While the recent mass shootings of many innocent people and children has greatly saddened and sickened me to the core along with decent people everywhere, I see something equally disturbing being carried out in the mass media – the shameless using of these bizarre events in order to engender public support for an unspoken purpose and agenda.
"A handy rule for arousing hate is, if at first they do not enrage, use an atrocity. It has been employed with unvarying success in every conflict known to man."
"So great are the psychological resistances to war in modern nations, that every war must appear to be a war of defense against a menacing, murderous aggressor. There must be no ambiguity about who the public is to hate."
– Harold Lasswell, Director of War Communications Research, Library of Congress, 1939-1945
The recent lobbying efforts and media push to ban the ownership of guns is riding full-steam on the decent empathy and sympathy of people the world over, but there is a much darker and evil purpose, using the decent emotions and natural reactions of people. Public opinion is being intentionally swayed through the use of a series of strategically orchestrated atrocities. This is a psychological operation at it’s most basic.
But where is the corresponding outrage and public outcry against secret mind-control programs and the wide-scale drugging of the populace with powerful psychiatric pharmaceuticals? There isn’t any, because these are both secret tools of a malevolent regime hidden behind the scenes, bent on the control and domination of all other beings.
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, considered so important that it came just after the right to free speech and a free press, was signed into law for one single, solitary purpose – as a final, ultimate safeguard, after all other precautions and safeguards had failed, against the establishment of a totalitarian regime hostile to the interests of the people.
"But, when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security."
– Declaration of Independence
The founding fathers of this country also knew the dangers of a standing army simply because it is a highly-trained, organized, heavily-armed group under a single rigid command structure, and all that is necessary to seize totalitarian control of a country is to be in command of that army, and to systematically disarm the citizens.
The protection of this country was never supposed to be a standing army and a myriad of secret government agencies, all under the hidden and exclusive control of a few men, but was originally supposed to be the people themselves – an armed populace who could if necessary rise up and band together into armed militias to repulse an external invasion, or to put down an internal usurper alike; in order to protect their own interests and freedoms, versus the malevolent interests and domination of a small, secret group.
As the people have slowly delegated and given-up their essential responsibilities, they have simultaneously lost personal control and thus their personal freedoms as well.
Yes, it is much easier and simpler to let someone else take care of difficult or unpleasant tasks for us, but when the price of doing so is giving-up your personal integrity and freedom, you merely wind up as someone else’s slave.
However, if all those who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution or to protect and serve their fellow man actually stood up and did so, instead of blindly and obediently following the destructive orders of a suppressive regime to violate the Constitution, and to forcefully put-down or incarcerate or kill their fellows to protect the malevolent interests of a few; we could see a regime change practically overnight, and who knows, perhaps even... without a single shot ever being fired.
Ethics and Justice at: