WHY PATRIOTIC AMERICA LOVES DONALD TRUMP

THIS IS THE REAL DONALD TRUMP: THE SIDE THAT THE PARTY BOSSES ON THE LEFT AND RIGHT DO NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW ABOUT!

THEY ARE TERRIFIED OF DONALD TRUMP!

Who is Donald Trump?

This is a piece on the Donald!

Most of this can be found in speeches on U-tube. The rest I found in literature mentioned in his Biography and also I have all 8 of his books  

 

Therefore, I can vouch for all that is written here. By the way, I highly recommend “The Art of the Deal” which he wrote back in 1987. It certainly stresses his strong ability to deal and from what he’s accomplished, he’s obviously gotten even better at it since then. 

  WHO IS DONALD TRUMP?

The criticisms of Trump are amazingly missing something.

1. All the positions Trump has were as a Business man building an Empire in New York City. Any Idiot who criticizes him for that period of his life should realize what it takes to do business and BUILD THINGS. Read up on the process. Now Trump is an American running for office under the Republican Umbrella. If the Republicans do not want him they could have thrown him out and he would have taken 40% of the base with him. So they do not! In 1989 he had very liberal positions. He donated to liberals who could help him get approvals for Construction in New York. He was NOT Running for Office. He was then growing an EMPIRE..legally. This is what it takes to run a business in America. Ask Warren Buffet, Ask Bill Gates, Ask Jeffrey Immelt and everyone else. Only a low level non productive working stiff with no business experience would expect a Business Man to walk a Conservative line when he is trying to succeed as a Business man. 

2. They are lacking in negative stories from those who work for him or have had business dealings with him. After all the employees he’s had and all the business deals he’s made there is a void of criticism. In fact, long term employees call him a strong and merciful leader and say he is far more righteous and of high integrity than people may think.

And while it may surprise many, he’s actually humble when it comes to his generosity and kindness. A good example is a story that tells of his limo breaking down on a deserted highway outside of New York City . A middle-aged couple stopped to help him and as a thank you he paid off their mortgage, but he didn’t brag about that. Generous and good people rarely talk of charity they bestow on others.

But as much as all this is interesting, the real thing that people want to know is what Donald Trump’s plan is for America . It’s funny how so many people say they don’t know what it is, or they act like Trump is hiding it. The information is readily available if people would just do a little homework. But, since most Americans won’t do their own research, here, in no particular order, is an overview of many of Trumps positions and plans:

1.) Trump believes that America should not intervene militarily in other country’s problems without being compensated for doing so. If America is going to risk the lives of our soldiers and incur the expense of going to war, then the nations we help must be willing to pay for our help. Using the Iraq War as an example, he cites the huge monetary expense to American taxpayers (over $1.5 trillion, and possibly much more depending on what sources are used to determine the cost) in addition to the cost in human life. He suggests that Iraq should have been required to give us enough of their oil to pay for the expenses we incurred. He includes in those expenses the medical costs for our military and $5 million for each family that lost a loved one in the war and $2 million for each family of soldiers who received severe injuries.

2.) Speaking of the military, Trump wants America to have a strong military again. He believes the single most important function of the federal government is national defense. He has said he wants to find the General Patton or General MacArthur that could lead our military buildup back to the strength it needs to be. While he hasn’t said it directly that I know of, Trump’s attitude about America and about winning tells me he’d most likely be quick to eliminate rules of engagement that handicap our military in battle. Clearly Trump is a “win at all costs” kind of guy, and I’m sure that would apply to our national defense and security, too.

3.) Trump wants a strong foreign policy and believes that it must include 7 core principles (which seem to support my comment in the last point):

American interests come first. Always. No apologies.

Maximum firepower and military preparedness.

Only go to war to win.

Stay loyal to your friends and suspicious of your enemies.

Keep the technological sword razor sharp.

See the unseen. Prepare for threats before they materialize.

Respect and support our present and past warriors.

4.) Trump believes that terrorists who are captured should be treated as military combatants, not as criminals like the Obama administration treats them.

5.) Trump makes the point that China ’s manipulation of their currency has given them unfair advantage in our trade dealings with them. He says we must tax their imports to offset their currency manipulation, which will cause American companies to be competitive again and drive manufacturing back to America and create jobs here. Although he sees China as the biggest offender, he believes that America should protect itself from all foreign efforts to take our jobs and manufacturing. For example, Ford is building a plant in Mexico and Trump suggests that every part or vehicle Ford makes in Mexico be taxed 35% if they want to bring it into the U. S., which would cause companies like Ford to no longer be competitive using their Mexican operations and move manufacturing back to the U. S., once again creating jobs here.

6.) Trump wants passage of NOPEC legislation (No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act – NOPEC – S.394), which would allow the government to sue OPEC for violating antitrust laws. According to Trump, that would break up the cartel. He also wants to unleash our energy companies to drill domestically (sound like Sarah Palin’s drill baby, drill?) thereby increasing domestic production creating jobs and driving domestic costs of oil and gas down while reducing dependence on foreign oil.

7.) Trump believes a secure border is critical for both security and prosperity in America . He wants to build a wall to stop illegals from entering put controls on immigration. (And he says he’ll get Mexico to pay for the wall, which many have scoffed at, but given his business successes I wouldn’t put it past him.) He also wants to enforce our immigration laws and provide no path to citizenship for illegals.

8.) Trump wants a radical change to the tax system to not only make it better for average Americans, but also to encourage businesses to stay here and foreign businesses to move here. The resulting influx of money to our nation would do wonders for our economy. He wants to make America the place to do business. He also wants to lower the death tax and the taxes on capital gains and dividends. This would put more than $1.6 trillion back into the economy and help rebuild the 1.5 million jobs we’ve lost to the current tax system. He also wants to charge companies who outsource jobs overseas a 20% tax, but for those willing to move jobs back to America they would not be taxed. And for citizens he has a tax plan that would allow Americans to keep more of what they earn and spark economic growth. He wants to change the personal income tax to:

Up to $30,000 taxed at 1%

From $30,000 to $100,000 taxed at 5%

From $100,000 to $1,000,000 taxed at 10%

$1,000,000 and above taxed at 15%

9.) Trump wants Obamacare repealed. He says it’s a “job-killing, health care-destroying monstrosity” that “can’t be reformed, salvaged, or fixed.” He believes in allowing real competition in the health insurance marketplace to allow competition to drive prices down. He also believes in tort reform to get rid of defensive medicine and lower costs.

10.) Trump wants spending reforms in Washington , acknowledging that America spends far more than it receives in revenue. He has said he believes that if we don’t stop increasing the national debt once it hits $24 trillion it will be impossible to save this country. He disagrees with Democrats who think raising taxes is the answer and says that when you do that you stifle the economy. On the other hand, when you lower taxes and create an environment to help businesses they will grow, hire more workers, and those new workers will be paying taxes that become more tax revenue for the government.

11.) Even though he says we need to cut spending, he does not want to harm those on Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security. He believes that the citizens have faithfully paid in to the system to have these services available and that the American government has an obligation to fulfill its end of the bargain and provide those benefits. Therefore, he wants to build the economy up so that we have the revenue to pay those costs without cutting the benefits to the recipients.

12.) Trump also wants reform of the welfare state saying that America needs “a safety net, not a hammock.” He believes in a welfare to work program that would help reduce the welfare rolls and encourage people to get back to work. And he wants a crackdown on entitlement fraud.

13.) Trump believes climate change is a hoax.

14.) Trump opposes Common Core.

15.) Trump is pro-life, although he allows for an exception due to rape, incest, or the life of the mother.

16.) Trump is pro 2nd Amendment rights.

17.) Trump’s view on same-sex marriage is that marriage is between a man and a woman, but he also believes that this is a states' rights issue, not a federal issue.

18.) Trump supports the death penalty.

Trump believes that there is a lack of common sense, innovative thinking in Washington (Hmmm… looks like he believes in horse sense!). He says it’s about seeing the unseen and that’s the kind of thinking we need to turn this country around. He tells a personal story to illustrate the point:

“When I opened Trump National Golf Club at Rancho Palos Verdes in Los Angeles , I was immediately told that I would need to build a new and costly ballroom. The current ballroom was gorgeous, but it only sat 200 people and we were losing business because people needed a larger space for their events. Building a new ballroom would take years to get approval and permits (since it’s on the Pacific Ocean ), and cost about $5 million. I took one look at the ballroom and saw immediately what needed to be done. The problem wasn’t the size of the room, it was the size of the chairs.

They were huge, heavy, and unwieldy. We didn’t need a bigger ballroom, we needed smaller chairs! So I had them replaced with high-end, smaller chairs. I then had our people sell the old chairs and got more money for them than the cost of the new chairs. In the end, the ballroom went from seating 200 people to seating 320 people. Our visitors got the space they desired, and I spared everyone the hassle of years of construction and $5 million of expense. It’s amazing what you can accomplish with a little common sense.”

On top of his saving years of construction and $5 million in expenses, he also was able to keep the ballroom open for business during the time it would have been under remodeling, which allowed him to continue to make money on the space instead of losing that revenue during construction time.

Donald Trump’s entire life has been made up of success and winning. He’s been accused of bankruptcies, but that’s not true. He’s never filed personal bankruptcy. He’s bought companies and legally used bankruptcy laws to restructure their debt, just as businesses do all the time. But he’s never been bankrupt personally.

He’s a fighter that clearly loves America and would fight for our nation.

Earlier I quoted Trump saying, “I love America . And when you love something, you protect it passionately – fiercely, even.” We never hear that from Democrats or even from Republicans. Donald Trump is saying things that desperately need to be said but no other candidate has shown the fortitude to stand up and say them.

Looking over this list of what he wants for America I see a very necessary set of goals that are long past due. Before we criticize someone because the media does, maybe we should seriously consider what he has to offer.

Because until we clean the political cesspool we do not need another Politician. We need a Commander who can make decisions without bowing to the progressive bureaucracies that are embedded with anti America Leftist, Pan African Anarchists, and Progressives.
We must restore the Constitution and it cannot be done without an interim time where a PATRIOTIC AMERICAN WITH THE STRONG BACKING OF THE MILITARY CAN HOLD AMERICA TOGETHER AND SET THE SHIP RIGHT..
So Many Sincere and earnest Patriots talk about all kinds of ways... short of "Revolution" to Restore our Republic.
Things like the "States Convention" the "Countermand Convention" "Impeachment" etc etc...
All of these are "Intellectual Pipe Dreams" ... the Cabal is so firmly entrenched that the process will be sabotaged and will NEVER EVER COME TO FRUITION...
THE ONLY WE WAY TAKE BACK THE COUNTRY THIS LATE IN THE GAME IS REVOLUTION... IN SOME FORM OR ANOTHER!
No election of a Conservative Senate, Congress or President or Governors or Legislatures ...... is going to resolve the decayed underpinnings of the Constitutional Republic our country once was.
It needs a whole lot more work before a "President" can do any meaningful work.
📢 FACT:
The Bureaucracy and the Federal Judiciary is loaded with leftist Progressives and Socialists and unless and until we remove all of them through a Radical Bloodless/bloody Revolt.. all we will do is spend the next 30 years fighting against people with legal authority to enforce the mandate created by these crooks and ideologues over the past 90 years ...who have diametrically opposite views of what America should be than we do..
📢 FACT:
WE CANNOT CO-EXIST WITH IDEOLOGIES THAT ARE POLAR OPPOSITES TO OURS. NOTICE AS SOON AS THEY LOSE THEY TALK ABOUT US WORKING WITH THEM. WHEN THEY HAVE THE POWER THEY DO WHAT THE HELL THEY WANT.
Electing a Conservative Senate, Congress or President or Governors or Legislatures whose hands are tied by Federal Judges and by Bureaucracies like the EPA, THE IRS, THE HHS etc that are also loaded with enemies of the Constitutional Republic is a WASTE OF TIME...and energy UNTIL we have completed the catharsis first.
Thats a fact !! ONLY A REVOLUTION CLEANS THE SYSTEM. AN APOLITICAL GENERAL WHO TILL NOW HAS SHOWN NO LONG TERM POLITICAL ASPIRATIONS AND HAS SHOWN LOVE OF COUNTRY IS WHAT WE NEED.
DON'T YOU AGREE?? Unfortunately to date although we have asked and begged for the General to show support he has kept to the sidelines and without his stepping to the plate....AMERICA MAY NOT HAVE THE BALLS TO WAGE REVOLUTION.... WE HAVE BECOME TOO FAT AND LAZY AND TIMID AND WANT OTHERS TO DO THE DIRTY WORK...
💣 💣 SO.... MY OPTION # 2 IS DONALD TRUMP!
YES HE HAS BIGGER BALLS THAN ALL OF YOU !! 💣💣
For him or against him read up and put on your thinking cap and your Patriotic cape!.
📣
You know that the Political class are getting very nervous:
✖
Barack Obama, Valerie Jarrett, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Jon Corzine, to name just a few.
It's about the unholy dynamics between big government, big business and big media. They all benefit by interests to protect one another. It's one for all and all for one.
It's a heck of a filthy relationship that makes everyone filthy rich - everyone except the American people. We get ripped off. We're the patsies. But for once, the powerful socialist cabal and the corrupt crony capitalists are scared. I've never seen them this outraged, this vicious, this motivated or this coordinated. Never in all my years in politics have I seen anything like the way the mad dogs of hell have been unleashed on Donald Trump.
Why ? Because Donald Trump is "Filthy Rich" already. He does not need to butter up anyone. I LIKE THAT! I also believe he wants America to succeed so that his kids can inherit his FORTUNE. He does not want socialism to take hold in America.
The over-the-top reaction to Trump by politicians of both parties, the media and the biggest corporations of America has been so swift and insanely angry that it suggests they are all threatened and frightened!
After Politicians and Bureaucrats are fired, defeat or retired, if you're a "good boy," you've got a $5 million-per-year lobbying job waiting. The big-money interests have the system gamed. Win or lose, they win
.
But Trump doesn't play by any of these rules. Trump breaks up this nice, cozy relationship between big government, big media and big business. All the rules are out the window if Trump wins the presidency.
FACT: The other politicians will protect Obama and his aides - but not Trump.
Remember:
Trump is the guy who publicly questioned Obama's birth certificate.
He questioned Obama's college records and how a mediocre student got into an Ivy League university.
Now, he's doing something no Republican has the chutzpah to do.
He's questioning our relationship with Mexico; questioning why the border is wide open; questioning why no wall has been built across the border; questioning if allowing millions of illegal aliens into America is in our best interests; questioning why so many illegal aliens commit violent crimes yet are not deported; and questioning why our trade deals with Mexico, Russia and China are so bad. Obama's secret deals and Hillary's email holds deep dark secrets. The Bush family have their own secrets too.
Trump has the audacity to ask out loud why American workers always get the short end of the stick. Good question.
I'm certain Trump will question what happened to the almost billion dollars given in a rigged no-bid contract to college friends of Michelle Obama at foreign companies to build the defective Obamacare website. By the way, that tab is now up to $5 billion. Trump will ask if Obamacare's architects can be charged with fraud for selling it by lying.
Trump will investigate Obama's widespread IRS conspiracy, not to mention Obama's college records. Trump will prosecute Clinton and Obama for fraud committed to cover up Benghazi before the election.
How about the fraud committed by employees of the Labor Department when they made up dramatic job numbers in the last jobs report before the 2012 election?
Obama, the multinational corporations, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Progressives and the media need to stop this. They recognize this could get out of control. If left unchecked telling the raw truth and asking questions everyone else is afraid to ask, Trump could wake a sleeping giant. Trump's election would be a nightmare.
We all know that Obama has committed many crimes. No one else but Trump would dare to prosecute. He will not hesitate. Once Trump gets in and gets a look at "the cooked books" and Obama's records, the game is over.
The gig is up. The goose is cooked. Holder could wind up in prison. Jarrett could wind up in prison. Obama bundler Corzine could wind up in prison for losing $1.5 billion of customer money. Clinton could wind up in jail for deleting 32,000 emails, or for accepting bribes from foreign governments while secretary of state, or for "misplacing" $6 billion as the head of the State Department, or for lying about Benghazi .
The entire upper level management of the IRS could wind up in prison. Obamacare will be defunded and dismantled. The Obama crime family will be prosecuted for crimes against the American people. And Obama himself could wind up ruined, his legacy in tatters. Trump will investigate. Trump will prosecute. Trump will go after everyone involved.
Oh there's more and I believe if General James Mattis was chosen as Commander in Chief or we had a Revolution we could get the same results.. BUT MY CONSERVATIVE AMERICAN COMPATRIOTS ARE MOSTLY TOO COWARDLY TO FIGHT A REVOLUTION.
SO TRUMP IS THE NEXT BEST OPTION .
HE IS A PITBULL WITH NO FEALTY TO POTENTATES, POLITICIANS OR BUREAUCRATS. He has enough money to live the good life and he does not need the Presidency to pad his fat wallet. His politics as a business man are complicated and his ideology is all over the place .. I get that... but His LOVE OF AMERICA is unquestioned!
SO THE MORE I SEE THE ESTABLISHMENT ON THE LEFT AND THE RIGHT GO AFTER TRUMP .... THE MORE MY REBELLIOUS SIDE AND NATURE WANTS THIS MAN... TO SHAKE UP DC.
Hell I hope he has the balls to use executive Orders and down right POWER to reign the fat cats that are devouring AMERICA like Piranha.
So you see... that's why the "dogs of hell" have been unleashed on Donald Trump. The Political class wants someone that they can "Manage"
Yes, it's become open season on Donald Trump. The left and the right are determined to attack his policies, harm his businesses, and, if possible, destroy his credibility and his name.
But they can't silence him.
And they sure can't intimidate him. The more they try, the more the public will realize that he's the one telling the truth.
And the left can't stand that.

