©

Watch ‘EU-Censor-Free!’ HERE!


___________________________________

For More See: Is Hillary Clinton The Antichrist? Click Here

And: Jews Lead Gun Control Charge Click Here

And: Obama Rebrands Gun Control Click Here

And: Gun Control Fight Goes Viral! Click Here

And: Why The Jews Want Your Guns Click Here

And: Senator Schumer Wants Your Guns! Click Here
___________________________________

Support The Brother Nathanael Foundation!
Br Nathanael Fnd Is Tax Exempt/EIN 27-2983459


Online donation system by ClickandPledge

Or Send Your Contribution To:
The Brother Nathanael Foundation, POB 1242, Priest River, ID 83856
E-mail: brothernathanaelfoundation([at])yahoo[dot]com

Scroll Down For Comments

Send this article/post as a PDF attachment to PDF | PDF Creator | PDF Converter

Brother Nathanael @ September 20, 2016

58 Comments

  1. Brother Nathanael September 20, 2016 @ 4:54 pm

    Text –Text– Text

    Hillary Wants Your Guns
    By Brother Nathanael Kapner
    Copyright September 20 2016

    Hillary denies she wants to “repeal” the Second Amendment.

    But it’s all about jargon and how it’s nuanced to dupe and deceive.

    [Clip: “I do not want to repeal the Second Amendment, I do not want to take anyone’s gun away.”]

    But Trump insists she does.

    [Clip: “Hillary Clinton wants to abolish the Second Amendment; she wants to abolish it, okay. Hillary Clinton wants to take your guns away, she wants to abolish the Second Amendment, she wants to take the bullets away.”]

    If he’s wrong, why can’t Hillary give a straight answer?

    [Clip: “Do you believe that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right, that it’s not linked to service in a militia?”
    “I think that for most of our history, there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment until the decision by the late Justice Scalia. And there was no argument until then that localities and states and the federal government had a right, as we do with every amendment, to impose reasonable regulations.”

    “And the “Heller” decision also does say there can be some restrictions. But that’s not what I asked. I said do you believe that their conclusion that an individual’s right to bear arms is a constitutional right?”

    “If it is a constitutional right, then it, like every other constitutional right, is subject to reasonable regulation.”]

    She’s bearing a two-edged sword.

    Hillary’s answer implies the Second Amendment may or may not be a constitutional right. But even if it is, she wants to regulate it.

    If she gets in she’ll get the judges that will ‘regulate’ with the other gun-grabbers, Ginsburg and Breyer.

    Trump warns that’s exactly what she’ll do.

    [Clip: “Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish, the Second Amendment. And by the way, if she gets to pick, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks, although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know.”]

    They need to know Hillary’s plan and be prepared to fight it.

    [Clip: “I’m going to continue to speak out for comprehensive background checks…”]

    That’s privacy invasion.

    You want to give your gun to your son?

    You will be forced to do the transfer through a licensed dealer who will run the background check on your boy.

    This will create a national registry of gun owners—not criminals, since they don’t get their guns legally.

    Hillary and her backers like Bloomberg, Soros, Schumer, Blumenthal, are playing the long game:

    Register now, confiscate later.

    [Clip: “Closing the gun show loophole; closing the online loophole…”]

    There’s no “loophole.” Both already do background checks.

    Hillary would like nothing more than to see both shut down. [Clip]

    [”Reversing the bill that Senator Sanders voted for and I voted against giving immunity from liability to gun makers and sellers.”]

    That’s the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act” which protects gun dealers from being sued by victims.

    This will easily close down thousands of gun stores who haven’t the means to defend themselves.

    Then why not make “server” companies liable for their customers’ lies. Huh Hillary?

    And if taking away guns will ’stop violence’ maybe taking away email servers will stop Hillary from lying?

    Fat chance.

    [Clip: “Back to handguns, my name is Gene Woljahowski, recently Australia managed to get away, or take away tens of thousands, millions of handguns. In one year, they were all gone. Can we do that? Why, if we can’t, why can’t we?”
    “Australia is a good example, Canada is a good example, the UK Is a good example. Why? Each of them have had mass killings. Australia had a huge mass killing about 25, 20 or 25 years ago. Canada did as well, so did, did the UK. And in reaction, they passed much stricter gun laws. In the Australian example, as I recall, that was a buyback program.”]

    It’s jargon to dupe and deceive.

    Buyback in Australia was an attempt to mollify gun owners whose firearms had been declared contraband.

    Take the bucks or surrender your guns, that was their ‘choice.’

    [Clip: “By offering to buy back the guns, they were able, you know, to curtail the supply, and set a different standard for gun purchases in the future. Now communities have done that in our country. Several communities have done gun buyback programs. I think it would be worth considering doing it on the national level.”]

    That means buyback or surrender - on a national level.

    And “gun free” Australia is now rife with gun crimes.

    For when guns are outlawed only the outlaws will have guns.

    And Hillary, the biggest outlaw of them all, will be sleeping on your guns.

  2. Brother Nathanael September 20, 2016 @ 4:55 pm

    Watch This NEW Video Worldwide & In All EU Countries CENSOR FREE:

    “Hillary Clinton Wants Your Guns!” @

    http://brothernathanaelchannel.com/watch_video.php?v=1168

    This is my STATE-OF-THE-ART Video Platform AND I OWN It! It Bypasses ALL Jew-Censorship.

    ALL Jew-Ruled EU Countries Can NOW View ALL My Vids Without JEW-CENSORSHIP! @

    http://brothernathanaelchannel.com/

  3. Brother Nathanael September 20, 2016 @ 4:58 pm

    STREETS ACROSS AMERICA!…HAVE CROSS WILL TRAVEL!

    Here’s my NEW Schedule of my Street Evangelism:

    (ALL Sponsored Trips!)

    Summit County CO (Ski Resort Area) - September 27-30

    Boston - Early October (Pending)

    Washington DC - October 11-18

    San Francisco - November 3-8

    + Please Consider Sponsoring Me To Come To YOUR City! +

    Please Help Me Financially To Continue my Street Evangelism, Videos, and Articles.

    To Donate Via PayPal CLICK:

    https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=Q5ZHDE2BRW5AG

    To Donate Via Click & Pledge CLICK:

    https://co.clickandpledge.com/sp/d1/default.aspx?wid=40066

    By Mail:

    The Brother Nathanael Foundation; PO Box 547; Priest River ID; 83856.

    May Christ Bless Us All!

    +Brother Nathanael @
    http://www.brothernathanaelfoundation.org/pics/BNAffirm.png

  4. Brother Nathanael September 20, 2016 @ 5:01 pm

    Dear Real Jew News Family,

    If you LIKE what I am doing online, please help!

    To Donate Your Tax Deductible Contribution Via PayPal CLICK:

    https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=Q5ZHDE2BRW5AG

    Or Donate Your Tax Deductible Contribution Via Click & Pledge @

    https://co.clickandpledge.com/sp/d1/default.aspx?wid=40066

    By Mail: The Brother Nathanael Foundation; PO Box 547; Priest River ID; 83856.

    Personal Needs: (rent, expenses, food, necessities, etc)

    Brother Nathanael; PO Box 547; Priest River ID 83856.

    +Brother Nathanael @
    http://www.brothernathanaelfoundation.org/pics/BNAffirm.png

    PS - ALL cash donations by mail come in safely. (Special Thanks To Margaret C!)

    PPS All mail is forwarded from my prior mailing address in Frisco CO…but please send donations to my new address above.

  5. Cornelius September 20, 2016 @ 6:22 pm

    Canada, Australia and the U.K. are different countries. What is good for them is not automatically good for us.

    They have different crime rates, gun culture, etc.

    They are more peaceful and more developed… We are facing a greater threat than they are.

    Every American feels in their gut that giving up their guns is a bad idea.

    It is the most important freedom we have, because we live in a police state.

  6. Stephen September 20, 2016 @ 6:24 pm

    Excellent vid, Dear +BN!

    Not that I believe any Hillary supporters will change their minds with it. They believe in and fervently want gun control.

    But it could get at least get some Hillary haters out to vote, when they might not have otherwise.

    Reminding them about Supreme Court appointments is a VERY strong motivator!

  7. Golf Tango September 20, 2016 @ 6:51 pm

    ALL a moot point. They CAN’T get the guns. It’s a physical, logistical, and mathematical impossibility.

    The DEA was established in 1973 to stamp out illegal drugs. Are there still any illegal drugs around?

    The Australian government tried the carrot and stick approach simultaneously on gun confiscation. Their most optimistic, euphemistic, pie-in-the-sky estimate is that they got 40% of what they were after. The more realistic is that they got 20%. So somewhere between 60% and 80% of the evil “assault rifles” are still out there - and the grabbers have no other means except brute force confiscation, house-by-house.

    In the U.S., the size of the land mass and the population that inhabits it would make a physical forced search and confiscation impossible by the sheer size of the constabulary required. Ten million trained, equipped, and financed men would still be insufficient. The whole U.S. military comprises only 1.3 million personnel.

    Confiscating the guns is an idea hatched in a haze of cannabis smoke.

  8. Tom S September 20, 2016 @ 6:56 pm

    I favor Charlton Heston’s declaration, which I paraphrase here: ‘The only way they will take my gun is to pry my dead fingers off it.’

    Somebody, please correct the quote, but I believe I have captured the thought faithfully.

    The day we give up our guns is the day we surrender all of our rights — those for which our forefathers bled and died — to a tyrannical government out of control.

  9. Brother Kapernikiss September 20, 2016 @ 7:03 pm

    Brother, this is the best video yet, that you have done.

    My guns were forcibly seized from me by Jew-trained thugs at the Texas border, they acted like entitled federal swine, with no respect for anyone.

    Look at how disrespectful the US federal government is now: can you imagine how entitled, presumptuous, and overbearing the police state will become when all the good men have been declared gunless felons, and all the women are paid large sums to cage their men?

    It’s ROT, R-O-T, rot! That’s what American government is. And that stupid man in the video, fumbling and feebly asking Hillary the “softball question of the century” about Australian gun laws, fine, she may try, but there will be a second revolution first.

    We can make guns with 3D printers, electroforming, and in our basements on cast-aluminium lathes. That bitch doesn’t know what she’s started.

    FINE, BITCH, so WE’RE ALL FELONS, you put your guns down first, bitch!

  10. Brother Kapernikiss September 20, 2016 @ 7:06 pm

    Why were my guns seized?

    I was arrested for resisting arrest, when I wasn’t breaking the law in the first place!

    In other words, trumped-up charges! And now the FBI has my fingerprints and DNA, and the US federal government says that I can’t “bear arms” (purchase, possess, own, or operate) for the rest of my life!

    SCREW YOU, HILLARY ROT-HAM CLINTON!

  11. Eileen K. September 20, 2016 @ 9:59 pm

    Sorry, Brother Kapernikiss, that a gang of Jew-trained thugs forcibly seized your legally-owned firearms at the Texas border.

    They’re nothing more than thugs who had NO right whatsoever to seize your guns. Did they have a warrant on probable cause? Of course not. They behaved like Bolshevik Chekists out to terrorize people such as you. Period.

    You legally purchased those guns; therefore, the cowardly thugs who took them robbed you of them, which, in fact, is a felony in itself. On top of that, they had the gall to physically assault you - another felony on their part.

    You should sue them into bankruptcy for the felonies they perpetrated on you and have them expunge your record of the false charges against you and return your firearms to you. You have every right to justice against those thugs, and Texas is a very good state wherein justice against those perps is easier to obtain than in Bolshevik states.

  12. KathJuliane September 20, 2016 @ 10:03 pm

    Brilliant Video, dear +BN.

    There you go again, “deconstructing” what the Hildebeast says, and revealing what she means.

    Obama and the Clintons are so proud of the progressive Australian model of gun control, designed to ban weapons ownership.

    The Federalist has a much different opinion:

    The Australian Gun Ban Conceit

    Australia’s gun ban isn’t what the Left wants it to be.

    SEPTEMBER 3, 2015 By Stephen Gutowski

    As they’re wont to do, in the immediate aftermath of the brutal and calculated murders of two Virginia reporters many gun-control advocates pointed to Australia’s gun ban and confiscation as a successful model America should adopt.

