The Business of an Empire is Constant War / Global Conquest

Fed’s Preparing for Civil War – Attempt to Ban Civilian Ownership of Bullet Proof Vests

Washington City, Federal Empire. – Why else would the Federal Empire start pushing to ban the right for civilians to own bullet proof vests? This is a clear aggressive tactic meant to undermine the current militia build up of arms and weapons. Currently 3% and other militia groups have been purchasing massive amounts of old Federal Army bullet proof vests as well as tactical gear and Kevlar helmets. There is no other reasoning as to why bullet proof vests would be banned.

A new piece of legislation was introduced in the House of Representatives, H. R. 378, labeled the Responsible Body Armor Possession Act, which if enacted would deprive law abiding citizens of another means of self defense.

The legislation, forwarded by Rep. Mike Honda, would ban citizens from ownership of enhanced body armor, defined as “body armor, including a helmet or shield, the ballistic resistance of which meets or exceeds the ballistic performance of Type III armor, determined using National Institute of Justice Standard-0101.06” in the bill.

Level III and higher body armor can defeat most common rifle ammunition.

The body armor in question has a sole purpose of protecting the wearer from potential serious injury or death from being shot.

If passed, this bill would usurp people’s ability to own a truly defensive form of protection, with penalties for possession/ownership ranging from fines to jail time or both.

In his press release, Rep. Honda states:

“This bill allows law enforcement to respond to active shooting situations more effectively. The bill prohibits the purchase, sale, or possession of military-grade body armor by anyone except certain authorized users, such as first-responders and law enforcement.”

This speaks to the heart of the law enforcement problem in America.

Laws are continually being proposed to solve problems that don’t exist, which is exactly how we have gotten into the current police state mess we find ourselves in.

Battle Brewing in Utah over Recapture Canyon and the BLM

Only this time the ranchers are not alone like Cliven Bundy and his family were in Nevada. In Utah the local County and State governments are supporting the ranchers and local citizens who are being terrorized by BLM agents who routinely trespass on private property to steal cattle feeding tubs, cut ranch fencing, and use tyrannical bully tactics to harass ranchers daily in the rural portions of Utah.

The people of Utah need to form their own citizen and state militia units and begin working with local law enforcement to provide security for ranchers who are faced with bully tactics by the Federal Empire’s jack-booted storm troopers in the BLM.

Public Enemy No. 1 for rural Utah sheriffs just happens to be a fellow peace officer: Dan Love, the Bureau of Land Management’s special agent in charge.

Lets Dance!

Uh-Merica today is more divided then before, and its because the Empire is socialist and those that are not socialists are not falling in line with those that are. Simple math.

What boggles my mind are those that still cling onto the old America from the 1770’s and 1950’s, I hate break it to you guys and gals but it ain’t coming back, and there is nothing you can do about it.

Go out and wave your Betsy Ross or Gadsden Flag all you want. That will do nothing but get you on a watch list.

The only way to take back America, and rid yourself of the Empire / Uh-Merica is to embrace secession and the secession movement. Like it or not its your only option left.

 

Retired Army officer warns: DHS preparing for war against American citizens

On Saturday, Terry M. Hestilow, a retired United States Army Captain from Fort Worth, Texas, posted a letter on Facebook that he wrote to Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, warning that the Department of Homeland Security is preparing to go to war with the citizens of the United States.

“It is with gravest concern that I write to you today concerning the recent appropriation of weapons by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that can only be understood as a bold threat of war by that agency, and the Obama administration, against the citizens of the United States of America,” his letter began.

The retired officer expressed deep concerns over “recent purchases of almost 3,000 mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) armored personnel carriers, 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition (with associated weapons), and other weapons systems.”

Re-elected Obama Pushes Anti-2nd Amendment Gun Grab

Second Amendment: Within hours of re-election, the administration fast-tracked a treaty in the United Nations that transcends borders and tramples our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. It was no coincidence.

Less than 24 hours after President Obama’s re-election, the U.S. Mission to the United Nations helped move the U.N.’s Arms Control Treaty a step closer to enactment. America joined 157 other nations in voting Wednesday to finalize the treaty in March. None was opposed and there were 18 abstentions.

U.N. delegates and gun-control activists had complained that talks collapsed in July largely because Obama feared attacks from Republican rival Mitt Romney if his administration was seen as openly supporting the pact. But once the election was over, the Obama administration had more flexibility to pull the trigger on supporting the pact.

The Obama administration, which reversed long-standing U.S. opposition to the treaty in 2009, says the treaty does not threaten our Second Amendment rights and applies only to international arms trade. But its record of opposition to private gun ownership and its deference to international bodies and their authority give us pause.

So does a paper by the U.N.’s Coordinating Action on Small Arms. It notes that arms have been “misused by lawful owners” and demands that the “arms trade therefore be regulated in ways that would … minimize the misuse of legally owned weapons.”

Is an American defending his home against intruders just such a “misuse”?

Even if the treaty applied only to transfers of small arms between nations, would that mean restrictions on our ability to aid allies such as Israel and Taiwan? Would we be forbidden from supporting resistance movements around the world that rise up against the very dictators who support this treaty?

The treaty establishes a bizarre moral equivalence between countries that trade arms to defend freedom and those that do so to suppress and extinguish it.

Interestingly, just as the world’s worst human rights violators sat on and often chaired the U.N. Human Rights Council, Iran, arms supplier extraordinaire to America’s enemies, was elected to a top position at the U.N. Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty that was held in New York in early July.