Gun Control is not about Controlling Guns its about Controling the People

GUN CONTROL IS THE LOGICAL STEP

TO MAKE SURE THE PEOPLE

DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO FIGHT BACK

This is the Classic way it has been done at the dawn of every clamp down on the way to a Totalitarian Regime/Oligarchy:

Control the PEOPLE's FIRE POWER = Gun Control
Control the PEOPLE's Health Care provisions
Control the PEOPLE's Travel and Communication
Control the PEOPLE's right to assemble
Control the PEOPLE's Right to information

GETTING THE IDEA ??? ITS ALL BEING DONE NOW...

SO READ ON..... here are some of these issues analyzed .. Read and share to educate other PEOPLE!


Does Gun Control Reduce Crime? – Emphatically no. Never once did it ever do that.
Below are several studies that can be researched on the Internet yourself that document the fact that gun control never reduces crime.
New Jersey – In 1996 New Jersey passed what was considered to be the most stringent gun laws in the USA. Two years later their murder rate went up 46% and their robbery rate about doubled.

Hawaii – In 1968 Hawaii passed harsh gun laws. At the time of the legislation their murder rate was 2.4 per 100,000 per year. Nine years later their murder rate had tripled to 7.2 per 100,000.

Washington, D.C. – In 1976 they passed a major gun control law. They even stopped people from owning guns in their homes. Their murder rate went up 134% while the USA rate for murder dropped 2%.

New York City – They have some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the world. All sales of any sort of gun are restricted and tightly controlled. 20% of all armed robberies in the USA are committed in New York City and they do not have anywhere close to 20% of the population. This is what happens when the criminals know a certain population is unlikely to be unable to defend themselves.

Chicago, New York City, Detroit and Washington, D.C.- Each of these cities has accomplished a virtual ban on the private ownership of guns. The Washington D.C laws are being fought out in the appellate courts at present. These four cities have 20% of the homicides in the USA yet they only make up 6% of the USA population. This means that restrictive gun control leads to a tripling of the homicide rate. Some one is going to say wait the population in these areas is why the murder rate is so high. Fine we can look at Arlington, Virginia which is a city right across the Potomac River from Washington D.C with sensible gun control laws so the population base should not be that different. Their murder rate is 10% of Washington D.C. (7.0 murders per 100,000 people versus 77.8 murders per 100,000 people in Washington D.C). We can also look to Virginia Beach, Va. a nearby city of 400,000. They have sensible gun laws allowing for easy access to firearms and their murder rate is 4.1 per 100,000.

Other Effects Non-Restrictive Gun Laws have on Crime – In the USA in a given year law abiding citizens kills 2,000 to 3,000 criminals. They also wound another 9,000 to 17,000 criminals a year. This is a reduction in the load of violent crimes the government must arrest, detain, prosecute and imprison. It also sends a strong signal to the other would be criminals. Criminals worry far more about an encounter with an armed law abiding citizen than a policeman. Police are most likely going to be polite about asking the criminal to drop their weapon and submit. The citizen in fear of protecting himself and his family is going to be much more prone to firing his weapon than a police officer. Criminals’ greatest fear is running into an armed victim when committing a crime. This was based on a study of 1874 felons from 10 states. In this study 38% of these felons said at least one time they had been scared off, shot at or wounded by an armed victim. Only 1% of the time do criminals take a gun away from a victim, yet 10% of the police officers that are shot, are shot with their own guns. Police officers are slow to shoot and the criminals know this and thus are more fearful of an armed citizen. Private citizens kill three times as many criminals as police do. Remember if someone is assaulting you or robbing you or your house the police will likely only be taking a report not encountering the criminals. It is the citizen who needs all the help and assistance of weapons to survive the criminal encounter.

Why Do Governments Seek Gun Control? – Fear! They are afraid of losing control over the population. The prefect state of affairs for a police state is the confiscation of all privately owned firearms. Then the possibility of an overthrow of the government goes down by about 99.9%. They never want partial gun controls like only machine guns or “assault type weapons” to be banned. They want all the privately owned guns gone. The partial gun control is the Salami theory. You keep cutting a slice away until there is nothing left. The only reason for gun control is to make room for a totalitarian government, nothing else. Sometime there are people ignorantly confused who support gun control thinking it will do something to make the world a safer place to live. Play with these people and say when the government disarms then you will. Tell them to chase the government and tell them to have the government give up their guns for police leaving only the military armed. Use the British Bobbies who used to be unarmed as an example. Tell them the Cayman Island and Nassau police are unarmed. Have them call for the disarming of the police. Play with them. Have fun. Every time the police shoot someone accidentally tell them to call for the disarming of the police.

How Would Gun Control Happen – Well Obama showed it to you recently. They were starting to introduce gun control bills again. We do not know how aggressively they will push them this time. Nothing in these bills will do any practical good in terms of reducing crime, not a single thing. They also increase the penalties each time. So if it would happen what would it look like. OK there would be a bill that say banned all assault weapons. The bill would say the attorney General can add any gun to the list he wanted. Over time he would keep adding guns to test the public response. The banned guns would be prohibited from being sold at first. They would leave .22 caliber single shot rifles and single shot shotguns until the end to satisfy the call for hunting guns. Then the banned guns would become illegal to own even if they were grandfathered in, registered whatever. This would be something like turn them in or face 20 years in prison for each gun plus a $100,000 fine for each gun. I am serious on the penalties.
No one would be coming to anyone’s house to collect the guns for a long time. They would wait for someone to get shot with a .22 caliber gun and then say these too need to be banned. They always love to call for new restrictive laws after a shooting crime. Do that back to them. Every time you see the police abuse a person with a taser call for them to be banned and not used by the police. They will soon stop when their own tactics gets turned on them. Now the people have their guns and they can run around quoting Charleston Heston and his out of my cold dead hands slogan. The next stage is anytime the local police get into a house like to respond to a burglary, a domestic abuse call, a noisy party anything and they see the guns then someone gets to go to jail for a long time. The word soon gets out. If you think the people that own guns are going to like get together, carry guns and march on Washington D.C. armed to the teeth to demand gun laws be repealed you need to get some counseling. You will never see this. If anything like this were ever going to happen it would have happened in 1968 with the first serious federal gun control law. This came on the heels of the Kennedy assassination. What did that have to do with gun control laws anyway?
I am going to say some things about how it used to be. If any of you find this too wild to be true verify it. Find old issues of Guns and Ammo magazines and read the ads. You were able to buy guns mail order across state lines before 1968. There were a few states that prohibited this but that was it. You were able to buy machine guns fairly easily. You were able to freely buy what they call destructive devices. Boys ant-tank rifles (Boys was a manufacturers name) were being sold for $99.00 with bipods and all. The ads used to say for the jackrabbit that got away. This rifle fires a .51 caliber round that is effective on lightly armored tanks. Bazookas were a mail order item as were mortars. Armor piercing ammo was freely available until the late 1970’s or early 1980’s. They had lovely armor piercing fully jacketed .45 auto rounds that would pierce engine blocks, let alone bullet resistant vests. Guns were not registered except for a few states and cities that did this. Those yellow forms came along with the 1968 gun control law. This was when guns were fairly well available and by mail order. An armed society is a polite society. Criminals are not polite.

