by Scott Creighton
When the elections of 2016 kicked into high gear, suddenly and without explanation, all the motiveless mass casualty events that marked the middle years of Obama’s rule stopped abruptly as if the crazies didn’t want their gun-grabbing manufactured “crisis” to interfere with Killary’s coronation. The crisis actors went back to their day jobs and for a brief moment in recent history, we didn’t have to deal with stories of multiple military-styled assailants becoming one dead “shooter” with no military experience, no motive to speak of and an off-the-charts kill/shots fired ratio that defied belief.
And that’s a good thing except now we get to deal with the aftermath. For example, the Pulse Nightclub shooting was the final act in what I have called the American Gladio campaign. Families of the victims of the Pulse event are taking action this week in opposition to proposed new gun laws here in Florida. The new law they are opposed to would allow citizens to carry weapons into certain areas which they could then use to defend themselves against… say… hired mercs brought in to destabilize the country by shooting up… say… Orlando nightclubs for instance.
In Maryland a federal appeals court ruled in a majority decision that the 2nd Amendment does not extend to citizens the right to own what they call “weapons of war” meaning “assault-type” rifles and large capacity magazines. They say nothing about the police in that great state being constantly armed with surplus “weapons of war” that they can and will use against the very citizens they intend to disarm.
“A federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that a Maryland ban on assault-style rifles and large-capacity magazines isn’t subject to the Constitution’s right to keep and bear arms.
The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Richmond, Virginia, reconsidered a divided ruling issued last year that found citizens have a “fundamental right” to own these weapons, and that laws restricting the right deserve the toughest level of constitutional scrutiny.
Writing for a nine-judge majority, U.S. Circuit Judge Robert King said that weapons such as M-16s and the kind that “are most useful in military service” aren’t protected by the Second Amendment as interpreted by the Supreme Court in the landmark District of Columbia v. Heller decision. That ruling limited the right to ownership of handguns for self-defense within the home.
Is it just me or do both of these two examples seem to be focused on making sure the average citizen in this country cant’ defend themselves from various actors at any given time? Curious, right? Especially when you consider there was another attempt at a mass casualty event that took place the night before the Pulse shooting in Orlando but in that case the “victims to be” piled on the assailant and took him down before more civilians were shot. And it was also at a nightclub. But of course, we forget all about that one because Pulse happened the very next day. Curious, right?
Anyway, if you read the decision by Judge King writing for the majority in his decision, you get the jist of the American Gladio campaign… in fact, you can’t miss it because he recalls a good part of the mass casualty events in the first three paragraphs of his decision…
“On the morning of December 14, 2012, in Newtown, Connecticut, a gunman used an AR-15-type Bushmaster rifle and detachable thirty-round magazines to murder twenty first-graders and six adults in the Sandy Hook Elementary School. Two additional adults were injured by gunfire, and just twelve children in the two targeted classrooms were not shot. Nine terrified children ran from one of the classrooms when the gunman paused to reload, while two youngsters successfully hid in a restroom. Another child was the other classroom’s sole survivor. In all, the gunman fired at least 155 rounds of ammunition within five minutes, shooting each of his victims multiple times.
Both before and after Newtown, similar military-style rifles and detachable magazines have been used to perpetrate mass shootings in places whose names have become synonymous with the slaughters that occurred there — like Aurora, Colorado (twelve killed and at least fifty-eight wounded in July 2012 in a movie theater), and San Bernardino, California (fourteen killed and more than twenty wounded in December 2015 at a holiday party). In the early morning hours of June 12, 2016, a gunman killed forty-nine and injured fifty-three at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, making it the site of this country’s deadliest mass shooting yet.
According to news reports, the Orlando gunman used a Sig Sauer MCX, a semiautomatic rifle that was developed at the request of our Army’s special forces and is known in some military circles as the “Black Mamba.” Other massacres have been carried out with handguns equipped with magazines holding more than ten rounds, including those at Virginia Tech (thirty-two killed and at least seventeen wounded in April 2007) and Fort Hood, Texas (thirteen killed and more than thirty wounded in November 2009), as well as in Binghamton, New York (thirteen killed and four wounded in April 2009 at an immigration center), and Tucson, Arizona (six killed and thirteen wounded in January 2011 at a congresswoman’s constituent meeting in a grocery store parking lot).” Judge King
Draped in the statistics of the mass casualty events and wearing the names of the victims like a cloak of armor, Judge King ruled that citizens don’t have the right to own and keep “assault-type” weapons because they are not intended to be protected by the 2nd Amendment.
“As explained below, we are satisfied to affirm the district court’s judgment, in large part adopting the Opinion’s cogent reasoning as to why the FSA contravenes neither the Second Amendment nor the Fourteenth. We diverge from the district court on one notable point: We conclude — contrary to the now- vacated decision of our prior panel — that the banned assault weapons and large-capacity magazines are not protected by the Second Amendment.” Judge King
Judge King made no mention of this:
The ongoing rush to militarize our police departments is not a conspiracy theory nor is it an exaggeration. From the local police departments to their tactical teams to the nation’s “homeland security” details, this country is being militarized like any city in Afghanistan or Iraq has been over the last few years.
When you consider the fact that violent crime is down over the past decade, it kinda makes you wonder why all the hardware and jar-heads to use these weapons of war in our cities? And why the simultaneous push to disarm the civilian population.
Well, the “why?” of it all isn’t really that big of a secret, now is it?
“The video is nothing if not an instant dystopian classic: melancholy music, an ominous voiceover, and cascading images of sprawling slums and urban conflict. “Megacities are complex systems where people and structures are compressed together in ways that defy both our understanding of city planning and military doctrine,” says a disembodied voice. “These are the future breeding grounds, incubators, and launching pads for adversaries and hybrid threats.” The Intercept
The future of America is being defined by the planners at the Pentagon and it looks very similar to certain episodes of our past.
Let’s now, finally, put aside the propaganda that says “no one is coming for your guns” They are. The Maryland ruling makes that perfectly clear.
And don’t pretend The Donald and his SCOTUS pick will save the day. His catch-phrase, “draining the swamp”, is not only hollow seeing as how he is filling his own swamp with insiders and Goldman Sachs stooges, but the phrase itself actually comes DIRECTLY from the video above and it refers to massive urban jungles as the “swamp” and the poor people living in it as what needs to be ‘drained”
The problem with allowing law-abiding middle class citizens to hang onto these weapons is obvious: they might not be middle class in the next couple of years and they might just be a little pissed off about that development.
So yeah, American Gladio was about manufacturing a crisis which could result in the passage of a new interpretation of the law which allows for the government to come along and disarm the people of weapons that could pose a threat to their soldiers they put on the ground right here at home to maintain the order they are currently imposing on us. This ruling makes that perfectly clear. Whether it succeeds or not is a different story.
Filed under: Uncategorized |