    The idea wasn’t just limited to the fringe Left, either. It was put forth in places like the The New Republic and Vox. The Gray Lady herself published a column advocating Australian-style gun confiscation less than 24 hours after the killings.

    Now, the practical problems of instituting an Australian-style gun ban and mandatory buyback program have been well flushed out.

    But I think it’s important to examine the main claim about Australia’s gun control. Namely, that it worked. The argument, as Vox’s headline puts it, is “Australia confiscated 650,000 guns. Murders and suicides plummeted.”

    Murders and Suicides Didn’t ‘Plummet’

    The piece, along with many gun control advocates, cites a Harvard University study whose conclusion begins with this line: “It does not appear that the Australian experience with gun buybacks is fully replicable in the United States.”

    Not a great start for Vox’s angle, but I digress.

    America was more than doubling how many firearms it manufactured and seeing a nearly identical drop in gun homicides.

    The study doesn’t conclude that “murders and suicides plummeted” in Australia after the 1996 gun ban, as Vox claims in its headline.

    Instead, it focuses solely on firearm-related murders and suicides. In that category they found a marked decline (although, interestingly, it still makes up nearly 20 percent of all homicides nearly two decades after most guns were banned by the island nation).

    But at the same time Australia was banning guns and experiencing a decline in gun homicides, America was more than doubling how many firearms it manufactured and seeing a nearly identical drop in gun homicides.

    That throws a bit of a wrench into the idea that Australia’s gun ban must be the reason for its decline in gun crime.

    However, what’s more important is the fact that overall suicides and murder have not “plummeted” in the years after the gun ban.

    Yes, as with the gun-happy United States, the murder rate is down in Australia. It’s dropped 31 percent from a rate of 1.6 per 100,000 people in 1994 to 1.1 per 100,000 in 2012. But it’s the only serious crime that saw a consistent decline post-ban.

    In fact, according to the Australian government’s own statistics, a number of serious crimes peaked in the years after the ban.

    Manslaughter, sexual assault, kidnapping, armed robbery, and unarmed robbery all saw peaks in the years following the ban, and most remain near or above pre-ban rates.

    The effects of the 1996 ban on violent crime are, frankly, unimpressive at best.

    Violence Declined Stateside Without A Gun Ban

    It’s even less impressive when again compared to America’s decrease in violent crime over the same period.

    According to data from the U.S. Justice Department, violent crime fell nearly 72 percent between 1993 and 2011. Again, this happened as guns were being manufactured and purchased at an ever-increasing rate.

    While Australians kill themselves with firearms less often, it seems they don’t actually take their own lives any less often.

    The Australian gun ban’s effect on suicide in the country isn’t any better.

    While Vox repeats the Harvard study’s claim that firearm-related suicides are down 57 percent in the aftermath of the ban, Lifeline Australia reports that overall suicides are at a ten-year high.

    The Australian suicide prevention organization claims suicide is the leading cause of death for Australians 15 to 44 years old. So, while Australians kill themselves with firearms less often, it seems they don’t actually take their own lives any less often than before the ban.

    Whatever you think of the merits of Australia’s gun ban or the practicality of using it as a model for American gun control, it most certainly has not caused suicide or murder rates to plummet.

    Furthermore, Australia has seen violent crimes peak in the years following its ban while the United States experienced the exact opposite phenomenon.

    Australia isn’t much of a model for Australia, let alone for America.
    —–

    Stephen Gutowski is a staff writer for the Washington Free Beacon, where he primarily writes about gun rights.

    He is a National Rifle Association-certified instructor who focuses on teaching other writers basic firearm knowledge.
    http://thefederalist.com/2015/09/03/the-australian-gun-ban-conceit/

  13. KathJuliane September 20, 2016 @ 11:39 pm

    Five Years Old and Still Timely

    Gun Control in Australia - Watch and Weep

    When a country takes away guns from its citizens it’s in big trouble as they are finding out in Australia.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGaDAThOHhA&t=0s

  14. Jona September 21, 2016 @ 1:56 am

    Since the gun ban in Australia:

    Armed robberies are up 69%,
    Assaults with guns up 28%,
    Gun murders up 19%,
    Home invasions up 21%

    Still giving up your guns in America???

    Think twice about that!

  15. hugo September 21, 2016 @ 2:03 am

    My understanding is that the right to bear arms was always about giving the citizen the right to protect himself from over-bearing government i.e. the Feds were considered the problem.

    In the last 50 years however because of the destruction of the Christian social order via cultural Marxist policies — forced on the citizenry by a combination of government, M.S.M. and Hollywood — there has been a breakdown in family and morality followed by an explosion in crime. Today we need guns for a 2nd problem — to protect ourselves from criminals.

    Hildabeast does not need a gun since she will always be protected by people themselves carrying guns. There is one law for the hypocritical elite (who cause all the problems in any event) and another for the plebeians.

    So at every junction it is government that is the problem not the solution.

  16. John September 21, 2016 @ 3:29 am

    Let’s not be fooled by the framing of the question. Gun ownership is NOT a constitutional right.

    Gun ownership falls under our God-given natural right of self protection.

  17. Wally September 21, 2016 @ 5:32 am

    Hey Brother

    I live in Australia, and I can say without a doubt that Australia DOES NOT have a gun crime problem.

    What you said about Australia having high gun crime rates was simply not true. A study conducted by the Australian institute of criminology shows that gun crimes have fallen dramatically since gun laws were first introduced in the 1990’s.

    Sources:

    http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide/weapon.html

    http://www.aic.gov.au/dataTools/facts/weaponUseTrend.html

    I respect you and admire your work, but what you said about Australian gun crime was not correct.

    I was born in Australia and I have been living in Australia all my life, I can say with absolute certainty that gun crime is still VERY rare. When a person gets shot and dies or if a drive by happens, it becomes national news here, its not something that happens often.

  18. Brother Kapernikiss September 21, 2016 @ 10:18 am

    @Eileen K.

    Thank you for your solidarity and comments.

    @Bro N.

    Thank you for publishing my remarks, it is my hope that Hillary’s cringe-worthy performance will be her own undoing. Hillary relies upon hired guns everyday, sharpshooters, marksmen, countersnipers, guys in suits with concealed, Level III Dragonskin* body armor and submachine guns, etc.

    But we can’t have any, not even semi-automatic pea shooters.

    Her Royal Highness wants total dominion.

    *Dragonskin concealable body armor is circular ceramic, overlapping plates in a durable carrier, that moves naturally with the body. It can withstand multiple rounds from an AK-47 to the human torso.

  19. Ted Gorsline September 21, 2016 @ 12:03 pm

    The Jew boys want Christian America’s guns so they can treat them like they treat Palestinians.

    Obama, with George Soros at his back, said as much at his inauguration. He talked about the problem of people with Bibles and guns. Then along comes Eric Holder who arms the Mexican drug cartels to get America’s guns. And this after Obama himself worked as a community organizer in Chicago which has the worst gun crime in America.

    On another note Bro Nat. Take a look at Ian Greenalg’s story in Veterans Today, today, about Snowden and Assange. It sounds like Snowden is pure CIA and is going to be held in Russia as a spy. Bro Nat is this a legit story or not?

  20. mmuehlbauer September 21, 2016 @ 12:06 pm

    It doesn’t matter whether we have guns or not as far as revolution is concerned. We need something to protect our loved ones from the US criminals who do have guns.

    A gun seems to be a likely choice since these criminals do have guns (from where and how they get all their guns, tens of thousands of guns, is a question, we need to concentrate on and not the other).

    If we decide to revolt and we don’t have weapons, then we will get them from the people who do have them, the police and the military. Sorry, to inform the readers, it is rare when the destroyers of nations are ever punished, they are usually moved to safety, the fool’s backing them left to die for the cause.

    As weird as it sounds, no matter the people or the cause, reversals are the name of the game. I suspect the time will come when the Mexicans and the Africans and all the other people’s today so persecuted and devoid of representation, the time will come when these nations are the preferred nations to live in.

    Here in America the corporations have destroyed the environment, have poisoned the land and the water, have made most of America desolate. There are days when you can count the number of birds you see on one hand.

    We are not fighting for money here in America, we are fighting a war against the people who are destroying the pollinators and the beauty of our country, by fracking, etc.. We will soon be fighting for food if things keep going the way they are going today.

    We have guns today, nobody uses them though except to kill already scarce creatures; we need to make our nation a world and not a desolate camp. A place of flowers and bees and not a place of dirt and blacktop.

    Like the song said, and how many even heard: they took paradise and made it a parking lot!

    We are at war and guns are not the issue. We need people, lots of people to descend on the Politicians like a plague and teach them, about nature and our love of it. If we pave their streets with gold, what would we have, golden streets, to lay the card board on, and, gold is a lousy main course.

    We have a Constitution and Bill of Rights to protect us, to insure our right to have a gun, to protect our family and our nation. Any politician who moves against our right to bear arms exposes him/herself as a traitor and criminal, against, the laws of our nation.

    There are, however, few laws on the books intending to protect our nation from the Corporatist who will destroy a million acres of land to make a few bucks. A million acres of land, a few billion living creatures, that we need to insure we do get food to eat and a song, in our hearts.

    Our fight is much more than fighting with a bunch of paid off politicians over what the Constitution says or doesn’t say, we are fighting for our lives — for water and for food, the people in Africa and South America have all the guns they can use, guns seem to grow where food won’t, too many guns.

    See, see, how they intend to depopulate us, we will be starved too death, we will die of thirst, nothing quick like a bullet through the heart; if the meat doesn’t suffer it is no good, and we will suffer, sooner than we want to think.

    We are their sacrifice to their gods, nothing else matters.

  21. Zionien September 21, 2016 @ 12:21 pm

    BEWARE The Jew Lautenberg Amendment MCDV Federal gun ban for the slightest touching of another person!!!

    Whats with these jews ALWAYS trying to take OUR guns, yet promote homosexuality in the hopes of creating a diabolical “Utopia”, but all we will get is a bizarre “Fruitopia”!

  22. walt September 21, 2016 @ 12:39 pm

    Let us not forget, the Constitution and Bill of Rights does not grant any rights.

    The Constitution and Bill of Rights is written to only explain whats rights a people are born with. In other words, “natural rights”.

    Therefore, neither the Constitution nor the government grant these rights, therefore the government cannot take them away by a law or by scratching it out on the written Constitution or Bill of Rights!

    Doing so, is null and void by it’s own existence, and breaking any law which is contrary to the Constitution is not a criminal act and not prosecutable. Furthermore, the government would be charged with breach of contract by ignoring their oath to uphold and protect the natural born rights and for enforcing illegal null and void laws.

    In this, we can say ANY gun law is no gun law and we have been duped into believing it is.

    May I add that the UN treaty is expected to be a source for the taking of guns as well. Yet, it is explained in the Constitution that no foreign treaty, or its rules can trump the supreme law referred to as the Constitution.

  23. Citizenfitz September 21, 2016 @ 1:07 pm

    Eh? If they’re so distressed by gun violence then why don’t the grabbers want to take the guns of the US police and military - given all the poor, innocent Blacks murdered in cold blood by policemen; and all the non-combatants around the world who’ve been “neutralized” whenever the US military gets ideas about “freedom and democracy”?

    Very curious, that….

  24. Citizenfitz September 21, 2016 @ 1:48 pm

    Brother Nate and Zionein: you guys inspired me to call my trained seals… errr… DC reps a little while ago to make a pointed statement in favor of the Second Amendment.

    When the 2A goes the others will swiftly follow.

    The question in front of us comes down to:

    1. Take as many of them with us as we can.

    2. Die miserably at the hands of ZOG - and offer it up to Christ.

  25. Brother Nathanael September 21, 2016 @ 1:51 pm

    @Wally

    I’m pressed for time but I will answer briefly.

    Those links you provide are WONDERFUL!

    You see, whenever I am in doubt about a government action I always rely on their own proofs justifying their deeds done in the “public interest!” It’s a politically-correct way to go, you know, and Jews like it like that!

    So, I thank you for the proof your provide from government statistics that the Australian government did not betray their own citizens by taking away their God-given right to protect themselves and family! Case closed for sure, sir!