Response To New Restrictive Gun Control Laws - We will now address how the people will be likely to respond. This is hypothetical and based on speculation only. No one can predict what the people will do with any accuracy including the government. There are many mitigating circumstances that will come to bear on the hearts and minds of those affected.
In this hypothetical scenario the people in our opinion are going to not physically resist new guns laws instead just sort of go with the flow and verbally oppose them only, for the most part. They will bury their guns and ammo in the woods. They will hide them inside the walls, under the floorboards etc. They will say things like well when the time comes etc. Eventually the local police will start arresting people when they discover the guns in vehicles, in houses, informants (the maid, the plumber, the cable TV guy, the alarm company guy) tell them about them and so forth. These people will be arrested and get probably 10 years for each gun plus massive fines like $100,000 for each gun. There will be calls for amnesty asking people to just turn the guns in and walk away free. Many will do this out of fear. There will be no revolutionary forces to join and resist. After a year or two there will be raids on houses. They will use devices to see images behind the sheetrock. They will use metal detectors in the yards and land.
When they find a gun after the owner does not turn it over when they show up they will throw the book at the person. They will take his family as accomplices. All will be in jail for many years. The fines will cause them to lose their homes, cars and assets. They will be destroyed completely. Only thing worse would be to kill them. Those with guns hidden in the woods will be questioned as to where their guns are. They will probably be charged with some crime for not reporting a stolen gun within 72 hours, which is found in HR 45 the latest gun control bill (not law yet). So when they say the guns were lost or stolen they get charged with the crime of not reporting this and get serious jail time for each gun. Gun registration is the prelude to the confiscation, nothing else.
The reporting the lost and stolen guns in 72 hours is the fix against you saying you lost the guns when they come to take them away. Those with unregistered guns will be able to hide them in the woods. There are many ways to do this securely and preserve the firearm. If the weapon is wiped free of prints and any blood like from getting pinched by the slide (think DNA) then this person should be safe if the weapons are found and not traceable to him in any way. What good is it doing them to have the guns buried in the woods? It is just a psychological game they are playing with themselves. Once a man came to Confucius and said I had a jar full of money buried in the woods. I went to dig it up to check on it and the money was gone. What should I do? Confucius said put rocks in the jar, bury it again and make believe the money is still there. It would be very dangerous for these people to even go and check on their weapons and they probably never will. I do not think there will be any rising up of gun owners. They are not going to engage the police in active firefights to keep their guns. The guns will just go away and the police state will be in full swing.

What the Police Are Missing – Police do not see their role in the police state correctly or even close to it. They miss the bigger picture. To them it is a status job, the pay is good and the perks are big. Police and their families get out from traffic tickets. Ask any law enforcement officer you may know well. This includes spouses, children, brothers, sisters, and parents. In many departments they even have little gold and silver courtesy badges they give their relatives. The police and their families get favorable treatment with accident reports, ouch if you are the other driver. They have a lot of favorable treatment letting them get away with things regular people do not get away with. They usually cannot get away with major crimes. Police carry guns all over the USA without a carry permit. They can carry on airplanes if they are Federal Officers. They can carry guns in government buildings, in stadiums, schools etc.
If they are in their own jurisdiction they can get away with anything short of major felonies with victims. Police like this treatment. It gives them status and pride. It teaches them there are only three classes of people. The ruling class to them is not the Federal Reserve Bank; they would not know what that is. It is the senators, congressmen, mayors, supervisors, judges etc. They know these people can exert their power and influence and make their life miserable in many ways. They leave these people alone. Then there are police, which they always leave alone. Then come you the citizen. You pay their salary and they have no respect for you. You do not matter in that you have no power to do anything against them and you cannot retaliate. They are there to control you. The Taser is the latest police state tactic to be adopted. If a person doe not verbally snap to and respond to a verbal command of a police officer like get out of the car, stand here, sit down, move here etc they taser them.
The police do not know they are conditioning the populace to respond to the police blindly without thinking or face painful consequences. I do not really know what they think. I guess they think it is proper to demand such respect and control over those they are supposed to protect. Most people that get tasered are involved in a victimless non-violent crime. This makes it worse. The police are not aware of any of this. They are in their own little world. They do not worry too much about the financial crisis in that they think there will always be work for them. Wait until the layoffs sink in later this year. Their attitude will change for the worse. They will do anything their handlers ask to keep their jobs. The police do not think they are there to protect and serve. They are there to control the populace and protect the ruling class and each other. Can you remember when police had nice government service looking uniforms, revolvers, long wooden sticks and helped people change flat tires. Now they look like storm troopers, wear black uniforms and masks, never help anyone with anything, have high tech weapons and strike fear and terror into the hearts of those that have contact with them. This is not being done by chance it is planned to strike fear into you of the police who used to be there to serve you. The police used to be hard on armed robbers, rapists, burglars, muggers and real criminals. Now most of the people in the prisons are there for crimes that are victimless. A government statue is not a victim.

When the Police State Flourishes What Is It Like For The Police? – Well this is something they do not consider. Let us say gun control has been accomplished and private ownership of guns is historical. So the people are no longer a threat. Who will the paranoid rulers fear next? They are always paranoid because they do not rule by popular support. Ever see the army of bodyguards they have now, this is nothing. You got it, the police and military is what they will fear the most. They have the weapons, the access, the association potential to organize etc. Imagine police leaving their guns in their lockers when going off shift. This is how it will be. No private guns for police anymore. Internal security investigations will become a lifestyle.
There will not be any more lawsuits against the government. The Internal Security Forces will be super cops trained to resent the police, take advantage of them and rule them by fear and harshness. What the police do the population now, is what the internal security forces will do to the police then only worse since there will not be any consequences for their actions. There will be mandatory polygraph exams. Long interrogations. Police homes and cars being searched. Their phones and email being tapped. They will be followed. Other police constantly being questioned about their colleagues. The role model is the SS Hitler had. Remember who tried to kill Hitler, the military on several occasions. The military will also be handled harshly but they are much more easily controlled due to the nature of the military but their internal security forces will constantly be engaged in a war of terror against them.
The internal security forces will have to get results or else they will be considered ineffective so one way or another they will be discovering sedition, spying, attempts to revolt, steal, commit criminal acts etc. The police will be policed very harshly. They will in turn be harsh towards the population. The police do not see any of this coming. The Federal Police are in the same boat as the local police. They will become more and more entrusted to police the police and protect the state as time goes on. There will not be much point in protecting the state from an unarmed populace so guess who they will focus on – the others who can have access to guns – the military and police. The internal security forces the federal police have will rein terror on them as well. They will have to uncover plots to keep their jobs and show they serve a purpose. Doom and gloom.

THINK ABOUT THE CONSEQUENCES!!! THE SOCIALIST WANT THIS DO YOU ??

Patriots. IMPORTANT. Difference between Sikhs and Muslims. Please read and share!

PATRIOTS: KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INDIAN SIKH WITH A TURBAN & ISLAMIC/MUSLIM HEADGEAR:

Please take the time to read and Understand the differences. During active duty in the Corps I have had the honor to fight in Specops alongside these brave loyal men.

I know of and vouch for their integrity.

 

Most Americans mistake Sikhs for Muslims due to their turbans, which often makes Sikhs targets of attacks meant for Muslims.
Sikhs are not MUSLIM and are mortal enemies of Muslims. Islam has been trying to destroy Sikhs for hundreds of years. Read up!

