by, J. Schuyler Montague | sharia unveiled
What would the world look like today if the Chinese never invented black powder? What would the world look like today if the first hydrogen atom was never split?
What might have been, could have been or should have been doesn’t really matter at this point. The proverbial genie was let out of the lamp many centuries ago… and all that matters now… is, where do we go from here?
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
There is little greater that separates us from the rest of the world than those words right there. The rest of our freedoms are shared with many nations, but the right of the people to keep and bear arms is that which sets us apart. Our insightful forefathers knew that, just as they required that right themselves to acquire our republic, we would one day require it ourselves to keep it secure. Not necessarily secure from a foreign invader, but secure from the enemy within. What part of “shall not be infringed” do they not understand? Oh, they understand it very well. They understand, that all that stands between us and tyranny are those hallowed words. They understand as we do, that the second amendment ensures all the rest.
Today in America, there is a liberal constituency that have disillusioned themselves into thinking that we would somehow be safer without guns. They believe that all murders would end and suddenly utopia would wash up on our shores and everyone will sing kumbaya. Well, nothing could be further from the truth. You see, the act of murder is not begot from a gun but it’s born from the heart of a man. Long before those Chinese alchemists accidentally stumbled upon black powder, murder existed. Whether it was by the stone or by the sword, murder long predates the gun. If every firearm was removed from the planet today, there would still be murder tomorrow. Whether it be by the sword of the Arab, the noose of the Persian or knife in the kitchen sink.. death will not cease to exist.
If the liberals really want to save lives, they should focus their efforts on the heart of man. They should concentrate their efforts on enforcing the laws on the criminal instead of forcing their agenda on the innocent. Especially since criminals do not obey the gun laws now, so why would they once our rights are taken away?
So, what would an America with no second amendment look like? If we, the citizens of the republic allowed this right to be taken from us today, to what nation tomorrow would we awake? In order to gain a greater understanding of that future, first we must look to the past. Many nations have already walked that path, so let’s see how that worked out for them, shall we?
One of our readers sent us the following:
(Excerpted from: Gun Control Vanity by, RC one)
1—–Nazi Germany established gun control in 1938 enabling the government to round up 13 million defenseless Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, mentally ill and impaired human beings, imprisoning them in concentration camps, and by a conscious process of attrition, destroyed them.
2—–The Turkish Ottoman Empire established gun control in 1911, proceeding then to exterminate 1.5 million Armenians from 1914 – 1917.
3—–The Soviet Union established gun control in 1929. Subsequently from 1929 – 1953, 60 million dissidents were imprisoned and then exterminated.
4—–China. Gun control laws were enacted in 1935. Between 1948 – 1952, 20 million Chinese, unable to defend themselves, were likewise murdered.
5—–In the United States the first gun control laws were enacted during the Civil War era to prevent guns from falling into the hands of black slaves who might be inclined to attack their masters and thereby keeping control in the hands of the latter.
6—–Guatemala. Gun control laws were passed in 1964: as a result, between 1964 – 1981, 100,000 defenseless Mayan Indians met their deaths.
7—–Uganda. Established gun control measures in 1970. Predictably, from 1971 – 1979, 300,000 defenseless Christians met a similar fate.
8—–Cambodia. Established gun control measures in 1956, subsequently from 1957 – 1977 one million Cambodians met their deaths.
The following is the expanded version with pictures and some interesting supporting links:
Between 1903 and 1911, Turkey enacts gun control laws that were designed to keep firearms out of the hands of Armenians. These laws were successful. . Between 1915-1917, 1.5 million Armenians were systematically rounded up and exterminated by the Turkish government.
Armenians being marched off to the death camps.
In 1938, Germany enacts gun control laws which were targeted squarely at the Jews. Between 1939 and 1945, 13 million Jews and other undesirables were rounded up and exterminated by the German government.
Adolph Hitler’s own thoughts on gun control:
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.”
Guatemala has a long history of legislating guns out of the hands of peasants. Between 1964 and 1985, 100,000 Mayan Indians were rounded up and exterminated by the Guatemalan government.
China establishes gun control in 1935. From 1949 to 1975, 50-60 million Chinese citizens are exterminated by the Chinese government lead by the infamous Mao Zedong.
The soviet Union, under Joseph Stalin, made use of existing gun laws to ensure that his extermination of some 60 million people went smoothly.
The first Soviet gun controls were imposed during the Russian Civil War, as Czarists, Western troops, and national independence movements battled the central Red regime. Firearm registration was introduced on April 1, 1918.  On August 30, Fanny Kaplan supposedly wounded Lenin during an assassination attempt; the attempted assassination spurred a nationwide reign of terror.  In October 1918, the Council of People’s Commissars (the government) ordered the surrender of all firearms, ammunition, and sabres.  As has been the case in almost every nation where firearms registration has been introduced, registration proved a prelude to confiscation. Exempt from the confiscation order, however, were members of the Communist Party.  A 1920 decree imposed a mandatory minimum penalty of six months in prison for (non-Communist) possession of a firearm, even where there was no criminal intent. 