    Hmm, but once in a great while, a non-government source comes out with stats that contradict government reports.

    For instance, Australia’s The New Daily reported that in the last 11 years Australian gun-crime rose dramatically.

    Please check it out at your own risk since governments never, ever lie when justifying their evil deeds, and who would ever think of contradicting what Big Bro says!

    http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/national/2015/11/10/australias-secret-gun-problem-exposed/

    +BN

  26. Wart September 21, 2016 @ 2:51 pm

    “It doesn’t matter whether or not we have guns”?!

    O.K., let’s just have something instead that can do exactly what a gun can do, and call it the same thing, how about that?

    Problem solved.

  27. debbie September 21, 2016 @ 6:03 pm

    All presidential candidates want our guns, believe it.

    It’s not just Hillary, Trump will just take a slower approach.

    Trump is a dirty business man.

  28. KathJuliane September 21, 2016 @ 9:16 pm

    I have to agree with +BN about his tongue-in-cheek comment that governments, depending on the political agenda driving it, would never, ever lie to citizens to justify their evil deeds.

    I noticed that the official Australian government stats run up only to 2012, yet at the bottom of the page it says it was “Last modified 7 July, 2015 [by the] Australian Institute of Criminology”.

    So what has been happening for the last four years in Australia that the government doesn’t want you to know?

    Comparing Australian and US is like comparing apples and oranges to begin with, because there are different forms of government, not to mention geography and demographics. And, it depends on how Australia calculates it’s statistics.

    And, despite the Jew media propaganda and skewed scrutiny on America’s gun violence, America is generally a peaceful country, as Australia is. Outside of major urban areas, it’s quite possible to find thousands of American police officers in small to middle sized cities who have never had to fire a shot in the line of duty.

    According to FBI statistics, there is an average of 500-600 officer related justifiable homicides each year. There are in fact an unknown number of police shootings not determined to be justifiable homicides, and are criminally prosecuted as murder or manslaughter, but the numbers are probably small compared to the number of officer-related justifiable homicides.

    The conviction statistics, based on local agency reporting, are rolled over into corresponding FBI homicide categories with out distinction as being an officer-related shooting. Which is to say, police officers do not often skate on criminal prosecutions if the circumstances and evidence call for it.

    In any case, neither officer-involved homicides or gun homicides in general are an “epidemic” in a country with 324 million people.

    Does Australia count only criminal convictions, as England and Wales do, while the US reports all gun homicides solved or unsolved, but only gets convictions on (I believe) 62% of criminal homicides, with at least 38% of gun-related homicides remaining unsolved, because the perpetrators aren’t known, or else not prosecuted for because of insufficient evidence?

    From the Australian government’s own statistics that Wally linked to, then Australia’s real problem all along is knives/sharp objects-related homicides, so now all Australians should be restricted from owning anything sharper and pointier than a butter knife.

    The data shows that there has not been much change in overall violent crime deaths, and that there were more homicides by knife/sharp objects than there were gun homicides to begin with so it’s time to ban sharp objects.

    But then, there will be a certain number of people who will resort to butter knives to kill someone if they have to.

    However, the US really doesn’t have a “gun crime problem” either, requiring “gun control”. We do have a very large body of firearms codes at the federal, state and local levels, some instituted at the federal level in 1934. The problem is mainly concentrated in larger American cities, as in Australia. The way the progressive Democrats would have it, that there is an epidemic of gun-related violent crimes all across America.

    Gun grabbers here in America, like their pink- and red-diapered fellow travelers in Australia (some with yarmulkes, too), stress only gun-related death statistics in total, and avoid mentioning violent deaths by category, or the fact that 61% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. are suicides.

    And, as +BN so amply proved a while back, it is statistically thousands of times more dangerous to go to a hospital and die from hospital-related infectious diseases or medical error than it is to be fatally shot here in the US. The chances of being struck by lightening are greater than being shot to death (unless you live in a high risk area of Chicagoland).

    Our “progressives” cherry pick from studies that point to reduced instances of “gun murders,” a sloppy use of terminology which really means all gun-related deaths lumped together with violent gun homicides, such as suicides and accidental discharges violent gun homicides in general.

    Gun control will neither increase nor decrease homicides/crime rate in the U.S. Statistics show that after gun bans in other countries, there is only a slight decrease of homicides and violent crimes briefly, but then homicides, sans guns by other means, revert back somewhere close to what it was before.

    Australia is nearly the size of the continental United States, but has 1/13 the population. Most of Australia is uninhabited desert and sparsely inhabited rural outback, with populations concentrated in major cities and the coastlines.

    According to the Worldometer:

    Pop of Australia (2016): 24,309,330 million

    Pop of USA (2016): 324,657,229 (13.3 times the population of Australia)

    Australia has six federated states and three federal territories, and is far less urbanized than the US, which has 50 states and dozens of urban metropolitan areas with higher density populations. The most populated state, New South Wales, has 7.6 million people. NYC alone has 8.5 million people by comparison.

    Naturally, just because of the lower population to begin with in terms of risk reduction, Australia has a lower rate and absolute number of violent deaths than the US.

    Those Australian government stats only go up to 2012. What they do point to is that the trend for violent crime and violent crime deaths including gun deaths in Australia was decreasing steadily years before the gun control measures outlawing long guns, while still allowing handgun possession, were enacted after the Port Arthur massacre in 1996.

    In fact, the stats only show that while gun deaths have decreased, knife deaths have risen to take their place in that period of time, so gun control is proven to have had very little effect on violent deaths and crimes overall.

    Gungrabbers love to do their myopic math when it comes to gun control: 500 firearms homicides + 500 baseball bat homicides + 500 knifing homicides + 500 other means homicides = 500 firearms homicides. Take away all the firearms, and Voilà! — no more violent deaths.

    Starting in 1979, there was a steady downward trend in gun deaths unrelated to any gun control measures. According to the University of Sidney statistics, in Australia, annual deaths resulting from firearms total were 680. In 1990 there were 595; in 1995, 470; in 1996, 516, which includes the Port Arthur Massacre victims.

    The Port Arthur victims are a statistical outlier in tracking trends as it only crime of mass murder since 1979, and not what can be considered an ordinary type of homicide in society. In a similar way, the 3,000 deaths in the homicidal Trade Towers Disaster are usually excluded from calculations for tracking overall trends of violent homicides in NYC.

    Subtracting the 36 deaths at Port Arthur from the total as an outlier, there were 480 incidents of deaths resulting from firearms as ‘ordinary’ crimes. This is not a substantial increase from 1995’s toll of 470, and means that there was just a 0.97% (<1%) increase of ordinary gun-related deaths from 1995.

    Firearms deaths (mostly by handguns as before Port Arthur incident) then continued to decrease at a steady modest pace after the 1996 forced compensated confiscation of self-loading rifles, self-loading shotguns, and pump-action shotguns in response to the Port Arthur mass shooting.

    In other words, a mere uptick in what was already a part of a steadily declining trend since 1979 long before gun control was ever enacted.
    http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/australia#total_number_of_gun_deaths

    The seizure of long guns took around 650,000 firearms out of civilian hands and tightened the rules on legal acquisition and ownership of weapons going forward. From my perch, all that I can see that this legislative tantrum did was strengthen organized crime in Australia and expand the black market exponentially. And whenever I read of organized crime and black markets, my Jewdar twitches and pings.

    The Adelaide Advertiser admitted this several years ago:
    http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/internal-rivalry-among-comancheros-led-to-gunfight-at-paesano-restaurant-police/story-e6frea83-1226226914996

    Now, the amazing thing about the link that +BN posted from The New Daily, is that it reveals how successful Australia has been as the progressive “model for gun control” boasted by Obama and Clinton.

    Which is to say, not at all. It appears to me that police agencies have been under orders by the gun-grabbing politicians to bury their gun crime statistics for the past ten years or more so the world couldn’t see what an utterly expensive failure it’s been in reducing violent crimes, and that criminals have no problems getting black market weapons.

    Gun control will never affect criminals because they don’t follow the law anyway — their guns are obtained illegally.

    The US (outside of gun-free Chicago, and other largest metro areas like LA with entrenched street gang organized crime) does not have an nation-wide epidemic gun death problem either, despite what Obama, Clinton, and the whole viper’s den of Lenin-Marxist revolutionaries squawk about.

    There are currently about 34,000 gun deaths a year in the US, half of which are suicides by self-inflicted gun shot, while the rest are homicides, most of which are criminal, but includes a certain percentage of justifiable homicides, and a miniscule number of accidental gun deaths.

    That’s 0.0001% of the US population die from a firearm annually. I think. When I used the calculator 34,000/324million it came out to 1.049382716049383e-4% in scientific notation, which should mean there’s three zeros in front of the 1 or something. Someone correct this if it’s wrong.

    America is overall a peaceful country to live in, and it’s not difficult to navigate around high risk areas. There are high crime areas, including the gun-free People’s City-State of Chicago and Hizzoner Rahm Emmanuel. There are more gun homicides, mostly black on black crimes, in Chicago each year thanks to criminal street gangs than there are officer-involved justifiable homicides in the entire country. Now Hizzoner is hiring 500 more police for Chicago PD, and promoting hundreds more.

    “With more than 3,000 shot already this year and more than 500 killed, Chicago is being savaged by violence. Chicago in the national mind has become bloody Chicago, a town of gangs running wild, slaughtering innocents and gangbanger soldiers on the streets of his city.”

    President Barack Obama stays away. Hillary Clinton stays away. Rahm is left, the ultimate boss of a police force that in his own words has gone “fetal.” So it’s his duty to say something. He’s the mayor of Chicago.”
    ( chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/kass/ct-chicago-police-hiring-john-kass-20160921-column.html )

    Yes, indeedy. Where’s Black Lives Matter and the liberal Black Democrats?

    Anyway, people determined to commit suicide will find other means if they do not have access to a gun. You could take every single gun away from American citizens, and that would change the number of gun suicides, but it wouldn’t prevent 17,000 suicide deaths, they’d just add the numbers statistically to suicide-by other means.

    There are 324 million Americans, about 80% of them living in urban areas. As of 2013, for the entire US, there were 21,000 gun suicides (61% of gun-related deaths) and 11,000 gun homicides, for a rate of 3.25 per 100,000 population, excluding accidental death, inclusive of justifiable homicides and deaths due to firearms with “undetermined intent”.

    There are 24 million Australians, with a rate of 1.02 gun homicides per 100,000. There are about other countries in the world with rates of gun homicides as high as 12 per 100,000.

    Since 2012, the Australian government has issued no new updates to the linked statistical charts, and much can happen in 4 years.

    For example, the daily newspaper which has been published in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, since 1854 (I know, sometimes considered “that pinko rag” so I suspect “progressive” leanings) had this to say their interactive report “YOUNG, DUMB AND ARMED How Melbourne became a gun city”:

    “The facts are chilling and compelling. In as little as five years, gun crimes have more than doubled. Some very dangerous people are involved; in 2015 alone, more than 750 people with serious criminal convictions were caught carrying guns.

    “That’s up a staggering five times since 2011. Shootings have literally become a weekly event. Crimes related to firearm possession have more than doubled in the past five years.

    “The number of young criminals has rocketed; almost 1500 people aged between 20 and 34 committed a gun offence last year, more than twice the number five years ago. A culture of carrying, and using, guns is becoming worryingly entrenched in criminal circles.”

    “The escalation rivals the Underbelly War between drug syndicates that shook the city between 1999 and 2005. Drugs are again involved, particularly illicit stimulants, but insidiously those with the guns are not only dealing the drugs, they’re consuming them, which adds to the volatility and danger.”
    http://www.theage.com.au/interactive/2016/gun-city/day1.html

    This time, the Australian Left and government are paving the way for handgun bans and confiscations from the 5 or 7% of citizens who still have legally registered handguns, and make another sweep for the unregistered long guns they didn’t get the last time.

    The laws are so strict, I understand, that households having legal guns are incapable of speedily accessing their own weapons for self defense because of rigorous home gun security and storage laws separating gun from ammo, thus preventing households from defending themselves.