Please learn the differences in Sikh and Muslim headgear below. You might be able to save a Sikh’s life one day or maybe he will save yours. 

 

I urge all those who read this to find a Sikh person with a Turban and let him know that you appreciate him for being a loyal American. He may not sound like you, but 99.9% of them are 100% loyal to America. In 130 years there has never been a Sikhs act of Terror against America.
Sikhs have been a part of the American populace for more than 130 years. Near the end of the 19th century, the state of Punjab of British India was hit hard by British practices of mercantilism. Many Sikhs emigrated to the United States and began arriving to work on farms in California. They traveled via Hong Kong to Angel Island, California, the western counterpart to Ellis Island in New York Harbor.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikhism_in_the_United_States

If you see a man walking down the street wearing a pointed turban, there is 99.9% chance that he is a Sikh, a follower of a monotheistic religion that started in the 15th century in India. Sikhs proudly wear the turban as part of their religious and cultural heritage. Sikhs are often mistaken for Muslims or Arabs. They are neither. Sikhism is an independent religion and is in no way related to Islam.

SIKH MEN commonly wear a peaked turban that serves partly to cover their long hair, which is never cut out of respect for God’s creation. Devout Sikhs also do not cut their beards, so many Sikh men comb out their facial hair and then twist and tuck it up into their turbans along with the hair from their heads.  

 

Sikhism originated in northern India and Pakistan in the 15th century and is one of the youngest of the world’s monotheistic religions. There are an estimated 18 million Sikhs in the world, with some 2 million spread throughout North America, Western Europe and the former British colonies.

About Sikhism and Islam

Sikhism, founded in fifteenth century Punjab on the teachings of Guru Nanak Dev and ten successive Sikh Gurus (the last one being the sacred text Guru Granth Sahib), is the fifth-largest organized religion in the world. This system of religious philosophy and expression has been traditionally known as the Gurmat (literally the counsel of the gurus) or the Sikh Dharma. Sikhism originated from the word Sikh, which in turn comes from the Sanskrit root śiṣya meaning "disciple" or "learner", or Sikshameaning "instruction".

---- "SIKHS WILL NEVER BOW TO ISLAM !! -

Pictures shows...Sikh women Martyrs of Punjab (1752) -----

ISLAM HAS BEEN AT FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS!!

March 6, 1752 A.D., Muin-ul-Malk, Governor of Lahore (now Pakistan), also known as Mir Mannu; ordered the extermination of Sikhs in his area & had the men-folk beheaded publicly, with the younger unmarried girls sold or distributed among the jihadis. The women and children had a different fate and were taken captives & keep hungry in the Lahore jail. Starving women were forced to operate heavy wheat grindstones and were given the option of conversion to Islam or suffer consequences. They unanimously chose to remain steadfast to their faith in the face of certain death, upon which the Muslim guards gruesomely massacred over 300 infants and children, IMPALING them on spears. Chopping their limbs, bodies of babies were RIPPED open to take out Internal Organs which were then garlanded around their mothers necks. One by one many Sikh women suffered such brutal atrocities but they all chose to remain steadfast to their Sikh faith instead of embracing Islam.

Miraculously though, before the Womens' turn came to be slaughtered, the surviving Sikh women were rescued by the Akalis (Sikh horsemen) sometime after the death of Mir Mannu on November 4, 1753. One can guess, that similar barbarity must have befallen on Sikh babies at other prisons where their mothers could not be rescued to tell their part of tragedy.

Incidents like these run in thousands if not more, and were spread over entire Punjab region, the evidence for many such gruesome atrocities come not from the survivors such as these women, but interestingly from the Muslim chroniclers themselves who very proudly mention these infidel slayings as a "service to Islam ". Such as one account by Nur Ahmad Chishti who recorded that Mir Mannu “killed thousands of Sikhs” daily. Once, on the day of Muslim festival, he beheaded 1100 Sikhs” in public.

Even today, 200 years later, Islamists are doing the same Islam barbarity upon the Yezidi women and children in Iraq, at the time of writing this article.

Could anything be more painful for Sikh women than to watch and witness the gruesome butchery of their own sons and husbands? These women maintained strong conviction in their Sikh faith in the face of extreme atrocites. In those days Sikhs were persecuted because they were considered infidels by Muslims & today Sikhs become victims in the United States because they are confused with Muslims. Its my hope that readers will share & help avoid such confusion.

Some people may wonder why didn't these women convert for a moment to save their children & themselves, be released & when free then go back to worshipping your old religion again? this way atleast they could save their & their babies life and go on worshipping your old religion like before once you have appeased the Muslims by fake-converting to Islam ?

-- the important thing here is that the Sikh resistance shown by these women was not a fight to worship in "Sikh way" rather than "Islamic way", the reader should not mistakenly consider this heroic resistance of Sikh women as some blind intoxication with Sikhism so much so that they sacrificed their children but foolishly refused to abandon Sikhism. The Sikh women here were not being obstinate about "being a Sikh to the last moment of breath". This sacrifice shown here is the highest epitome of fight for principles in Sikh history, for which life had to be given. This Sikh resistance here, was primarily to stop the spread of Islamic ideology in India at all costs; instilling a blind faith & a cult like commitment to die for Sikhism was NOT the objective here as it might seem to some. The Sikhs of that time understood very well the dangers of Islam & the hate it perpetuates towards humanity. If Islam was just another peaceful religion, then the Sikhs could just as well have converted to Islam if it was just a spiritual & peaceful religion like any other religion; meaning why die for Sikhism if all religions are same? The only way to stop the hateful ideology of Islam, was not to give in to forced Islamic conversion at all costs. Infact this was the only option available to them, today Islam has a very weak chance against the advent of internet and democracy in many powerful nations; but in those times many powerful civilizations were rapidly collapsing in the face of Islamic jihad. In India in one generation, either all infidels would be dead or would have converted to Islam.
Converting to Islam to save ones' neck was already common place & the 'logical thing' to do during this time in the spread of Islamic rule in India. Many infidels in India who were forced to convert to Islam to save their necks, actually did indeed convert to Islam, and then went on to practice their old Hindu / Buddhist religion secretly inside their homes; but outwardly they put on a Islamic name, Islamic rituals/circumcision, Muslim beard just to save their necks. Over a few generations, they became more Islamic, more radicalized and started to feel a connection with pan-Islamic pride and anti-infidel mindset radicalized them and within a few generations, the descendants of once forced-converted-closet Hindus had turned into the same monster, their ancestors had tried to save themselves from. Today their descendants are called "Pakistani's", the world's finest producer of ongoing terrorism and a nuclear contributor to Muhammads' 1400 year old legacy of jihad. The ancestors of present day Muslims were all Closet-Hindus at one time. They practiced ancient Hindu festivals like Holi upto 2 or 3 generations even after converting to Islam.Even today some of Pakistani's keep their old Hindu surnames.

This Sikh resistance as shown here, was the fight against Islamic ideology and its spread across human minds, and for this sacrifices such as that of these brave women had to be made, not because they were careless about their babies life, nor that they were intoxicated with Sikhism as is commonly seen in many blind cult faiths, but because one of the Principles of Sikhism is to put welfare of society above ones' individual welfare. The purpose of a Sikhs' life is not to be selfish about one's survival but about the survival of "society" / "community" at large, this means the extent of harm done by self-sacrifice of these Sikh women is minor as compared to the damage to the society that would have been done if Islam is allowed to be spread in the Indian society. This can be seen today, old civilizations now turned Islamic.

Had these women converted to Islam they would have saved their lives and their babies, but it would have lead to perpetual spread of Islamic poison in society, as we can see with the emergence of Pakistan, which is far worse than personal death of these women & the immense grief of massacre of their babies. It was only after this immense sacrifice that the Sikhs less than 5% of Punjab, were able to rule over Punjab and tame the Muslim majority areas. No other episode in history has seen a slaughtered tribe taking the enemy head on in less than a generations time; and rendering North India free of Islam. In the grand scheme of life, the sacrifice of these women was necessary.