After the Red victory in the Civil War, the firearms laws were consolidated in a Criminal Code, which provided that unauthorized possession of a firearm would be punishable by hard labor.  A 1925 law made unauthorized possession of a firearm punishable by three months of hard labor, plus a fine of 300 rubles (equal to about four months’ wages for a highly-paid construction worker). 
Stalin apparently found little need to change the weapons control structure he had inherited. His only contributions were a 1935 law making illegal carrying of a knife punishable by five years in prison and a decree of that same year extending “all penalties, including death, down to twelve-year-old children.” 
Uganda established gun control in 1970 (Firearms act of 1970- This legislation made legal ownership of firearms more difficult than the pre-existing 1956 British colonial legislation through an expanded system of firearm registration and prohibitive licensing. It also banned a wide range of firearms. Civilian ownership of firearms, already low in Uganda, appears to have been virtually eliminated (Simkin, et al., 1994, pp.285-289). Between 1971 and 1979, 300,000 Christians are rounded up and exterminated by the government of Idi Amin.
Cambodian gun control was a legacy of French colonialism. A series of Royal Ordinances, decreed by a monarchy subservient to the French, appears to have been enacted out of fear of the Communist and anti-colonial insurgencies that were taking place in the 1920s and 1930s throughout Southeast Asia, although not in Cambodia.  The first law, in 1920, dealt with the carrying of guns, while the last law in the series, in 1938, imposed a strict licensing system.  Only hunters could have guns, and they were allowed to own only a single firearm.  These colonial laws appear to have stayed in place after Cambodia was granted independence. The Khmer Rouge enacted no new gun control laws, for they enacted no laws at all other than a Constitution. 
Cambodia was a poor country, and few people could afford guns.  On the other hand, the chaos that accompanies any war might have given some Cambodians the opportunity to acquire firearms from corrupt or dead soldiers. There is no solid evidence about how many Cambodians, with no cultural history of firearms ownership, attempted to do so. 
As soon as the Khmer Rouge took power, they immediately set out to disarm the populace. One Cambodian recalls that:
Eang [a woman] watched soldiers stride onto the porches of the houses and knock on the doors and ask the people who answered if they had any weapons. “We are here now to protect you,” the soldiers said, “and no one has a need for a weapon any more.” People who said that they kept no weapons were forced to stand aside and allow the soldiers to look for themselves. . . . The round-up of weapons took nine or ten days, and once the soldiers had concluded the villagers were no longer armed, they dropped their pretense of friendliness. . . . The soldiers said everyone would have to leave the village for a while, so that the troops could search for weapons; when the search was finished, they could return. 
People being forced out of villages and cities were searched thoroughly, and weapons and foreign currency were confiscated.  To the limited extent that Cambodians owned guns through the government licensing system, the names of registered gun owners were of course available to the new government
What do all of these Cambodians have in common? They were unarmed and they were killed by their radical left wing government.
More recently, In Rwanda during the 1990s, some 800,000 unarmed Tutsis were slaughtered by the new Hutu government. It is interesting to note that most of the murders were committed with machetes. More interesting than that, however, is the fact that communist China supplied the Hutus with 581,000 machetes in 1993 BUT Even more interesting than that is that the former Secretary General of the United Nations, one Boutros Boutros-Ghali, facilitated the arms deals with the Hutus, the deal that facilitated the genocide. In 1990, then Minister of Foreign Affairs of Egypt, Boutros-Ghali, facilitated an arms deal which was to result in $26 million worth of mortar bombs, rocket launchers, grenades and ammunition being flown from Cairo to Rwanda and then used to perpetrate a genocide a few years later. China. The UN. Gun control. Genocide.
Made in China
Democide is a term revived and redefined by the political scientist R. J. Rummel as “the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder.”
Rummel defines democide as “the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder”
His research shows, further, that the death toll from democide is far greater than the death toll from war. After studying over 8,000 reports of government-caused deaths, Rummel estimates that there have been 262 million victims of democide in the last century. According to his figures, six times as many people have died from the inflictions of people working for governments than have died in battle.
Bottom line, statistically speaking, you are much more likely to be killed by your government than by a gun wielding maniac in a theater especially if you have allowed your government to disarm you. It should be obvious to you after reading this, that it has primarily been radical left wing socialist/communist governments imposing gun control and then perpetrating genocide against select members of the newly disarmed populace. It is also worth mentioning that gun registration typically precedes these events. It ought not be surprising to you that the leftists of this country are the ones pushing for gun control in the name of preventing crime despite an abundance of evidence that shows that gun control does not prevent crime. Further, it should come as no surprise that registration of long guns is increasingly being touted as a “reasonable” gun control legislation. Sales of assault rifles ending up in the hands of Mexican cartels was, in fact, to be the just cause for this incremental step towards subjugation of the free men and women of America. Luckily, their machinations were sufficiently exposed and thus foiled. They know what they’re trying to do. They do have an agenda. They do intend to disarm this country one way or another. Remain vigilant my friends. Not one step backwards. Ever forward. The life you save may be your own.