    And the criminals know this, which leaves the household sitting ducks for brutal home invasion robberies. Of course, the one thing that criminals look for are firearms to steal and so at gunpoint, the householder is forced to open up his gun safe and his ammo storage and hand everything over to the robbers.

    Stolen guns are a staple street market strategy here in America — stolen guns can’t be traced to the perpetrators.

    Last time for Australia it was the long guns which the government confiscated in reaction to the very suspicious Port Arthur Massacre.

    When gun control advocates say they want Australian gun control laws in the America, what the “progressives” are really saying is that they want total gun confiscation in America.

    Charles Cooke of the National Review skewered the “progressive” Leninist-Marxist hyperbolic conceit of shouting “Australia!” at every mass shooting last year after Obama expressed admiration for Australia’s forcible confiscation of all semi-automatic firearms from its law-abiding citizenry:

    “Let me be clear, as Obama likes to say: You simply cannot praise Australia’s gun-laws without praising the country’s mass confiscation program. That is Australia’s law. When the Left says that we should respond to shootings as Australia did, they don’t mean that we should institute background checks on private sales; they mean that we should ban and confiscate guns.

    “No amount of wooly words can change this. Again, one doesn’t bring up countries that have confiscated firearms as a shining example unless one wishes to push the conversation toward confiscation.”
    Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/380033/obama-praises-australias-gun-confiscation-charles-c-w-cooke

    And this is what +BN is getting at.

    It is not just about tightening up regulations and registration, of which there are plenty of federal firearms laws, which most states already have data bases for, and most have state gun control laws governing firearms transactions and registrations within their own state that even exceed federal law, such as the Soviet Socialist Republic of California.

    Clinton is all about establishing a centralized mandatory federal registry containing all gun owners and the firearms registered to them, and overturning the national Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986.

    FOPA, in curing numerous and widespread enforcement abuses of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) with needed reforms of the 1968 Gun Control Act and firearms laws, FOPA specifically forbade the U.S. Government agency from keeping a registry directly linking non-National Firearms Act firearms to their owners.
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/926

    The impelling force for the National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934 was the gangland crime of the Prohibition era, such as the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre of 1929 during a gang war in, of all places, Chicago if you can imagine that, and the attempted assassination of President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933 in Miami, Florida. Maybe.

    Giuseppe “Joe” Zangara, was the assassin of Anton Cermak, the Mayor of Chicago(!). Zangara, an Italian immigrant, shot Cermak and four others in Miami, Florida on February 15, 1933, during an impromptu speech by United States President–elect Franklin D. Roosevelt. Roosevelt himself may have been the intended target, but was unharmed.

    In any case, it lit a match under Congress’ collective throne warmers, and the National Firearms Act was enacted in record time.

    Like the current National Firearms Act (NFA), the 1934 Act required NFA firearms to be registered and taxed. The $200 tax was quite prohibitive at the time (equivalent to $3,538 in 2015). With a few exceptions, the tax amount is unchanged.

    Under the original Act, NFA weapons were machine guns, short-barreled rifles (SBR), short-barreled shotguns (SBS), any other weapons (AOW or concealable weapons other than pistols or revolvers), and silencers for any type of NFA or non-NFA, the weapons of choice in Chicagoland mob wars.

    The NFA also covers Destructive Devices (DDs). There are two broad classes of destructive devices:

    1) Devices such as grenades, bombs, explosive missiles, poison gas weapons, etc.

    2) Any firearm with a bore over 0.50 inch except for shotguns or shotgun shells which have been found to be generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes. Many firearms with bores over 0.50″ inch, such as 20-gauge or 12-gauge shotguns, are exempted from the law because they have been determined to have a “legitimate sporting use”.

    Minimum barrel length was soon amended to 16 inches for rimfire rifles and by 1960 had been amended to 16 inches for centerfire rifles as well.

    In general, certain components that make up an NFA item are considered regulated as well.

    Originally, pistols and revolvers were to be regulated as strictly as machine guns; towards that end, cutting down a rifle or shotgun to circumvent the handgun restrictions by making a concealable weapon was taxed as strictly as a machine gun.

    It is legal to own a machine gun in America, if the NFA federal laws are followed precisely subject to the ATF. NFA defined weapons that have to be registered with the ATF, and all transactions must be approved through the ATF by way of special categories of licensed gun dealers, and are subject to federal excise taxes.

    A basic Federal Firearms License (FFL) is required as a prerequisite to become a Special Occupation Taxpayer (SOT): Class 1 importer, Class 2 manufacturer-dealer or Class 3 dealer in NFA. Legal possession of an NFA firearm by an individual requires transfer of registration within the national NFA registry. An individual owner does not need to be an NFA dealer to buy NFA-Title II weapons for personal possession.

    The sale and purchase of NFA is, however, taxed and regulated as follows:

    All NFA items must be registered with the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

    Private owners wishing to purchase an NFA item are subject to a number of federal restrictions:

    They must obtain approval from the ATF, pass an extensive background check to include submitting a photograph and fingerprints, fully register the firearm, receive ATF written permission before moving the firearm across state lines, and pay a tax.

    The request to transfer ownership of an NFA item is made on an ATF Form 4. There have been several unfavorable lawsuits where plaintiffs have been denied NFA approval for a transfer.

    The proportion of NFA firearms ownership is relatively small in porportion to the far vaster numbers of non-NFA firearms ownership, which includes millions of the demonized civilian version of the AR-15 semi-auto rifle, (always misrepresented as an “automatic assault rifle” by the Leftist regressives), and handguns, as well as various shotguns and historical weapons.

    For the time being, the gun-grabbers’ fundamental agendas are to stigmatize gun owners and ownership and restrict it ever further, up to banning gun possession – much as happened in the United Kingdom and Australia. There’s a three-pronged attack on the Second Amendment and non-NFA firearms ownership by individual citizens:

    1) outright banning and confiscation;

    2) re-classifying as many types of firearms as possible to fall under the federal NFA regulations, such as the civilian AR-15 which would then require federal registration, transfer through the ATF, and then subject to federal excise taxes, which would generate millions of dollars in taxes, and to pay for all of this additional bureaucratic expense, exacting annual federal registration fees for all firearms listed in the NFA registry;

    3) the smokescreen of firearm injuries and deaths as a “public health” problem and legislating in that direction, therefore circumventing pesky firearms laws and the the Second Amendment altogether.

    And as for Hillary’s claim that the right to own and bear arms was a “nuanced reading of the Second Amendment until the decision by the late Justice Scalia,” that issue was settled in the important 1982 publication of The Right to Keep and Bear Arms: report of the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Ninety-seventh Congress, second session:

    “The conclusion is thus inescapable that the history, concept, and wording of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as well as its interpretation by every major commentator and court in the first half-century after its ratification, indicates that what is protected is an individual right of a private citizen to own and carry firearms in a peaceful manner.”

    The gun rights movement in the Reagan era lobbied Congress to pass the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 was to prevent the abuse of regulatory power — in particular, to address claims that the ATF was repeatedly inspecting FFL holders for the apparent purpose of harassment intended to drive the FFL holders out of business (as the FFL holders would constantly be having to tend to ATF inspections instead of to customers).

    The Act mandated that ATF compliance inspections of FFL’s can be done only once per year. An exception to the “once per year” rule exists if multiple record-keeping violations are recorded in an inspection, in which case the ATF may do a follow-up inspection.

    The main reason for a follow-up inspection would be if guns could not be accounted for.

    The Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 (FOPA) addressed the abuses noted in the 1982 Senate Judiciary Subcommittee report.

    Among the reforms intended to loosen restrictions on gun sales were the reopening of interstate sales of long guns on a limited basis, legalization of ammunition shipments through the US Postal Service (a partial repeal of the Gun Control Act), removal of the requirement for record keeping on sales of non-armor-piercing ammunition, and federal protection of transportation of firearms through states where possession of those firearms would otherwise be illegal.

    However, the Act also contained a provision that banned the sale of machine guns manufactured after the date of enactment to civilians, restricting sales of these weapons to the military and law enforcement.

    Enough of that. Varad Mehta, a historian living in Philadelphia, wrote this excerpt in the Federalist in his 2015 piece, The Fallacy of the Australian Model, after discussing the amount of coercive force by a militarized police force to forcibly confiscate guns from 100 million Americans after cash for guns programs failed, wrote:

    In an op-ed for the New York Times written after Sandy Hook, John Howard, the prime minister who oversaw the passage of Australia’s current gun laws, implored Americans to consider his nation’s example. Yet Howard fully understood the fundamental irrelevance of his country’s laws to the United States, and undermined his case by highlighting the differences between the two countries.

    “Our challenges were different from America’s. Australia is an even more intensely urban society, with close to 60 percent of our people living in large cities. Our gun lobby isn’t as powerful or well-financed as the National Rifle Association in the United States.

    Australia, correctly in my view, does not have a Bill of Rights, so our legislatures have more say than America’s over many issues of individual rights, and our courts have less control. Also, we have no constitutional right to bear arms. (After all, the British granted us nationhood peacefully; the United States had to fight for it.)”

    Leave aside that Australia had—and has—far fewer guns and people than we do. Forget the bits about the gun lobby or Australia’s greater urbanization.

    The crucial point is the final one: Australia does not have a bill of rights, and that, ultimately, is the reason it was able to confiscate guns.

    Australians have no constitutional right to bear arms, so seizing their weapons did not violate their constitutional rights. Gun confiscation in the United States would require violating not only the Second Amendment, but the fourth and fifth as well, and possibly even the first.

    Progressives generally have no compunction about breaching the Second Amendment, but one wonders how many others they would be eager to violate in their quest to nullify the second. Civil war and a tattered Constitution: such are the consequences of invoking “Australia.”

    It is not a model; it is a mirage.
    http://thefederalist.com/2015/06/25/the-australia-gun-control-fallacy/

    Neo-Leninist-Marxist “progressives” like Clinton have no compunction about shedding blood in their crooked and perverse notions of championing their “humanitarian” ideals and “peace”, such as regime change, and gun control. Look at Jewmerica’s wars overseas now, and the millions dead. Look at the Bolshevik revolution, Mao’s cultural revolution,

    Closer to home a few decades ago, during Bill Clinton’s administration, in 1993 (at the same time the Clintons were busy breaking up Yugoslavia) there was the bloody and fiery federal massacre of 98 men, women and children belonging to a harmless and peaceful apocalyptic Christian cult called the Branch Davidians, a split off from 7th Day Adventists, living on a ranch out in the country outside of Waco, Texas. They had acquired a stockpile of firearms, apparently preparing for self-defense in “the last days.”

    They had never threatened anyone, but the ATF wanted their firearms. The group was suspected of weapons violations, causing a search and arrest warrant to be obtained by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). There are independent reports which state that David Koresh, the leader of the group, had approached the ATF offering to show them his firearms, but they had spurned him.

    The incident began when the ATF attempted to raid the ranch. An intense gun battle erupted, resulting in the deaths of four government agents and six Branch Davidians.

    Upon the ATF’s failure to raid the compound, a siege was initiated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the standoff lasting 51 days.

    Eventually, the FBI launched a militarized assault and initiated a tear gas attack in an attempt to force the Branch Davidians out of the ranch. During the attack, a fire engulfed Mount Carmel Center, officially reported as started by the FBI’s tear gas assault. 76 people died including David Koresh, the leader of the cult in that inferno.

    During the siege, negotiators managed to facilitate the release of 19 children, ranging in age from five months to 12 years old, without their parents. However, 98 people remained in the building. The children were then interviewed by the FBI and Texas Rangers, some for hours at a time, without parental supervision.

    The key justification offered by the FBI (both to President Bill Clinton and to Attorney General Janet Reno) for launching tear gas attacks on the compound to force the Branch Davidians out, was the allegation that 19 children sent from the compound had been physically and sexually abused long before the standoff. That’s called “humanitarian intervention” in the language of the neo-Leninists.