- On another note, humans are social animals. Its called Pack mentality... Muslims love it. Once anybody converts, Muslims will shout out loud as when some celebrity converts to Islam, they mean to show that as an example that Islam is true. If these women had converted even for a moment, an example would have been set; and a lot more people would not have stood up to fight against islam. The idea was to show strong resistance at all costs to stand up against Islamic oppression & you you couldn't put an end to Islam in India if these brave Sikh men & women just converted..
These brave women sacrificed their babies & set a great precedent at that time. Taking inspiration from these brave women & other Sikh martyrdom that followed many more people joined the Sikh resistance & did not accept forced conversions and fiercely fought against Islamic oppression. Within next 50 years, Sikhs who were less than 5% in Punjab, not only destroyed & took over the Islamic empire in Punjab, but also ruled over that region which was majority Muslim something unparalleled in history till date, it is to say that Sikhism on the verge of being extinction, did not run away to safer parts of the world, but stood right there steadfast and rather kicked the enemy out of Punjab. By 1800, Punjab with a sizeable Muslim population was ruled over by a Sikh emperor who tamed their jihadi tendencies, by closing several mosques that called for jihad, banned muslim calls to azaans in the streets of his capital and wrested half of Afghanistan east of Khybar pass. This put a stop to Islamic spread in India. Today there is no Islam in as much as half of Punjab (todays' North India). Sikhs who numbered less than 5% of a population could not have saved their future generations from Islam, but for the Bravery of these women. In the grand scheme of life, the sorrow & sacrifices faced by the Sikh women must have been small and necessary. Today we are in much better and safer position with the advent of internet to face Islamic jihad. But will we use our freedoms today to carry on the fight of these women? These women belong not just to Sikh faith but a beacon of inspiration for all of us freedom loving people.THESE ARE MUSLIMS AND THEIR HEADGEAR.. BEWARE OF THESE GUYS!!

MUSLIM RELIGIOUS ELDERS, like this man from Yemen, often wear a turban wrapped around a cap known in Arabic as a kalansuwa. These caps can be spherical or conical, colorful or solid white, and their styles vary widely from region to region. Likewise, the color of the turban wrapped around the kalansuwa varies. White is thought by some Muslims to be the holiest turban color, based on legends that the prophet Mohammed wore a white turban. Green, held to be the color of paradise, is also favored by some. Not all Muslims wear turbans. In fact, few wear them in the West, and in major cosmopolitan centers around the Muslim world, turbans are seen by some as passé.

AFGHAN MUSLIM MEN wear a variety of turbans, and even within the Taliban, the strict Islamic government that controls much of the country, there are differences in the way men cover their heads. This Taliban member, for example, is wearing a very long turban — perhaps two twined together — with one end hanging loose over his shoulder. The Taliban ambassador to Afghanistan, on the other hand, favors a solid black turban tied above his forehead. And some men in Afghanistan do not wear turbans at all, but rather a distinctive Afghan hat.

IRANIAN MULLAHS wear black or white turbans wrapped in the flat, circular style shown in this image of Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The word turban is thought to have originated among Persians living in the area now known as Iran, who called the headgear a dulband.

ARAB MUSLIM KAFFIYEH is not technically a turban. It is really a rectangular piece of cloth, folded diagonally and then draped over the head — not wound like a turban. Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian leader, has made the kaffiyeh famous in recent times. However, the kaffiyeh is not solely Palestinian. Men in Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Arab Persian Gulf states wear kaffiyehs in colors and styles that are particular to their region. Jordanians, for example, wear a red and white kaffiyeh, while Palestinians wear a black and white one. And a man from Saudi Arabia would likely drape his kaffiyeh differently than a man from Jordan. The black cord that holds the kaffiyeh on one’s head is called an ekal.

DESERT PEOPLES & MUSLIM TERRORISTS have long used the turban to keep sand out of their faces, as this man from Africa is likely doing. Members of nomadic tribes have also used turbans to disguise themselves. And sometimes, the color of a person’s turban can be used to identify his tribal affiliation from a distance across the dunes. This man’s turban is a very light blue. In some parts of North Africa, blue is thought to be a good color to wear in the desert because of its association with cool water.
 

KNOWING THE DIFFERENCE CAN SAVE YOUR LIFE

ISLAM AND THE WHITE SLAVE TRADE.

LEARN REAL HISTORY ABOUT HOW MUSLIMS HAVE TREATED WHITES WHEN THEY CONTROL THEIR WORLDS!

 

Did you know that Muslims branded white slaves with hot irons – then as well as now

“There is a long history of girls being kidnapped from Europe and ending up in Morocco [and from there to Turkey and Saudi Arabia].”
— Portugese police on child abduction

A Medieval painting showing Muslims branding Caucasian girls captured in sex-slave raids into Christian Europe. Muslims who purchased such girls in Islamic slave markets had them branded with red-hot irons.

.

WHEN EUROPEANS GOT INTRODUCED TO ISLAM:

American and European historians have studied all aspects of the enslavement of Africans by whites, but have deliberately ignored the slavery of whites by North Africans, during approximately the same period as the transatlantic traffic, and which devastated hundreds of coastal communities. In the thought of today’s nations, slavery is only of blacks, while the Mediterranean slave history is, in fact, more horrible than American slavery. UNESCO behaves with hypocrisy obscuring trafficking in Arabia and Africa, while forgetting the history of abuse of Europeans.
Muslim invasions, theft, mass murders, rape waves, booty raids, slave raids, wars continuing from 620 AD until as late as 1920 AD without interruption, destroyed the entire European Classical and Medieval civilization leaving nothing but a shell.

.
Why is there so little interest in the slavery that took place in the Mediterranean while the education and reflection on the slavery of blacks never ends? As the slaves of white masters, white slaves do simply not fit “the master narrative of European imperialism”. Patterns of victimization so dear to intellectuals require white wickedness, not white suffering. For centuries, Europeans themselves lived in fear of the whip. With a little effort, it is possible to imagine the Europeans concerned about slavery as much as blacks. If the Europeans had grievances regarding the slaves of the galleys in the same way that blacks have grievances for workers in the fields, European policy would be certainly different. There would be no creeping excuses for the “Crusades”.

Muslims attacked our countries relentlessly on slave and booty raids. From 620 AD onwards reaching all the way into 1920 AD there was not a single year of peace from Muslim aggression. How come our children are not being taught the truth in school? Because oil trade and Arab financing demand that people should be lied about Islam. Therefore, all trade must cease once and for all, completely, with all Muslim nations.

Completely ignored from educational materials is the sixteenth centuries of white slave raids by Muslims that were more numerous than Africans deported to the Americas. Everyone speaks of the black slave but nobody talks about the enslavement of whites by Muslims. In short, the slavery of the European white population by Muslims should also be acknowledged and talk about. If the Europeans had grievances regarding the slaves of the galleys in the same way that blacks carry grievances for workers in the fields, European policy would certainly be different, there would be no excuses made for the Crusades painted them in a distorted light; minarets would not push across Europe, and the Turkey would not dream of joining the European Union.
The current Western mentality mode demonstrate severe amnesia about his unfortunate story of its own people forced into slavery of whites, submitted by hundreds and hundreds of thousands to the ferule (submission) of islam (more a million during the 16th and 17th centuries and subsequently). This Treaty of white surpasses in number the digits of the slave which is estimated at 800,000 people, so there was more annually razzies white slave than Africans deported to the Americas, this trade, they practiced for centuries and it remains today, one of their unfortunate specialties (Mauritania) and elsewhere in some Muslim countries.

Muslims negotiating the price of a European slave captured in slave raids across Europe. Over 6 million Europeans are estimated to have been taken as slaves, although the numbers are likely much higher considering these raids continued for more than 1,000 years. It is due to these raids that Europe has a history of repeated bans on slavery since the 1300’s, that constantly failed.
.

