[handguns] the right to bear arms

I'm caught right in the middle of this debate for reasons apparent below and for some not so apparent.

Bob G opens with:

From WWII:
 "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass."
--Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto

To which Dave Cole replies, in the context of "if they were ordered to":

The US armed forces could, with conventional weapons alone, reduce much of America to so much rubble.

Bob gives a thoroughly American answer:

Soldiers in the armed forces swear loyalty to the Constitution, not the people running the government. It is a question of whether people will let it get to the point of no return. Once a nation is disarmed and programmed to always obey, there is no hope left.


Matt Wardman noted:

We have seen that soldiers will obey orders bordering on illegal orders when pushed to do so. And that commanders will then attempt to sweep things under the carpet, and blame it on the little guys.

All are right. Firsly, there is this charming and amazingly simplistic faith in America, for America and you see it in every bowling alley, every supermarket and on every beach. The type of patriotism which is Americanism, the American Dream, powerful and focused on one flag, one people.

Sadly, the problem we have is with leaders like Brown, who are openly traitors to the UK. He's not a traitor [in his own mind] towards England itself for the simple reason he doesn't recognize England as a separate entity but he does end up technically a traitor for selling out a constituent part of the UK to the EU.

So there is national chagrin over who we are, abetted by the EU regionalism [divide and rule]. If we fly the flag, which is it? The Union Flag [and we can't even celebrate 300 years properly]? The flag of St. George? St. Andrew? The crescent on a green background? It would never be the circle of 12 stars and have you ever wondered about that design? They're laughing in their sleeves in Bavaria. Council of Europe is most amusing for those with a sense of arcane history.

Not so in the U.S.A. One flag, one dysfunctional nation indivisible, huge pride and a belief that the CFR's proposal to carve up the U.S.A. [divide and rule], by stealthy means, is not only crazy Ron Paul stuff but it's also unpatriotic or would be so if we were Americans saying it and we're not Americans.

It's a beautiful faith, focused on one unchanging flag, the Stars and Stripes and you mess with that at your peril. Whereas the EU has hopes of foisting another flag on us over here, no one in his right mind will try that on an American.

But there are ways.

For a start, Matt is right, Manchurian Candidate is right, behavioural studies are right - people will kill their own, for some time, in a crowd context, for fear of reprisal. Also in terms of stealth and Emperor Palpatine treachery. Bush did agree, on March 23rd, 2005, that the functions of state become three nations at the start of 2009. At least the process begins and takes some years. Sorry America but he did betray you. It's on record. clinton will continue the agenda - she's CFR. So is Thompson.

But Bob wasn't referring to the people in charge. He was talking about innate Americanism which can take up arms and defend itself against the aggressor. Trouble is, the enemy is inside - Cheney, Rumsfeld, Clinton - hell, Cheney even referred to himself as the White House Darth Vader - it's on record. He is dropping hints as all that crowd do, all over the place. Hillary's in on the joke on America. Funny stuff, huh?

The average American has this notion of some great macro-invader [Russia? Iran?] whom they can all be patriotic against. It doesn't work that way. You'll never get a chance to turn on the enemy because the enemy is not visible. They are snakes in the grass, unmanly, slithery, metamorphosing into different forms to meet the changing circumstances.

Bush never signed anything in March 2005 - the CFR are correct. He simply agreed and it is now coming out in the actions of government behind the scenes, allowing Mexican truckers in here, signing this right away there. All done in offices at desks and tables. There'll never be a visible enemy.

American patriotism is simply factored in. And how can I know that? Because I've studied it. It's available if you do your homework but the American won't do that because something inside him which recoils against the idea that his national icons are traitors e.g. four time Roosevelt.

We, over here, have a living example before us every day - Brown and the EU. Lord Nazh says he'll be glad to prove me wrong. He'll never do that, not because I'm right but because they'll never be sufficiently visible for m'lord to do so. But that's un-American, he mutters. Come out and fight, you lily-livered wimps.

Think it through, Lord Nazh.

Are traitors ever likely to come out and fight, guns drawn at High Noon? Of course not. The way anyone fights the U.S. is by stealth [except for England, who've had their moments, and Russia]. Korea, Vietnam, China.

Please don't shoot the messenger. It must be apparent that this blog's American readers are very valuable but the blog doesn't deal in half truths and illusion. It prefers to tell it as it is.

So should Americans carry weapons? Yes - because it makes the enemy think twice before they factor that in and Americans end up with the "right" to bear arms but with all the "arms to bear" either impounded or inaccessible - used for the "war effort".

Against that, there is that small Andrew Jackson factor in there, where the American can be pushed so far and no more and if he does get any inkling what's going on - which I'm telling him is happening but he's so far ignoring - it's the end of the ball game for the snakes.

They know that - they've factored that in.