    The Waco Massacre is still disputed. The New York Times reported the FBI’s attempt early cover-up of their own actions:

    “David Koresh, we believe, gave the order to commit suicide, and they all followed his order,” said Bob A. Ricks, a special agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation at a news conference here today.
    http://www.nytimes.com/1993/04/20/us/death-in-waco-the-lost-cause-texas-cult-membership-many-lives-shared-fate.html

    Not today, not next week, maybe not even the next ten years, but I know what is coming down the pike if too many people resist the carrot approach of persuasion, then coercion built into Clinton’s rhetoric. Next in her mind will come brute force. Neither she, nor Bill Clinton, have ever expressed any regret over the Waco tragedy.

    As King Leonidas I of the far distant Spartan ancestors on my Greek father’s mother’s side once said to King Xerxes after the Persian armies demanded that the Greeks surrender their weapons at the Battle of Thermopylae: molṑn labé — “Having come, take” or “Come and take them”.

    I hope I’m alive to say it when the feds, spoiled by the Clinton mindset, come to bust my door. I’m half Greek, 1/4 Scottish, and the Colonial Anglo-French-Pennsylvanian Deutsch maternal branch fought in the American War of Independence.

    It might go rough on the feds.

  29. michael mazur September 21, 2016 @ 9:31 pm

    No, Debbie, Trump will not be taking away the guns.

    The 2nd Amendment is safe for the next 8 yrs.

  30. michael mazur September 21, 2016 @ 10:26 pm

    Wally,

    I live in Australia too, and often the evening TV news leads with some gun crime here in Victoria.

    Also illegal imports of military type firearms keep coming into the country with the customs people and police seemingly unable, or unwilling, to do much about it. Yes, unwilling.

    But, if you write that Israel and the Jews are behind all terror, all bombings, all wars - as I do very often, they do find the police resources to take my gun away and then fight to keep it, insisting that I need to be psychologically assessed before the matter can be reviewed.

    I refuse to, saying that even the police admit — in the voluminous paperwork, that I have not threatened anyone, that it therefore is a freedom of speech and opinion matter.

    They have refused my request that the matter go before a regular court of law, instead have had me appear before a Firearms Appeals Committee, an entity created to bypass an open court, for it effectively is closed, though they assert otherwise.

    Their finding to uphold the police commissioner’s cancellation of my firearms’ licence is now under appeal to a different quasi judicial body, the Victorian Civil and Administration Tribunal.

    We shall see. If the FAC’s decision is upheld in VCAT, I’ll take the matter to a regular court, for which I’ll need a lawyer. $$$$. I don’t know how much.

  31. Mario P. Velasco September 21, 2016 @ 10:41 pm

    The Psychopaths are not merely attempting to ban and take guns away, they are attempting to ban ALL FORMS OF SELF-DEFENCE!

    Knives, stunguns, pelletguns, and high lumen flashlights! Take a look into various catalogues and see the number of States to which shipment is prohibited!

    As parents, do not continue to be self-absorbed, feeble and timid minded, and “I just do not have the Time!” Make Time damn it, because the bastards will, if they are not already, mind-raping your children in and out of school (propaganda centers) to think of SELF-DEFENCE as odious!!

    Why do you think that our European brethren are meekly accepting rape, and EVERY MANNER of racial and cultural extinction at the hands of Jew-enabled racist invaders?

    Extinction however brought about happens only once and is not recoverable!!

  32. Wally September 22, 2016 @ 12:32 am

    @BN

    That is absolutely ridiculous, your going to take the word of some trashy pop culture news site over that of various government and non government sources? Im on the front page of the new daily right now and their top story is brad Pitt and Angelina jolie’s divorce. There are ton’s of legitimate and academic third party studies that prove Australia’s gun crime has declined since gun control.

    Sources:

    http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/12/6/365.full

    http://andrewleigh.org/pdf/gunbuyback_panel.pdf

    http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/JCRPP-05-2015-0013

    ( armsandthelaw.com/archives/GunLawsSudden%20DeathBJC.pdf )

    Is the new daily the only legitimate source for “skyrocketing” gun crime in Australia? Should the new daily become the sole authority on gun crime statistics in Australia? Lets abolish all academic institutions in Australia, after all who needs them? the new daily will serve all our research needs.

    If Americans want to keep their gun rights then that’s fine, they can do that. They have a right to live however they want. But in Australia, the quality of life was increased when guns were heavily regulated.

  33. Mark September 22, 2016 @ 3:15 am

    There is a reason that the Bible tells us about the people that are running the world and causing all of the problems.

    They are evil to the core, The synagogue of Satan, Revelation 2:9 & Revelation 3:9, read it for yourself. Many founding fathers warned us of these people but they are very corrupt and powerful, they control the world’s money, they answer to no one.

    They are planning to holocaust Americans in FEMA camps except this one will be real. They also control the weather using technology they have acquired or taken control of from the US so any devastating storms, earthquakes or floods can be linked back to these losers.

  34. Why Gov Gun Control Obsession September 22, 2016 @ 5:49 am

    Over the years +BN has published several fine articles on the government obsession with disarming citizens, taking their guns.

    The reason the JWO is obsessed with disarming citizens can be seen by looking at what the JWO did in previous cases after disarming the people of a nation.

    Take Bolshevik Jews for example. The Jews murdered the Russian tsar and his family, and took control of the Russian government. This was followed by confiscation of guns which in turn was followed by Stalin’s mass murder of somewhere between 40 and 100 million Russians by various estimates.

    The 40-100 million Russian victims were mostly Christians, people who opposed the anti-christian Jews. The Jews understand well that Christians are much easier to exterminate if they are helpless, without guns, with no way to resist.

  35. Police Guns September 22, 2016 @ 6:27 am

    The JWO is subverting police departments along with its push to take peoples’ guns.

    Obama, Attorney General Lynch, and some mayors, governors, and JWO wickedness in high places ensure that police officers who uphold the law are fired or put in prison for defending themselves in cases like “Big Mike Brown vs Ferguson Policeman Darren Wilson.”

    The JWO is behind the ambush murders of police officers and promoting hate for police among black people. The Jews’ media fans the flames of this hate with a devilish passion.

    The JWO wants greater control of the police departments, especially big city police departments. Police carry guns and the JWO wants control of those guns. The JWO already has control of guns in the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, FBI, DHS, etc, because those institutions are part of the Federal Government which is controlled JWO puppets such as Obama.

    But state, city, and county police are not under direct control of the Fed gov. The JWO plan to gain greater control of city and county law enforcement involves forcing out brave honest Christian policemen, such as Darren Wilson was before he was forced out.

    As good honest policemen are forced out, they are being replaced with thugs who follow orders of corrupt officials in high places who got them hired. As more and more mayors, governors, and people in high office put more and more thugs in the police department, the police become more like police in Stalin’s government.

    This is the reason for attacks on police that we hear so much about in the Jews media recently. This is the reason for the recent murders of policemen in Baton Rouge, Dallas. The Jews want more control of police guns.

  36. tim jones September 22, 2016 @ 9:17 am

    @ALL ABOVE

    The real reason why Hillary and the Jews want to take away your guns:

    When a leader will abuse their power of the government to the fullest extent one day. They will prevent the right wing (majority) of Americans from fighting back.

    It has nothing to do with crime. In Australia they will not be able to fight back if they ever get a tyrannical leader. Western Europe won’t.

    Are we (the US) next?

  37. KathJuliane September 22, 2016 @ 11:16 am

    “Communism is a rejection of God, and Capitalism is a rejection of the human.” — Muammar Gaddafi

    “We came. we saw. He died (cackle, cackle, cackle).”– anti-God, anti-human psychopath Hillary Clinton, just one of the Destroyer’s demonically possessed legionaires and full time lush.

    ~~~*~~~

    From Fig Trees and Vineyards:

    Gaddafi’s 2011 Prophecy: Europe Will Be Overrun with Refugees (Must see!)

    In Sweden a government-backed charity recently produced a TV commercial informing the public that “Sweden will never be what it once was,” and encouraging them basically to accept floods of refugees pouring into the country as a new fact of life.

    The odd thing is, all this was predicted, or prophesied, if you will, by Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi back in 2011.

    Below are a couple of “must see” videos. The first is on Gaddafi’s almost prescient predictions on the destruction of Libya and its future implications for Europe…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLflLdIJeMw

    I had seen video clips of Gaddafi’s murder before, but the scene above, starting at about 12:10, is the first time I think I’ve seen the “long version” of it, and it reminds me very much of the demonically-possessed pigs in the 5th chapter of the Gospel of Mark.

    If you’ve never read that passage, here it is:

    Then Jesus asked him, “What is your name?”

    “My name is Legion,” he replied, “for we are many.” And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area.

    A large herd of pigs was feeding on the nearby hillside. 12 The demons begged Jesus, “Send us among the pigs; allow us to go into them.” He gave them permission, and the impure spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned.

    Any “Muslims” who have signed onto NATO’s regime change program by joining the ranks of ISIS or Al-Nusra (or the so-called “moderates” for that matter) are basically like the pigs in Mark’s Gospel. They are self-destructing, effectively running down the steep bank into the lake to be drowned. But it isn’t only errant Muslims.

    The analogy also applies to Western leaders–leaders like Obama, who claim to be fighting ISIS but who are in reality supporting it. Leaders of this caliber are no different from the possessed herd of swine in Mark. They are leading their own countries into chaos.

    Due to belief in their own propaganda (perhaps a form of demonic possession), or just plain evil inclinations, maybe simply bad judgement if you want to be charitable–whichever the case–they are self-destructing; they are running down the steep bank into the lake to drown; and they are taking their peoples with them.

    Which brings us to the next video. If you don’t watch a single other video for the rest of this year, do yourself a favor and watch this one.

    Like the video above, its central focus is on Gaddafi and the West’s destruction of Libya and the Libyan people, but it goes into the matter in much greater depth.

    At the same time, it also gives us a closeup look at Obama and the lies he told in 2011. This is essential viewing for anyone trying to render an objective assessment of Obama’s “legacy,” such as it is.

    The video includes interviews with Libyans, footage of a visit to Libya by Cynthia McKinney; news segments, including what appears to be a phony, staged segment from CNN; and bloody scenes from hospitals and bombed buildings–all juxtaposed with cutaways to a speech given by Obama in which he can be seen lying his fool head off–as he explains to the nation his reasoning for ordering the bombing of Libya.

    Many people tend to view Obama as being not quite as big of a liar as Hillary, but after watching this video, you may change your mind on that.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHgGKl2FVUc

    ~~~*~~~

    “They are leading their own countries into chaos.”

    When it is no longer possible for the neo-Leninist Marxist progressives, and neo-Leninist Marxist neocons to export their Revolution from Jewmerica to other countries, they will turn their revolutionary spirit and destructive agenda on the American people using government force.

    In addition to the continuing process of demoralizing destruction of the religious, spiritual, educational, social and moral order of American life, the Black Lives Matter shock troops erupting in various cities are but the latest symptom of just how deeply entrenched the old 1970’s Weather Underground revolutionary terrorists and its ideology became in controlling all aspects of our national governments.

  38. Brother Nathanael September 22, 2016 @ 11:46 am

    NEW YouTube Channel In Spanish Of Bro N!

    Nuevo canal de YouTube en español del H. N!

    https://youtu.be/6UmwAvkaNEw

    Enjoy! +BN

  39. benzion kook September 22, 2016 @ 11:53 am

    To the tune of “Silver(stein) Bells:

    We’ll grab your guns

    & have some fun,

    Shooting you in the

    Back of your mastoid.

    Worked for Reds.

    You’ll all be dead.

    Soon it will be

    Hannukah Day.

  40. Harry Cummings September 22, 2016 @ 12:36 pm

    I am truly glad that there is only one Don King because he does not represent me a person of color.

    Although I must ask, what was he talking about, and the words he was attempting to use left me dumb founded.

  41. Brother Nathanael September 22, 2016 @ 3:07 pm

    @Harry Cummings

    I saw that video too of Don King with Trump. Very painful to watch. Caused some temporary injury to my soul, actually.

    Although Donald did his best to maintain some semblence of dignity, King made that almost impossible and downright embarrasing for Trump.

    The entire meeting was horrible, King was disgusting, and the JEW FLAG King was carrying (usurping the American flag) made me want to vomit. +BN

  42. Obba Oxelltra September 22, 2016 @ 3:39 pm

    The people’s right to access firearms is to enable them to protect themselves from tyrannical government.