When the Arabs began to arrive in Vieste (South of the Italy) in 1554, they kidnapped 6,000 whites. The Algerians took 7,000 slaves in the same year in the Bay of Naples. Spain also suffered large-scale attacks. After a raid on Grenada in 1556, which reported 4,000 men, women and children captured into slavery, they were told that it was “raining Christians on Algiers”, and that these raids dropped the price of slaves so much that slave masters could “barter a Christian for an onion”. The appearance of a large fleet could scare an entire population inland, emptying the entire coastal regions. The Muslims did not object to desecrate churches and often ignored the bells, to reduce to silence the distinctive voice of Christianity.
Between 1530 and 1780, there were almost a million and a half of white European Christians enslaved by Muslims of the Barbary Coast. This surpasses the generally accepted figure of 800,000 Africans transported to the colonies in North America and later in the United States. There has been estimates of 3 – 6 million Europeans being taken into slavery. But considering that the slave raids and attacks were relentless for over 1,000 years and not the 250 years from 1530 to 1780, we can presume these numbers are highly understated.
Not only were the white slaves goods, but they were above all infidels, and deserved all the suffering of a master imposed them. Christian slaves were often so abundant and so cheap that he had no interest in their well-being or prolonged health, if at least from an economic perspective, and many owners worked them until premature death and quickly bought replacements.
The Christian West occupied only the third place on the podium of slavery. Twelve million people were deported to the Caribbean and the Americas. But others have done worse on the second step of the podium, there… blacks enslave themselves (Blacks against blacks), which produced at least 200 million captured people sold in Muslim slavery for 14 centuries.

.
MUSLIM SLAVERY TODAY: SAUDI ROYAL FAMILY OWNED USA CHILD SEX/REPRODUCTIVE SLAVES
“I would like to come back to my United States family. I really want to see my Dad who I was closest but I have two children by the Prince now, a boy and a girl. I never see him unless I am fertile. I feel close only to my children because I have no way out. I would like to live back in the United States with them but I don’t see that ever happening because the Prince is my master and I am his girl.”
— – A USA child reproductive slave in Saudi Arabia note smuggled out by an Asian area work slave assigned to her.
.
ARABIAN PENINSULA AND THE INTERNATIONAL SEX SLAVE TRADE
The Arabian Peninsula inhabitants have long been involved in purchasing slaves. Up until recently, most of these slaves were purchased in Africa. With the advent of oil wealth the Saudi princes have been able to extend their slave purchases throughout the world. This has enabled the Saudi princes to become more selective and specialized in their tastes for slaves.
The Saud family continue to be the prime purchasers on the international slave trade and are known as high end buyers. The Saudi Arabian Government continues to refuse to sign the United Nations treaties on slavery or other human rights issues because they do not want to be subject to their provisions.
They will not sign extradition treaties even with Washington.
They constantly declare they are free of slavery but will not allow international scrutiny. We will deal with the kidnaping of US male and female children by Saudi princes and their associates in this issue. We will substantiate the pattern of abuse using documented occurrence where the princes and their associates have been caught.
.
STATE DEPARTMENT SENSITIVITIES TOWARDS THE SAUDI ARABIAN INTERNATIONAL SLAVE TRADE
It has been an open secret in Washington that the State Department has been extremely sensitive to criticism of its actions regarding Saud Arabia and its princes. There has been an unusual amount of personnel turnover at the Saudi Arabian desk where officials showing the slightest tendency towards ethics and morality are either transferred or terminated to make an example to others.
Why the State Department sensitivity? There are things going on in Saudi Arabia which are so embarrassing to Washington that if the United States citizenry knew, their worst fears about Washington would be corroborated. We will deal with one of these sensitivities in this issue, child abduction by Saudi princes. This is one of several issues we have been reluctant to publish because of the emotional ramifications to families of children who have been abducted around the world in general and the United States in particular.
We had to balance what the Saud princes involved in these abductions would do upon publication. In considering publishing this article against the potential benefits of making known their actions, we chose the latter. The humanitarian action would be for the Saudi Arabian Government to return the sex slaves to their US families so they could receive hospitalization and rehabilitation. We believe this will be considered impractical because of the numbers as well as the legal and political ramifications.

We have seen time and time again US media reported scandals when slaves of Saudi princes and their associates brought into the United States try to escape. The State Department then intervenes on behalf of the Saudi princes with diplomatic or retroactive diplomatic immunity.

This is the same Saudi Arabia who Financed Hussein Obama's Education at Harvard.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/saudi-billionaire-did-help-obama-into-harvard/

Saudi Arabia's Funding of American Mosques

Today, it has been estimated that 80 percent of American mosques are under Wahhabi influence, described by both scholars and U.S. officials as a radical, violent philosophical platform used by terrorists and their supporters to justify violence against Christians, Jews and other "non-believers."

This is part of the Obama Agenda!!


YOU SHOULD KNOW  & WANT TO STOP IT!

Can MARCO RUBIO serve as President or Vice President. REad and tell me what you think!

As much as one may like a Candidate... you must love the Constitution  MORE.

The question must be addressed. Can Marco Rubio legally serve as President or Vice President of America. Is it allowed by the Constitution as it is written.. TODAY!

Rubio is, quite simply, not a "natural-born citizen" by the accepted legal, English-language standard as it has been known throughout American history. He was born in Florida to two non-U.S. citizen parents. 
 
I know this question is not a popular notion among Republicans who support either Rubio or Ted Cruz.
 
Remember it wasn't popular among Democrats when we challenged Obama's eligibility.

Shouldn't the Constitution always trump political expediency ?

You cannot be a Consistent Conservative with principles to Restore America .... IF you apply on standard of Obama and another standard for Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio.


If we don't adhere to the Constitution on matters as significant as Presidential eligibility, then the Constitution ceases to be a meaningful document for guiding our nation. 

If not then, it becomes the kind of living document that many liberals have claimed it should be - ever changing to new circumstances. Who knows when someone can then challenge the 2nd amendment and change that too?

Here are the facts:

Mario and Oriales Rubio became naturalized U.S. citizens on Nov. 5, 1975, four years after Marco Rubio was born.

That's really all you have to know. That simple fact — one not in dispute — disqualifies him legally, barring an amendment to the Constitution or a complete and deliberate misinterpretation of the Constitution, from being president or vice president. 

Those are the only two offices in the U.S. that have such a requirement.

The definition of natural-born citizen approved by the first U.S. Congress can be seen in the Naturalization Act of 1790, which regarded it as a child born of two American parents. The law, specifying that a natural-born citizen need not be born on U.S. soil, stated: "The children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States."

While the act was repealed five years later, it, nevertheless, represented the will of the Congress that someone with dual loyalties not lead the U.S.

Rep.John Bingham of Ohio, a principal framer of the 14th Amendment, affirmed in a discussion in the House on March 9, 1866, that a natural-born citizen is "born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty." 

"The Law of Nations," a 1758 work by Swiss legal philosopher Emmerich de Vattel, was read by many of the American founders and informed their understanding of law later established in the Constitution.

Vattel specified that a natural-born citizen is born of two citizens and made it clear that the father's citizenship was a loyalty issue: "The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. ... In order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country."

Significantly, when the U.S. Senate resolved in 2008 that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the Republican presidential nominee, was a natural-born citizen, it specified that his parents were American citizens.

The non-binding resolution, co-sponsored by then-Sen. Obama, stated that McCain — born to two American citizens on an American military base in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936, "is a 'natural-born citizen' under Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States." Slick don't you think? It made sure that McCain would not challenge Obama's Status! Two peas in an illegal pod scheme!

Of course, this raises a question: What about Obama? It's a good question — and goes right to heart of all the controversy about Obama's eligibility for the last four years. He is not eligible. He never was. It doesn't matter where he was born. It never did. What mattered — and still matters — is who his parents were. According to Obama and the limited and questionable documentation he has provided to date, his father was a Kenyan student who never became a U.S. citizen. 

Therefore, he NEVER met the test of eligibility. The fact that he has reluctantly provided highly questionable documentation to establish his birth in Hawaii is irrelevant, except that it suggests he is trying to obscure the real facts and the real substance of his eligibility. I guess if his father was Frank Marshall Davis we might have another discussion. A DNA test could help to set the record straight once and for all!!

But now... back to the issue of Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz. It would by hypocritical and wrong and set a dangerous precedent for all section in our Constitution if we accept the Leftis notion that the Constitution is not ABSOLUTE!!
 