Note: Thank you to Uareme and RC one.
By, Schuyler Montague
Benjamin Franklin stated it best when he said: “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
What beautiful words of wisdom, that apply today in America, as much if not more so, than the day he was first quoted. With the proposal of each new bill and the passing of each new law today, we find ourselves deeper and deeper in debt. Not just in the financial sense, but equally if not more importantly, in our deficit of freedom.
Government today is completely and totally reactionary and utilizes each and every opportunity to grab another handful of our rights, liberties and freedoms. These are all rights that we will never see again. Each liberty that we allow to be taken away today will be just one more freedom that children born tomorrow will never know.
No right nor freedom has ever been provided or given by any government. All of our liberties were endowed to us by our Creator at birth. Governments only possess the ability to limit, restrict or completely absolve us of our God-given rights. The freedoms that we enjoy today and the rights we allow to slip away were preserved, protected and passed down by the bloodshed of our ancestors. Our brave and courageous grandfathers shed their blood in valleys, on hillsides and from sea to shining sea, just to ensure our rights were secure for us today.
Our government instills the fear factor and any other tool at their disposal to bring the citizens into submission. They utilize conditioning and desensitizing techniques to slowly lure us down the path to servitude. We cannot turn on the news today without being subjected to around the clock shootings that are updated every hour on the hour. This is just a method of saturation used to bring all of the sheeple into lock-step and march them off the cliff to serfdom. All that is truly necessary for the government to succeed is for the people to remain silent or give in to their demands. We could more than likely make it another thousand years without the creation of one more new law. What we really need is simply for the government to enforce the laws that are already on the books, not create new ones. All we truly need is to be proactive as a society.
We place armed guards everywhere in our society today where something of value to us is possessed. We have armed guards in our banks to protect our money. We have armed guards at our Smithsonian Museum to protect the artwork. We have armed guards at our military installations to protect our equipment. We have armed guards at the CIA and NSA to protect our secrets. We have armed guards at the Federal Reserve and Fort Knox to protect our gold reserves. So, here is my question: Which of the above is more valuable to us than our children? Absolutely none of them. Then, why not immediately place armed guards in our schools? We do not need new laws to place restrictions on gun owners but rather, what we need is common sense.
Just think of the jobs that would be created if we placed at least two well-trained, certified armed guards in all of our childrens’s schools over the next 30 days. But more importantly, think of the security and piece of mind that our children and parents would benefit and not at the cost of even one of our constitutional rights.
editorial footnote: We respectfully ask that if you use this piece elsewhere, please source the author and this website by name and please place a link to this article. Thank you.
Some new information has just recently come to light in the Sandy Hook School shooting. According to the records of the Social Security Administration, the Social Security Death Index (SSDI) has Adam P. Lanza, the “alleged” shooter in the Sandy Hook School shooting as being deceased the day prior to the day of the tragic school shooting. Keep in mind the shooting was on 14 December 2012. Here are the records from the SSDI:
Adam P. Lanza: Social Security Death Index (SSDI) Death Record:
|Name:||Adam P. Lanza|
|State of Issue:||New Hampshire|
|Date of Birth:||Wednesday April 22, 1992|
|Date of Death:||Thursday December 13, 2012|
|Est. Age at Death:||20 years, 7 months, 21 days|
Let’s also remember that the name of the alleged shooter the authorities first released was a name different from that of Adam. When authorities were called on that, they quickly attempted to walk that comment back.
Please do not think for even a moment that we are saying we do not believe the shooting took place. We absolutely believe the shooting took place. We are saying, it did not take place the way we have been told it did. There has already been eyewitness testimony given that there were a minimum of two or three shooters.
There are still many private investigations ongoing in the Sandy Hook School shooting. Since the beginning of this tragic event, we have been outlining our position based on early evidence that pointed to a Manchurian Candidate operation involving a small, well-trained group of assassins. We believe there is sufficient evidence that supports the theory that it was carried out by the CIA, as a proxy operation of the obama administration. This would provide Obama the “excuse” to disarm the American public and eventually repeal the 2nd amendment. Here is one of our first articles on that subject:
Here is a follow-up story we did as more evidence became available:
Now please try to understand that there will more than likely never be 100% conclusive evidence supporting this theory or any other alternative theory. There never is in a cover-up. The perpetrators are usually very well-trained, very well prepared and they will have their support structure in place to collaborate their defense. This case will probably go down in history in a similar manner that JFK’s case did. No matter how many holes that can be discovered in their story, they will always have the element of plausible deniability.
Not to mention, when innocent people get a little “too close” to the truth, they tend to either experience ‘brake trouble’ coming down a mountain, their car ‘spontaneously combusts’ when they start it one morning or they are marginalized by the media as “the lunatic fringe” wrapped up in a cocktail of conspiracy theories and aluminum foil. Oh well…
source: Classified Source (‘s)