    I love it when people say things like, “Oh, that’s absurd - things like that will never happen here.”

    In 1765 Americans thought the same thing.

    It is much easier to dominate and control an unarmed populace, and it is a precursor to things like genocide and mass homicide, all the socialist massacres were preceded by firearm confiscation to “protect” the population.

  43. Bernard Weckmann September 22, 2016 @ 5:22 pm

    @KathJuliane

    Brilliant comment! As someone who has been living in Australia for 40 years I can only endorse every word!

    Australia is a Zionist-occupied country and our politicians are “kissers-of-Jewish-ass”. I did not shy away from suggesting this to former “Crime” Minister Tony Abbott in my post

    https://thechosenites.wordpress.com/2014/09/30/to-tony-abbott-prime-minister-of-australia/

    I urge all Americans that can still think straight and tell right from wrong not to allow their guns to be taken away. They are all that still stays the hand of the total NWO takeover of your country.

    Every human being has the right to defend himself and his human rights; everybody has the right to defend his loved ones and his country from the scum that constitutes the ruling “elite”.

    And that right includes the right to apply LETHAL!!!!! force!

    Australia is a brain-dead nation and beyond help, but perhaps there is still hope for America and the world, if Americans stand their ground on the issue of gun control.

  44. michael mazur September 22, 2016 @ 5:26 pm

    KathJuliane,

    Re: “That’s 0.0001% of the US population die from a firearm annually. I think. When I used the calculator 34,000/324million it came out to 1.049382716049383e-4% in scientific notation, which should mean there’s three zeros in front of the 1 or something. Someone correct this if it’s wrong.”

    ***

    Lop off the three zeros on both the numerator/denominator; 34/324,000 then press % to give 0.0104938%.

  45. Brother Nathanael September 22, 2016 @ 6:31 pm

    Speaking of guns, Crutcher’s hands were DOWN when the Tulsa officer shot him.

    Not only down, but he was reaching for his thigh and then into window when the officer made the determination to protect herself and fellow officers.

    (Scroll Down for Tulsa Police aerial Videos:)

    http://conservativetribune.com/truth-crutcher-bad-for-media/

    +Brother Nathanael
    TRUTH In Reporting
    NOT MSM JEW Lies!

  46. Brother Nathanael September 22, 2016 @ 6:50 pm

    More On Tulsa Shooting

    Window was not closed. Vid shows Crutcher’s left arm/shoulder beginning to reach into the window. Cops just don’t shoot needlessly in this kind of scenario.

    At 0:21 [on the aerial footage], after Crutcher turned facing the driver’s door, starts dropping his hands, his posture changes, his left should raises suggestive of inserting his left hand and arm through the window into the vehicle possibly towards the dash, and [at the same time] his right hand drops down towards his leg

    Take a close look at the dashcam & aerial vids:

    This is all very clear to see in 1/4 (.25) speed on YT. Crutcher’s right hand is down by his thigh and pocket area.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1SvIXdjTTA

    His hands were certainly not up in the air at the time he was shot.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Rh3fYHAfnI

    +Brother Nathanael
    TRUTH In Reporting
    NOT MSM JEW Lies!

  47. Brother Nathanael September 22, 2016 @ 7:05 pm

    AND More On Tulsa Shooting

    The aerial views are clear as day.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1SvIXdjTTA
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Rh3fYHAfnI

    I am praying she gets Excusable or Justifiable Homicide, or at worst, Manslaughter II.

    She was down on her knees crying right after she was forced to shoot him.

    I have a dear Christian friend who was a street cop in Denver. He is now a chief of police.

    He once said to me, “If I see my life threatened during an encounter, I shoot and do not hesitate.”

    At first I was stunned.

    But after thinking about it and knowing he was a pious Christian, a good man with a family, I agreed with his position. +bn

  48. Brother Nathanael September 22, 2016 @ 8:22 pm

    Tulsa Shooting AGAIN

    As for Tulsa cops being “low IQ turds,” police applicants must have completed a Bachelor’s degree with a C+ average or better at an accredited college. Some PD’s, usually small town, only require a HS diploma, or maybe a two year degree, but Tulsa is not one of them.

    I’m about 95% certain that she’ll be acquitted of any voluntary manslaughter charges in an open court jury trial once all the evidence is in, especially if the toxicology report comes in positive for PCP.

    The DA, in his discretion, has chosen to file Manslaughter I to get it in open court, and then go by the book because of all the public scrutiny and political atmosphere.. Manslaughter I is not the same as murder, it is a far lesser degree of homicide. Oklahoma also classes abortion as Manslaughter I.

    DA’s are political, they are elected officials. He’s going to play this hot potato strictly by the book. DA’s learn from other DA’s actions, and the one thing he won’t do is choose to decline prosecution.

    He’s going right down the line between handing the case over to the Grand Jury as in the Ferguson shooting, and insanely charging Murder I or II and all kinds of homicide charges as did the avenging DA of Baltimore in the Freddy Grey’s case.

    Manslaughter I is a charge with a formal arrest warrant issued for Officer Betty Shelby. Going through her lawyer, she turned herself in, she went through formal booking at the DA’s office, the PD, or the Sheriff’s Office jail, and then likely released on her own recognizance.

    Once all the evidence is evaluated by the DA’s office, and if it adds up to justifiable homicide as I believe it will, Kunzweiler can then recommend to the court that the charge of Manslaughter I be dismissed. If not, in this political atmosphere, then it’s not bad strategy to let a jury, with blacks on it, come with the same verdict of justifiable homicide.

    Tulsa County DA Steve Kunzweiler, white, not a Jew, has been Tulsa DA for 25 years.

    While Tulsa is large majority white, the black community generally trusts the DA’s office and court system for justice, and they seem to be developing a good relationship with the PD.

    And, the Tulsa black community, which is very conservative and the Black Protestant church is pretty strong, isn’t very open to outsider race-baiting blacks coming in and creating a disturbance during their own organized protests.

    Crutcher was some father of four, he was in prison a lot for some serious crimes.

    I went back to the dashcam again, and you can hear one shot being fired, and the smoke from Officer Shelby’s gun, just as she moves to the right at 0:18.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Rh3fYHAfnI

    There’s an old cop saying that goes along with with what my cop friend said:

    “I’d rather be tried by 12 of my peers, than buried by six.”

    +BN

  49. Brother Nathanael September 22, 2016 @ 9:31 pm

    Tulsa Shooting Once Again

    Shooting at arms or legs never works, unless there’s a lucky shot that blows a knee cap off, and the perp might go down, again maybe not, especially if on PCP or high on some other crap.

    If you hit the thigh, all you hit is muscle. If it’s a lucky shot, then it might nick the femoral artery and the perp bleeds out in 7 to 10 minutes, but that still won’t get him down on the ground.

    There are numerous cases of perps who’ve been riddled with bullets in both limbs and body who stayed standing and were still dangerous, especially on drugs like PCP, or something fairly new called Bath Salts.

    Shoot Crutcher’s left hand? The rest of his body was in the way. Besides, a hand is a very small target to aim for from 20 or 30 feet, and it’s trying to hit a moving target.

    Cops are trained to shoot at center body mass where the hearts and lungs are to knock the person down and incapacitate them from being any further danger, understanding that doing will probably kill them, but such is not their intention.

    Betty shot through Crutchner’s right side, which means the bullet went through the entire chest cavity striking lungs, heart and or the aorta. Cops immediately begin CPR once a perp goes down, as they did for Crutchner.

    Under stress, even shooting at such a large target as the torso, the average cop misses 50% of the time. I believe Darren Wilson had a number of misses.

    If cops miss the torso so much, then how likely is it that a cop will hit an arm or the lower leg. The thigh is a pretty sizeable target, but it won’t take a perp down. He might not even know he was shot in the thigh.

    Training to shoot towards body mass is somewhat similar in terms of intent as the physician who gives enough morphine to suppress someone’s excruciating, relentless cancer pain and as a consequence death likely results.

    A fine line, but a distinct one between medicating for comfort in some cases, and euthanasia. The doctor does not intend to kill the cancer patient, but alleviate the pain and suffering. A doctor performing euthanasia intentionally kills the patient.

    If these Tulsa cops were stone cold killers, why would they immediately start CPR or call paramedics for advanced life support?

    +BN

  50. Truth vs Politics September 23, 2016 @ 6:55 am

    Telling the truth when the truth contradicts JWO politics, quickly ruins a would-be honest politician, as Kathy Miller recently experienced -

    www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/23/ohio-county-chair-for-trump-campaign-resigns-after-obama-remarks.html

  51. Dan September 23, 2016 @ 12:58 pm

    I’m not familiar with all the state laws, who could be?

    However here if you have a Felony or certain Class A misdemeanors you are unable to purchase a gun.

    As they reclassify crimes restrictions, more people DUI’s and certain traffic violations, domestic battery, other assault convictions will be denied gun ownership.

    That number is growing.

  52. Gun Laws & Civil Rights September 23, 2016 @ 4:55 pm

    The Jews media has a sickening history of hyping civil rights to defend riots, pornography, and evil but not civil rights to bear arms.

    The JWO always tries to deny civil rights where they allow Christians to have guns.

    With the thousands of laws, the bureaucracy, and the red tape the JWO has manipulated their puppet politicians to impose, the 2nd Amendment civil rights have been violated to death.

    There are many gun laws and regulations that the average person doesn’t know about. Almost anyone with a gun could be charged with breaking several different laws that he doesn’t even know about.

  53. debbie September 23, 2016 @ 4:56 pm

    Trump will try to take some gun privilages away, also.

    I doubt people in America will LET ANYBODY GRAB OUR GUNS. Quit being paranoid.

    Wow, Hillary is gonna do this, do that, so many promises that never come to reality. lol.

    SHE probably won’t keep her promise to get our guns. Me being sarcastic.

  54. Obama Vetoes 911 Bill September 23, 2016 @ 5:14 pm

    In recent news, Senator Diane Feinstein was having “second thoughts” about a bill to let 9-11 victims sue the Saudi government.

    Some more truth about 9-11 might have been exposed if 911 victims began suing the Saudis.

    So the Jews told Obama to veto the bill. The JWO does its best to keep the sheep blinded to the truth about 9-11.

  55. Jack Frost September 23, 2016 @ 11:02 pm

    You can ignore what Wally the Australian says above.

    I am an Aussie too, well into my seventh decade who has lived in the four biggest capital cities, and I can tell you that gun crime in Australia was no worse prior to the gun laws than what it is now. In fact, all categories of crime are much worse now, whether gun related or not.

    If you drilled down into the raw data supporting those neat little graphs cited in the links, you would find the fraud.

    Our beloved Australia IS a ZOG society, and neither of our two or three major political parties hesitate to manipulate stats to support their respective positions.

    Yes, Wally, your precious government and NGO’s are liars, and have been for a long time. Both sides of the political “spectrum” have, and are saturating our nation with Asian and African immigrants, and any governments that would allow that perversion would hardly hesitate to falsify a few statistics.

    Australia is a fully paid up member of the political elites that have waged a hidden war on its own people even before Federation.

    No Yanks, keep your guns, or die trying! In the end, they will be the only thing protecting you from anihilation by the brown hordes.

  56. KathJuliane September 26, 2016 @ 2:48 pm

    Dear Michael Mazur,

    Thank you for working this out for me.

    So, rounding down, this means 1/100th of 1 percent of the US population dies from a firearm annually inclusive of suicide and accidental discharge.

    Despite what the medical gun grabbers would have us believe in the way of all gun deaths as pandemic public health menace among 324 million Americans, it’s not even a statistical pixel.

    It’s more dangerous to drive a car (33,804; 10.7 per 100,000 population;), go to a hospital or be on a medical treatment plan*, have an accident or sustain an unintentional injury inside your own home (falls, #4 cause of death–30,208, 9.6/100,000; poisonings–38,851, 12.3/100,000) or catch the flu in terms of fatalities, than it is to die in a gun-related homicide (suicides not included, as it is self-inflicted).

    NPR: *New John Hopkins Medical research study that more than 250,000 Americans die each year from medical errors. They call for changes in death certificates to better tabulate fatal lapses in care.