America permited an ineligible Obama to serve as president by a de facto changing of the constitutional standard through neglect and ignorance for the future. Now if we look the other way for our Candidates we have lost our moral high ground with regards to the Constitution and we open the door for interpretation of every ammendment!

Sure if America wants to have a national debate about the meaning of this requirement, let's have it in ways allowed by the Constitution. If not dissolve the Constitution and start anew ( that would be Revolution). But let's not allow conventional expedient wisdom on this matter to become so corrupted that we accept this on our side blithely as though it does NOT MATTER because it affects our Candidate's eligibility. If we do we have become political bastards just like them. We have no standing in the future!

And let's not stumble into nominating a president or vice president who tests the boundaries of eligibility in such a monumentally important election in 2016.

WE MUST STAND ON PRINCIPLE OR LOSE OUR REPUBLIC !

Can TED CRUZ legally serve as President or Vice President? Read and tell me what your think.

I like Ted Cruz.. I really Do!

....but in this extremely volatile dangerous world can we afford any controversy when it comes to choosing our NEXT President?  We cannot afford the controversy of the Obama Citizenship issue in our ranks. We need a total true focus on winning without any distractions

Here is the Cruz Citizenship Timeline (documented)
This is an authenticated timeline of known facts concerning the citizenship of Senator Ted Cruz.

I like Ted Cruz, 

I have been doing some detailed research and some gut wrenching soul searching and I have come to the conclusion that Ted Cruz is ineligible to be President or Vice President.

Sure there are many scholars who have argued that Cruz like Obama are both "Natural Born Citizens" but read the post and tell me why I am wrong? 

I really like Cruz and wanted him to be Donald Trump's VP and then go on to be the President 8 years from 2016 but I cannot in good conscience endorse him after the research I have done. Ted Cruz is a great American who would be a great VP to Trump and President in the future, but if I am to be consistent I cannot support Cruz in those two positions. I do this with a heavy heart, but the Constitution trumps my emotions.

FACTUAL CRUZ CITIZENSHIP TIMELINE

(Everything presented in this timeline is a matter of public record. All of it is based upon publicly reported events, public statements made by Rafael Cruz, Ted Cruz, officials with the Elect Ted movement or US and Canadian officials."

1957  - After working as a teen to help Fidel Castro gain power in Cuba, and being imprisoned for his actions by the Batista regime, Cuban Rafael Cruz applies for admittance to the University of Texas as a foreign student and enters the US on a four year student visa to attend four years of college. He is a Cuban citizen attending a US college on a student visa obtained through the US Consulate in Havana.

1961 – 1962 After graduating college at the University of Texas, and upon the expiration of his student visa, Cruz Sr. applied for and received “political asylum” and was issued a “green card”.  A green card is a permit to reside and work in the United States, without becoming a “citizen” of the United States, in this case, under political asylum from Castro’s Cuba. His citizenship status was that of a Cuban national living and working in the United States, under a green card work permit. According to US laws, the “green card” holder must maintain permanent resident status, and can be removed from the United States if certain conditions of this status are not met.

1964-1966  Cruz Sr. takes a few odd  jobs, marries and moves to Canada to work in the oil fields. The Cruz family resides in Canada for the next eight years. “I worked in Canada for eight years,”  Rafael Cruz says. “And while I was in Canada, I became a Canadian citizen.” – (From an interview with  NPR )

 1970  - Ted Cruz is born in Canada, to two parents who had lived in Canada for at least four years at that time, and had applied for and received Canadian citizenship under Canadian Immigration and  Naturalization Laws, as stated by Rafael Cruz. As a result, US statutes would have voided the prior “green card” status which requires among other things, permanent residency within the United States and obviously, not becoming a citizen of another country during the time frame of the US green card.

1974   The Cruz family moves to the United States when Ted is approximately four years old. Rafael Cruz has publicly stated that he remained a citizen of Canada until he renounced his Canadian citizenship when he applied for and became a US Naturalized citizen in 2005. As a result, his wife and son were also Canadian citizens, his son being born a citizen of Canada in 1970.

2005 - Rafael Cruz applies for legal US citizenship and renounces his Canadian citizenship. No record of Ted renouncing his Canadian citizenship or applying for US citizenship exists as of 2005

2013   Freshman Senator Ted Cruz is a rising star in the Tea Party movement, and calls for him to run for the White House begin. in July, Ted Cruz is questioned by the press about his interest in running for President, and the issue of his Canadian born citizenship is brought up

August 2013  As Ted’s political stock rises , so do press questions about his eligibility for office. Ted decides to quiet the questions by releasing his birth certificate, which now becomes absolute proof of  Ted’s Canadian citizenship at birth, 1970, Calgary. The release of  the Canadian birth records only serve to further fuel the controversy

Ted seeks legal counsel, as the media is now pressing members of Canadian Immigration and  Naturalization to clear the matter up, when instead, Canadian officials confirm the Ted Cruz was in fact  born a legal citizen of Canada, the son of two parents who had also applied for and received Canadian citizenship prior to Ted’s birth.

Generally speaking, under the Citizenship  Act of 1947, those born in Canada were automatically citizens at Birth unless their Parent was a  foreign diplomat.

So Ted’s Legal counsel advises Ted to “renounce his Canadian citizenship” in order to make himself eligible to run for the Presidency. Of course, renouncing one’s original citizenship only further proves one’s original citizenship.

May  2014  Ted Cruz legal counsel files to renounce Ted’s Canadian citizenship in an effort to make him eligible to run for high office under the natural born Citizen clause Article 11 in the US Constitution.

 

Austin, TX   Ted Cruz has given up his citizenship from his birth country of Canada.

 News that he had renounced his citizenship was first reported by the Dallas Morning News. The newspaper also broke that Cruz had dual Canadian- US Citizenship when he released his birth certificate in August.

However  the Constitution does not require that one be only an American citizen, but rather a natural born Citizen.

SO THE CONTROVERSY RAGES ON AS TO WHO IS A “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN” IF OBAMA IS NOT.. THEN TED CRUZ IS NOT!!

My question remains .. CAN WE AFFORD THE DISTRACTION OF THE CONTROVERSY? AMERICA’S POSITION IS SO PRECARIOUS THAT I PREFER A CLEAN PATH

This problem exists for Marco Rubio as well.

A “natural born Citizen” of the United States is a child born in the USA of two (2) U.S. Citizens. The parents can be Citizens by Birth or they can be Citizens by Naturalization after immigrating to the USA. But to create a “natural born Citizen” of the United States both parents must be Citizens at the time the child is born in the USA. See this legal reference book used by the founders and framers of our Constitution: Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law, Vol.1 Chapter 19 Section 212, Emer de Vattel, 1758-1797.  The overwhelming majority (probably 85%+) of citizens in the United States are natural born Citizens.

This clause was added for future presidents as a national security clause. It is from the group of natural born Citizens that our founders prescribed in the presidential eligibility clause in Clause 5, Section 1 of Article II of the U.S. Constitution that we shall choose a President and Commander in Chief of our military as a strong check against foreign influence via birth allegiances on the person in that singular and most powerful office. One needs all three citizenship legs to be a natural born Citizen and have sole allegiance and claim on you at birth to one and only one country — the United States: 1. Born in the USA. 2. Father must be a U.S. Citizen (born or naturalized). 3. Mother must be U.S. Citizen (born or naturalized). Like a three legged stool if you take away any of these three citizenship legs of the Article II constitutional intent and requirement to being a natural born Citizen, i.e., being born with unity of citizenship in and sole allegiance to the USA, the child is born with more than one country’s citizenship and claim of allegiance/citizenship on them at their birth and thus they are NOT a natural born Citizen of the United States.  And as in the analogy of a stool designed to stand on three legs and it is missing a leg, it falls down, likewise the person’s claim to natural born Citizenship fails if the person does not have all three citizenship legs required to be a natural born Citizen at the time of their birth.

SO IF WE AS CONSERVATIVES ARE TO APPLY THE SAME STANDARD FOR ALL.. IT IS WITH A HEAVY HEART THAT I MUST CONCLUDE THAT TED CRUZ IS NOT ELIGIBLE TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT OR VICE PRESIDENT. HE WOULD MAKE AN AWESOME ATTORNEY GENERAL.