Boston Terrorism Style Gun Control

No one could possibly suggest that background checks and gun control would have prevented the terrorist bombings at the Boston Marathon. Then again, neither Jared Loughner or Adam Lanza would have been filtered out through additional gun control, much less Timothy McVeigh or Eric Rudolph. Explosives aren’t exactly commonly available at the local convenience store, but when militia types set out to make a statement through violent terrorism – they find a way to do it.

For now at least, I believe the Boston bombs were premeditated, well organized, and accomplished by domestic militia. Of course, I would also suggest that might be more broadly described as “American Al Qaeda” and that they are in fact acting in concert with International terrorism, i.e. the larger International body of terrorism officially referred to as Al Qaeda.

Aside from the Olympic bombing in Atlanta by Eric Rudolph, which seemed to be a different monster from the outset, I’m not aware of any other “European” style terrorism of this type in the United States. I considered the blustery threats from the young North Korean leader Kim Jong Un to be over the top in that it seemed doubtful he would launch a long range nuclear missile. It still seems more likely to me that an attack would more likely walk, or fly in a small plane, from across the southern border – perhaps sponsored by North Korea. So that didn’t happen, yet. But the timing of the Boston bombings is clearly on the heels of the situation and rhetoric in North Korea. Kim Jong Un made threats, and a terrorist attack has occurred in the United States. If domestic militia, American Al Qaeda, timed the attack to be coincidental to the North Korean threats, what’s the difference?

advertisement

In some ways this “European” style terrorism appears to be tied a new phase in this country. There always have been militia types, and there always have been communist sympathizers. But there never has been a president able to muster socialized medicine, and there never has been a putsch from across the southern border by millions of foreign nationals, and there never has been… well, there was a Boston TEA party once before. How could the public dialogue over the Boston bombings possibly ignore the coincidence of the TEA party movement, adamantly fed up with over-taxation, and often seen to be the most extreme of political groups in the country?

It could be that none of those factors will be proven to be directly related to the terrorism in Boston. But still, whose side are you on? Because all the factors add up to a recipe for trouble right here in this country that previously has only been seen in places like London, the Middle East, North Africa, etc. You’re not on anyone’s side? And if and when the unthinkable does occur, as if the Boston bombings were not unthinkable, will you have a hand gun or an assault rifle with a 30 round clip to protect your home and family?

And you say that those situations are brought about by corrupt governments and dictators. Heh, heh, heh. I can assure you, except for the generous economic prosperity that this country continues to enjoy and that therefore cures a host of ills, the government and law enforcement in this country, and our little town, is every bit as corrupt, replete with functioning dictators all the way from the Mayor on up.

The debate over gun control, incidentally, has included a lot of rhetoric over background checks and the “mentally ill.” The abuse and exploitation of the mental health system for political aggrandizement, control, and eliminating potential rivals is quite likely the second oldest trick, and arguably it is the oldest trick. Mental health professionals are not law enforcement, and do not have the authority to deny constitutional rights – whether they think you are dangerous or not. The fact is, this part of the gun control debate is not about what they think or what an arbitrary profile thinks. The line is already drawn, it’s called “due process.” Fortunately, at least at this time and for the most part, denial of constitutional rights, including the right to own a gun, still requires deliberate due process by a court of law based on some type of illegal action. Anything less is a violation of unalienable rights and therefore essentially an act of war.

I’m not belaboring this point, because it is the point. Ultimately the focus and intent of the gun control debate and so-called background checks in regard to the recent acts of violence by Jared Loughner, Adam Lanza, etc., is to eliminate constitutional due process by establishing an illegal process of commitment based on a someone’s – a professional healthcare provider’s – opinion. This is very important to the Medical Industrial Complex and anyone who has investments in their stock. The constitution is in the way of genetic engineering and genetic medicine under Obamacare and socialized medicine. People like New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg don’t just want to regulate your sugar intake with a large blanket approach. They want to do a genetic profile, and then based on someone’s “professional” opinion, force you to follow certain guidelines under what will eventually be fully expanded socialized medicine – including compulsory abortion. They are setting the stage for complete and total control of everything you do. A perfect plantation system where you get only what you need to insure you’re productive for your duties, while eliminating personal discretion in just about everything you do, say, eat, or where you go. Healthy slaves is productive slaves.

Some people don’t think there could ever be “civil war” in this country like we have witnessed in the Middle East and North Africa. No one ever believed a truck bomb could destroy a federal building in Oklahoma, or an airplane could topple the New York Trade Center, or that a bomb would kill three and injure a hundred in Boston either. The media is fond of saying: “Everything changed on 911.” I’m telling you absolutely nothing changed on 911. The country and the world have been changing over time and those events only mark those changes. The political divisions in this country are deeper than they have ever been.

Now the Republicans are jumping on the amnesty for illegal foreign nationals bandwagon. It’s a political tactic that might work in the next election. However, I’m still convinced Newt Gingrinch would be president today if he had denounced illegal immigration during the last election. The republican hierarchy are actually in favor of illegal immigration because it knocks down the price for labor. Cheap slaves is the best slaves.

The trouble is, while the Republican aristocracy has set a course to convince conservative voters to accept illegal immigration – I’m not buying it – and I doubt all the others who agree with me are going to support it either. It’s immoral, unethical, and relearning the lessons over slave trading will prove to be expensive in the long run. You would think we learned our lesson. And honestly, I’m a little tired of hearing about the work ethic and family values of all those fine people who just want a chance to have a good life.

In truth, Mexico is a very large third world country rife with corruption, drug wars, and territorial battles. It’s hard to understand. How is it that all those fine people are unable to capitalize on such a beautiful country, with an abundance of natural resources, and such a great work ethic and family values in the first place? Why is it so important to come to the United States? Why is it that drug wars routinely result in wholesale carnage and decapitation of anyone who threatens their territory? Why are newspapers being shut down and journalists being killed? Where are the news reports for people in this country to know and understand what goes on in Mexico? Why is there what is essentially a media blackout – from an entire country that is probably the most important influence for the rest of the future of the United States? It may be that most of the 15 million foreign nationals from Mexico really are hard working family types. So, maybe only a million or so of them would cut off you wang and deliver it in the mouth of your decapitated head to your widow. That’s pretty good risk management, right?

advertisement

The bottom line is, this country is on a one way highway to a very rocky road. The forefathers of this country understood violence, war, and bloodshed. They understood it’s much cheaper to keep the liberty you already have than it is to purchase it again when it slips away because of histrionic naïveté – like the rhetoric generated by Sandy Hook. They understood, so they created a document called the United States Constitution that recognizes self-evident truths, including the fundamental inherent right to protect oneself and family from those who come to steal, kill, and destroy.

They understood, so they created the second amendment.


________________________________
© 2013 – Jim Casey
www.tocc.tv Red HOT Uploads

rssrss mailFacebooktwittermailFacebooktwitter
Nearby Links
  
Responsive Menu Image