    In an open letter, they urged the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to immediately add medical errors to its annual list reporting the top causes of death.

    On the CDC’s official list, that would rank just behind heart disease and cancer, which each took about 600,000 lives in 2014, and in front of respiratory disease, which caused about 150,000 deaths.

    Actually, millions of people don’t die directly from an influenza virus, but from secondary pneumonia infections and other complications, in what was a very obvious effort by the CDC to manipulate the stats.

    Here in Pharmacopia Land, every flu season we always hear that “50,000 people die from the flu so get your flu shot, when in fact cause of death was secondary pneumonia and other complications suffered by society’s most vulnerable — babies and young children with weak immune systems, the elderly and the immune compromised.

    In 2013, according to the CDC 53,282 people died of pneumonia, resulting in 16.9 deaths per 100,000 population.

    The number of deaths caused by influenza were 3,697 in 2013.

    In previous report formatting, CDC used to bury the influenza-related secondary pneumonia deaths in with influenza-related deaths to pump up their stats, to of course, push the latest flu vaccine.

    They’d title a section “Influenza deaths” and give the numbers, then in very finely printed subsections, distinguish between secondary pneumonia and influenza proper as causes of death.

    They’ve since changed their reporting format.

    Remember the Swine Flu hysteria generated by the powers that be? CDC informs us that just 3 of cases of a Swine Flu variant, H3N2, were detected in 2015 in the US with 2 hospitalized (most likely for pneumonia) and zero deaths. There are 18 cases detected so far this year, with 1 hospitalization and zero deaths.

    Statistics are manipulated by governments according to their dominant political ideology and agenda all of the time, or if the bureaucrats are trying to get a budget increase.

    Yet, enormous amounts of neo-liberal Democrat propaganda, political activism, money and resources are devoted to restricting and abolishing the Second Amendment rights of not only 100 million Americans who already own firearms because of less than 12,000 gun-related homicides per year, but the Second Amendment rights of all Americans including non-gun owners.

    Realistically, as the Demoncrats have found out from banging their heads on the Second Amendment for decades, its a Herculean task to push through Congress an amendment abolishing the Second Amendment, which is what it would require.

    Instead, the goal of the gun-grabbers is to simply make the Second Amendment irrelevant as an individual inherent right by demonizing and shaming tens of millions of law abiding and responsible gun-owners as social pariahs.

    Or from the public health angle, smear us as a Typhoid Mary infecting everybody with bullets.

    Hillary tipped us to this when she said, “If it [an individual’s right to bear arms] is, then it, like every other constitutional right…” In short, the individual right in her mind doesn’t exist, or if it does, it’s irrelevent.

    The public health gun-grabbers come up with arguments such as guns pose as much of a public health hazard as does smoking cigarettes in public.

    If she’s elected, her anti-gun political machine will go into high gear pushing new laws and regulations, while at the same time tightening up legal protections for a woman’s right to murder their unborn child.

    Your chances of being killed by a gun in the US are miniscule compared to the certainty of 1 million unborn babies murdered inside their mothers’ wombs every year, 52 million or so since 1973.

    It’s been described as the equivalent of the nuclear annihilation of the populations of 94 major American cities.

  57. KathJuliane September 26, 2016 @ 2:52 pm

    Dear Bernard Wexler,

    God bless you, and thanks for the compliment (blush).

    +BN must hear from people all over the world by email, so he nails his facts down pretty well concerning current events.

    I mean, it’s ridiculous to believe that the US, UK, Australian governments and their bureaucracies would never lie, or conceal, bend, spindle or mutilate statistics, or manipulate them and people’s brains to float failed programs as government successes for as long as possible.

    Johnson’s War on Poverty and the expansion of the welfare state has cost well over $1 trillion since 1965. It’s a phenomenal fail, yet it’s too big too fail, so the government, particularly the Democrat Social Injustice Warriors dedicated to the bigger and more centralized the federal government the better, has to keep it, and all of the administration’s bureaucratic anti-poverty/welfare federal petty kingdoms propped up.

    America’s poverty problem hasn’t changed. There are more poor people than ever, and the middle class is sinking faster than ever into poverty.

    Our Millenial generations are so poor and so in debt with student loans after earning their higher education and post graduate degrees, that they are living with their parents until an average age of 34, or else in collective shared housing.

    Per Bentley University data, Millenials are postponing indefinitely plans of marriage and family, if not refusing to marry at all.

    “The median age at first marriage is now 27 for women and 29 for men — up from 20 for women and 23 for men in 1960.

    “Today an unprecedented portion of millennials will remain unmarried through age 40, a recent Urban Institute report predicted. [And, essentially childless.]

    “The marriage rate might drop to 70 percent — a figure well below rates for boomers (91 percent), late boomers (87 percent) and Gen Xers (82 percent). And declines might be even sharper if marriage rates recover slowly, or not at all, from pre-recession levels, according to the report.”

    Interesting read. It also reflects on the marriage and family realities of whites in Europe and Australia:
    http://www.bentley.edu/impact/articles/nowuknow-why-millennials-refuse-get-married

    Our government cherry picks statistics for pushing their own agenda depending on the domestic ideology in control. The progressive, closet racist Democrats and race-baiting Black liberals, and the neo-Marxist revolutionary Black Lies Matter, are very big on Black poverty as well as get Whitey for “white on black” murders.

    According to the 2013 FBI Uniform Crime Report Expanded Homocide Data Table 6

    White on white murders-2,509; Black on Black murders-2,245; Black on White murders-409, and the most agregious of them all, White on Black murders-189. That’s it. But it’s only the last figure which matters to Black Lies Matter.

    White on Black homicides is major “equality and justice” plank, and also because screaming “White on black murder” can always be counted on to inflame the reactionary passions of a minority of members of the Black community. Even better if a White officer kills a Black in the line of duty, despite the fact that only about 1/3 of the police-related homicide victims are Black, while Whites are somewhere close to 2/3.

    If you believe the propaganda, Negroes were lynched by Evil Whitey(TM) and then hung (or shot) for for simply being uppity Negroes. Complicit liberal Whites quite often evoke old, historical photographs of the KKK and wave them around, along 19th and early 20th century photos of Blacks hanging from trees in order to reinforce White Guilt.

    The problem with this simple mindedness is its simple-mindedness. Every White is a member of the KKK. There’s a Klucker hiding under every Negro’s bed waiting to lynch them when the lights go out.

    Most often, way back when, an angry White mob (or a Black mob for that matter, or even mixed groups) took the law into their own hands incensed by some heinous crime and carried out extra-judicial executions. Statistics developed to support federal Anti-lynching laws in the 1930s reveal that lynch mobs hung Whites as well as Blacks. Up until the federal legislation was passed, it was up to the States to criminalize lynching or not.

    Generally, more Whites than Blacks were lynched out West during a 50 year period from 1882 to 1931, which reveals regional variations depending on population demographics, I suppose. In some Western states, no Blacks were lynched at all, even though a small minority of Blacks resided there.

    Blacks also lynched Blacks for the same reasons, because of real or suspected crimes, even forcibly taking them out of the custody of White police officers. There are other instances where Blacks just simply took matters into their own hands without getting the authorities involved, resorting to justice at the end of a rope their own way.

    These are some facts of an ugly period of U.S. history, which can be unearthed from contemporary newspaper reports of the day. There are also a number of research studies on lynching in America.

    Over the years there’s been the progressives’ retelling of history, magnifying the narrative to epic proportions to keep passions inflamed in the Black community about Evil Whitey lynching millions of Negroes. Maybe not millions but tens of thousands.

    No, not even tens of thousands.

    The fact is since 1882 to 1968, there were about 4750 recorded lynching incidents inclusive of both Black and Whites — total. About 3,400 blacks were lynched in that time frame.

    A substantial, even a majority, of incidents were for heinous crimes unrelated to race. That’s a national average of a whopping 55 lynchings a year. Not precisely the Black Holocaust we are led to believe through the lenses of White Guilt. Never fear, however, the numbers of unrecorded lynchings can be “estimated” to infinity.

    There are many years were there were just a handful of lynchings per year, or none at all.
    http://www.chesnuttarchive.org/classroom/lynchingstat.html

    Repeat “Black Victims,” and “White Lynchings” long enough, and the racist association is indelibly seared into the popular mind.

    Progressives especially love to throw around percentages, and avoid mentioning absolute numbers. As an example, there are numerically more poor Whites in America than there are poor Blacks.

    These are typical US Census government poverty statistics from the Economic Policy Institute:

    15.1 percent — just over 46 million Americans — were officially in poverty in 2010. This is an increase from 12.5 percent in 2007.

    Among racial and ethnic groups, according to the Atlantic Monthly, September 2015, Black Americans had the highest poverty rate, 26.2 percent, followed by Hispanics at 23.6%, Asians at 12% and Non-Hispanic Whites at 10.1 percent.

    Black Americans have the highest poverty rate, that’s a statistical fact, but what does it mean and how does it play out?

    What progressives, especially the wealthy white liberals, bend over backwards to avoid mentioning is that 72% of Blacks are not living in poverty and are not working poor. In fact, Blacks have enjoyed the greatest share of decrease in poverty since 1973 compared to Whites and Hispanics, and Asians sinces 1985.

    According to the 2010 Census, there were 37,685,848 Blacks, for 13% of the US population.

    It means that in the Black community, 27,133,811 Black Americans overall are doing fairly well. Nearly 73% of Black Americans are low middle class or better, while 10,175,179 live in poverty.

    There are, however, nearly as many poor Whites in absolute numbers then there are Blacks.

    77% of the American population are White –249,480,000 inclusive of ethnic minorites classed as Whites, such as North Africans and Middle Easterners, and Hispanic-Whites, as well as Jews.

    For 71 years, the US has classified Americans of Middle Eastern and North African ancestry as “white”. Many Arabs, Middle Easterners and North Africans, similar to Southern Europeans around the Mediterranean, can have fair, light or light olive skin color, light or red hair and blue or green eyes among the dark haired, brown eyed Mediterranean types.

    The federal government is now considering a plan to give this group of Americans its own ethnic classification on the next US census in 2020.

    But what the current census data format serves to do is inflate the numbers of Whites, and dilute the number of European Whites who are actually living under the poverty level. It may also be a disservice to Americans of MENA heritage, But since there’s no new classifications yet, I have to go with the census data as it is.

    10.1% of Whites, 25,197,480 live in poverty, including myself, but you never hear about that, because we all have “White privilege.”

    “White privilege” is a term ironically coined by the ultra-rich black sheep son of the mega-wealthy Chicago Ayers family — Bill Ayers — and his 6 white, rich, and equally spoiled Alinskyite Jewish SDS co-leaders of the revolutionary terrorist Weather Underground.

    Neo-Leninist-Marxist Weather Underground in fact, commit terrorist crimes across the US in the late ’60s-70’s and developed the ever-mutating organizing principles of “intersection politics” forming alliances with other seemingly disparate revolutionary groups such as the old Black Panthers and other Black revolutionary groups.

    And, while the other races are experiencing gradual but steady declines in the poverty rate meaning in increase in economic status, White poverty rate is the only one with an increasing trend as the White ‘blue collar’ lower middle class continues to sink, bringing the rest of the White middle middle class down with it.

    Let’s go back to the government statistic “15.1 percent— just over 46 million Americans— were officially in poverty in 2010. This is an increase from 12.5 percent in 2007.”

    Nearly half of poor Americans are White. This is what our Jewmerican government does, and the Jewmedia manipulates and propagandizes percentage rates.

    The average American and the average foreigner both have the popular impression that just like the popular myths and now “official history” of slavery in America that all slaves were Black, that every man who was lynched by a mob and hung on a tree was Black, then anyone on food stamps and housing assistance must be part of the long-suffering Black or minority communities.

    Not so. Per the US Census own data, what they don’t tell you, and you have to calculate the raw data yourself, or go elsewhere to dig the statistics out, in 2010 nearly 50% of people on food stamps were White.

    The government lies by omission as well as manipulates statistics, relies on the Jewmedia to go along with it, and in our bi-polar unitary, Jew-controlled, one Democrat-Republican neo-con/neo-liberal party system ideology, the reigning party doesn’t really matter.

    It is a matter of establishment suppressed political history that prior to the Civil War, skin color and the status of “unfree persons” were legally unrelated, save for the prejudicial and biased exception that after 1805, a person of color was presumed to be a slave unless they could legally prove their free status.

    There were three skin color classifications, “White, Colored, or Black,” and there were three classes relative to citizenship — free person (natural-born or manumitted) with all rights of citizenship; and unfree person (indentured servitude or slavery) with no rights of citizenship, and alien residents.

    One’s legal status as unfree or free person depended on the status of one’s mother as an unfree or free person, regardless of skin color classifications of White, Colored, or Black. As such, there were legally free and unfree Negroes, free and unfree Coloreds, and free and unfree Whites.

    A Black slave who married (in common law) a free Black woman would result in free Black children. A free White man who fathered children by an unfree Black mistress would have unfree Colored children. But if the same free White man had children in lawful marriage with a free Colored wife would have free Colored children who also could legally inherit property from each parent.

    An unfree White man who fathered children by a free Black woman in a common law marriage, would have free Colored children. The old local town and city censuses clearly record both the race and free/unfree status of each person in the census.

    The first official slave owner in colonial America was a free Black man, a native of Angola who anglicised his name. The Arab slave trade in Negroes was far greater and much longer lasting by centuries than the trans-Atlantic slave trade. The trans-Atlantic slave trade was dwarfed by the Arab slave trade.

    It is estimated that a minimum of 18 million Africans were enslaved by Arab slave traders, and that over one million Europeans were enslaved by the Muslim world during the same period. The Muslim slave trade saw Africans exported to regions throughout the Middle East and even to India, while the Europeans were captured in raids in Spain, Italy, France, Britain, and Ireland.

    These raids were launched from North Africa, and during the Islamic occupation of Iberia and southern Italy, from the latter regions as well.

    In the early Medieval era of the Arab slave trade, the raids into the North Atlantic and the Baltic Sea states were facilitated by the Viking raiders and slavers. In fact, the European slave trade of the Medieval era, almost exclusively a Jewish enterprise, is another suppressed aspect of slave history.

    Even Wiki admits: Barbary pirates and Maltese corsairs both raided for slaves and purchased slaves from European merchants, often the Jewish Radhanites, one of the few groups who could easily move between the Christian and Islamic worlds.

    Records of Jewish participation in the slave trade go back to the 5th century.

    Olivia Remie Constable wrote: “Muslim and Jewish merchants brought slaves into al-Andalus from eastern Europe and Christian Spain, and then re-exported them to other regions of the Islamic world.”

    The etymology of the English word slave recalls this period, as the word sklabos means Slav.

    Thanks, Wiki

    Of the millions of African slaves exported to North, Central and South America, less than 400,000 were ever imported to the former British American Colonies which came to form the United States.

    Article 1 Section 9 of the United States Constitution protected the slave trade for twenty years. Only starting January 1, 1808, could there be a federal law to entirely abolish the international slave trade, although individual states could and did ban it at any time.

    The Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves of 1807 (2 Stat. 426, enacted March 2, 1807) is a United States federal law that stated that no new slaves were permitted to be imported into the United States.

    It took effect in 1808, the earliest date permitted by the United States Constitution.

    This legislation was part of the general trend toward abolishing the international slave trade, which individual Confederated U.S. states had restricted during the American Revolution, and the national Congress first regulated against in the Slave Trade Act of 1794.

    The 1807 Act ended the legality of trade with the U.S. However, it was not always well enforced and slaves continued to be imported in limited numbers.

    Slavery itself continued in the United States until the end of the Civil War in 1865 and the adoption of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution. The domestic trade inside the U.S. was unaffected by the 1807 law.

    The invasion of southeastern Europe by the Ottoman Turks saw even more Europeans enslaved into the Muslim world—but their numbers are unknown.

    Not all Black slaves were sub-Saharan “pagans” that were forcibly converted to Christianity by their evil White Christian Slave Masters(TM) according to popular historical memory and half-truths on both sides of the Mason-Dixon Line, particularly among race-baiting Black liberation “theologians”.

    The Black liberation narrative goes something like “Some plantation owners required the enslaved to work even on Sunday, an intentional move to break them away from their [presumably pagan] religious regimen and softening them over time to accept whatever religion was presented to them by the plantation owners.

    Plantation owners separated the enslaved people who spoke the same tribal language so they could not worship together and could be taught Christianity at the same time, according to an article titled The Inconceivable State of African-American Christianity on christianitytoday.com.

    Then the obliging liberal white Protestant Christians feeds this inadequate historical narrative with articles like this from Christianity Today reinforcing “Oppressor Christian Religion”, and starts from the assumption that all Black and Colored slaves were pagans:

    “The Inconceivable Start of African-American Christianity

    “Why slaves adopted their oppressor’s religion—and transformed it.”

    That’s not true in all cases. Some were already Christians, fewer probably Muslims before they ever stepped on the trans-Atlantic slave ships. Relatively few would be Muslims since it was forbidden to take another Muslim and make him a slave.

    Among the Negro slaves and their religions exported to the British American Colonies and elsewhere in the Americas by way of Portuguese Judeo-Arab slave traders from the North Coast and northeast and sub-Saharan Africa, were a significant, if unknown, number of Coptic, Nubian, and Ethiopian Christians of the Oriental Orthodox Church.

    Black slaves largely came from West Africa, but a minority of Christian slaves came from Ethiopia (Aksum), Egypt (Kemet), and Cush (Nubia, now South Sudan) besides West Africa, having a variety of skin colors, languages and dialects. They were often exported in captive family, tribal, and village groups.

    The Oriental Orthodox Church is very close to the Eastern Orthodox Church having the same historical and traditional Early Church roots, and at one time an integral part of the Orthodox Church Pentarchy in political union with Constantinople, until the Muslim Arab conquests.

    Islam had also made inroads into West Africa, so many African slaves were also from conquered Muslim African tribes and civilizations. I’m aware of at least one history of a Muslim African prince who was conquered in battle and then shipped to America as a slave.

    In some of the personal family narratives passed down to descendents of Black and Colored slaves, there are describing how African Christians were not allowed by their Protestant White and Black masters to practice their native communal and traditional liturgical forms of Christianity.

    The founder of the southern state of Georgia banned both slavery and Africans from the state, as well as Roman Catholics.

    Large numbers of “Free Blacks” owned Black and White slaves as did the Cherokee plantation owners before the Civil War, and before they were forcibly transferred to federal reservations.

    American Civil War.com:

    The fact is large numbers of free Negroes owned black slaves; in fact, in numbers disproportionate to their representation in society at large. In 1860 only a small minority of whites owned slaves. According to the U.S. census report for that last year before the Civil War, there were nearly 27 million whites in the country. Some eight million of them lived in the slaveholding states.

    The census also determined that there were fewer than 385,000 individuals who owned slaves. Even if all slaveholders had been White, that would amount to only 1.4 percent of Whites in the country (or 4.8 percent of southern Whites owning one or more slaves).

    In the rare instances when the ownership of slaves by free Negroes is acknowledged in the history books, justification centers on the claim that black slave masters were simply individuals who purchased the freedom of a spouse or child from a white slaveholder and had been unable to legally manumit them. Although this did indeed happen at times, it is a misrepresentation of the majority of instances, one which is debunked by records of the period on Blacks who owned slaves.

    These include individuals such as Justus Angel and Mistress L. Horry, of Colleton District, South Carolina, who each owned 84 slaves in 1830. In fact, in 1830 a fourth of the free Negro slave masters in South Carolina owned 10 or more slaves; eight owning 30 or more (2).

    According to federal census reports, on June 1, 1860 there were nearly 4.5 million Negroes in the United States, with fewer than four million of them living in the southern slaveholding states. Of the blacks residing in the South, 261,988 were not slaves.

    Of this number, 10,689 lived in New Orleans. The country’s leading African American historian, Duke University professor John Hope Franklin, records that in New Orleans over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves, or 28 percent of the free Negroes in that city.

    To return to the census figures quoted above, this 28 percent is certainly impressive when compared to less than 1.4 percent of all American Whites and less than 4.8 percent of Southern Whites. The statistics show that, when free, blacks disproportionately became slave masters.
    More: http://americancivilwar.com/authors/black_slaveowners.htm

    And Black slave owners in the South supported the Confederacy. The slave owners, Black or White, were represented by the Democrat Party as well.

    Ironically, Obama’s great-great-great-great grandfather, George Washington Overall, owned two slaves who were recorded in the 1850 census in Nelson County, Ky. Obama’s great-great-great-great-great-grandmother, Mary Duvall, also owned slaves. My guess is that they were probably pro-Confederacy.

    It’s not 1830, 1861, 1888, 1931, or 1950, or even 1964 anymore.

    Nobody is taught real, comprehensive American history in school, because our public school system is nothing more than a publicly funded “Progressive” factory for churning out students, particularly White ones, as gist for the neo-Leninist Marxist revolutionary organizers, such as the race-baiting Black Lies Matter and the network of race-baiting liberal Black politicians and religious leaders promoting “Black Liberation theology”.

    Why are the Black Kids rioting in Charlotte and elsewhere?

    To the dismay of many of the older, conservative law-abiding, black Christians in the Black community and their leadership, organized political groups and churches devoted to peaceful protests and active reforms when called for, it’s not for Social Justice Warrior ideals, it’s because they, these fatherless Black Kids, think it’s fun.

    Just as they think it’s fun to hunt down innocent Whites in roving packs and beat them up, or wannabe gang bangers attack Whites and slash or stab them as a part gang initiation, or else play their “knock out games” on Whites.

    Many of them are smart enough to get through school, but they just don’t want to, because gangsta culture and peer pressure is more important to them.

    Outsider organized revolutionaries pour in to ruin peaceful protests, activate their criminal street gangsta shock troops, and make it exciting for the feral Black Kids to be a part of, especially under the illusions of social media and the chance to become a “star” for 10 minutes, even if they lie and fabricate stories.

    How many times have local community organized peaceful protests been hijacked by the Black Lies Matter revolutionaries?

    There is a well-established effort starting in grammar school to paint Whites evil simply because of the color of your skin.

    “Progressive” Jewish and liberal intellectuals and educational policy makers, implant every young, white American with the seeds of white guilt in the schools for twelve years and more through their “guided education” system of curriculum, propagated and reinforced by the media and entertainment.

    The progressives, led by the red- and pink-diapered Jews, have been gnawing away like termites at our conservative, traditional and Christian cultural institutions and social fabrid, until we are willing to simply allow our culture and our country to be overrun because of institutional learned helplessness, with no will to fight back.

    If you have white skin, you are automatically guilty of the crime of “White Privilege,” no matter how poor you might be. The only way to eliminate racism, “White Privilege” is erase white skin. Just ask Barbara Specter.

  58. Ted Gorsline September 27, 2016 @ 2:53 am

    If the American Medical Association really wants to make America a healthier nation, they would encourage the Jews to stop having children.

    The Jews have huge problems with genetic disorders, caused by inbreeding. That is why they put so much money into genetic research at place like the Ichann Foundation.

    They hope, in the future, to be able to develop boutique DNA clinics where they can pluck out their myriad mental and physical disorders and put in new DNA on the QT.

    If this all works out as planned, the Jews will all be able to become 100% German without anybody even knowing about it. Medical files are private.

    The children of just about everyone I know who married a Jew are now if not complete vegetables then at the very least damaged goods.

    That is why the Israelis, with all their money, just can’t break the bronze medal ceiling at the Olympics. They are the wrong stuff.

    Lots of third worlders from dirt poor countries and no budgets win gold medals. Not Israel. Damaged goods are damaged goods.

    You cannot partake of the unnatural behaviour of paying too much attention to your sisters, daughters, cousins, and pre menpausal grandmothers without expecting payback.

    To give you a good few examples, Albert Einstein married a woman who was his first cousin on one side of the family and second cousin on the other. Any childern from such a union would behave just like Prince Charles and for the same reason.

    That is why Albert Einstein is famous for the theory of relativity. He was bonking his closest relatives.

Leave a comment

Please copy the string SeUh9o to the field below:


Feed