The Founders’ 2nd Amendment exists so the citizenry can kill American tyrants

Last weekend’s attack in Las Vegas — probably conducted by people attached to the Democratic Party and inspired by the mainstream media — has, not surprisingly, sparked the usual tear-filled, moronic debate on the supposed need for gun control.

The issue on which Democrats and some Republicans have fixed their tyrannical goal is something called a bump-stock, which is a gadget that is said to accelerate the rate of fire from a semi-automatic rifle. With the vast amount of firepower that the increasingly tyrannical U.S. national government can potentially turn on its citizenry, this device is a god-send for gun-owning Americans. Banning this device — like banning machine guns in the 1930s — is a clear “infringement” of the 2nd Amendment, as it limits the citizen’s right to defend himself against domestic tyrants to the extent he desires to do so. It is, as well, another step toward what the Founders believed must never be allowed, a national government monopoly on the tools of violence.

Now, both the Democratic and Republican parties, the establishments of each, and the mainstream media have worked to strengthen centralized tyranny for at least three decades. Today, it is clear they have succeeded to a significant extent.

–Criminal politicians walk the streets, kill opponents, ignore the Constitution, and grow rich from corruption, graft, and theft because they are above the law. Examples? Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Susan Rice, Loretta Lynch, James Comey, and Eric Holder, to name only a few.

–Leaders and their followers in both parties have knowingly bankrupted this country; used federal agencies to persecute political opponents, started unconstitutional and unnecessary wars that never end; and refused to enforce legitimate laws passed by the national legislature.

–Democrats have demanded the end of any place whatsoever for Christianity in the public square, and on most occasions Republicans have either acquiesced or failed to undo the Democrats’ damage to 1st Amendment guarantees after they win power.

–Both parties have allowed the country to be overrun by unwanted, unneeded, and uneducated illegal aliens, people have shattered and criminalized American society and now staff the Democratic party’s terrorist organizations– like Black Lives Matter, Antifa, and By Any Means — as well as much of the federal civil service and the ranks of domestic Islamist organizations.

–The republic is ruled by the nine, unelected, arrogant, and unaccountable tyrants who sit on the Supreme Court, men and women who stick their noses into every facet of American life. These paragons of injustice have facilitated the suppression of the Christian faith in America; the murder of 60-plus million unborn Americans by calling it a “right”; and empowered Democrat-favored minority groups that are obviously unable to govern themselves let alone the nation. The Founders never intended the Supreme Court to become the absolute monarchy it is today, and so left Congress the constitutional ability to limit its purview, as well as that of all other federal courts. Neither party is willing to rein in the federal courts, apparently hoping at some point to make it a complete dictatorship from the right or the left.

The foregoing realities are among the reasons the Founders gave us the 2nd Amendment. They also are the reason the Founders specifically forbid the “infringements’ to it that they knew would be advocated by would-be political tyrants seeking to incrementally erase the citizen’s right to own arms to kill tyrants. The 2nd Amendment is the most important of all the amendments to the Constitution because it is the only one that ensures Americans will always have the option of killing the politicians that are trying to eliminate the God-given rights that are embedded in and protected by the Bill of Rights, as well as those in several of the other amendments adopted subsequent to it.

After the Democrats’ highly lethal and well-planned terrorist operation in Las Vegas — with those they ran in Charlottesville and Berkeley — they and some Republicans are breathlessly eager to lawlessly infringe on the 2nd Amendment to further limit the ability of Americans to defend themselves. One can only assume that these would-be tyrants believe they govern a citizenry that has no stomach for defending their rights and faith, and will do anything to avoid a civil war. On this point, they may want to think twice.

Almost from the arrival of the first Protestant English setters in New England, the grounding of American freedom has been based on the knowledge that neither God nor legitimate law require a people to live their lives passively, silently, and submissively under the arbitrary power of either an absolute monarch or a tyrannical oligarchy wielding the same kind of arbitrary power. In January, 1750, Johnathan Mayhew, the Congregationalist pastor of Boston’s West Church, preached a sermon that explicitly made this point. The tyrant that Mayhew spoke of was England’s King Charles I, whose tyrannical behavior provoked Parliament and its supporters to overthrow and behead him. In the sermon, Mayhew defended those who removed and executed the king and, in so doing, explained that their actions offended neither the law nor the Lord.

Till people find themselves greatly abused and oppressed by their governors, they are not apt to complain; and whenever they do, in fact, find themselves thus abused and oppressed, they must be stupid not to complain. To say that subjects in general are not proper judges when their governors oppress them, and play the tyrant; and when they defend their rights, administer justice impartially, and promote the public welfare, is as great treason as ever man uttered;–’tis treason,–not against one single man, but the state–against the whole body politic;–’tis treason against mankind;–’tis treason against common sense;–’tis treason against God. And this impious principle lays the foundation for justifying all the tyranny and oppression that ever any prince was guilty of. The people know for what end they set up, and maintain, their governors; and they are the proper judges when they execute their trust as they ought to do it;–when their prince exercises an equitable and paternal authority over them;–when from a prince and common father, he exalts himself into a tyrant–when from subjects and children, he degrades them into the class of slaves;–plunders them, makes them his prey, and unnaturally sports himself with their lives and fortunes. … For a nation thus abused to arise unanimously, and to resist their prince, even to the dethroning him, is not criminal; but a reasonable way of indicating their liberties and just rights; it is making use of the means, and the only means, which God has put into their power, for mutual and self-defense. And it would be highly criminal in them, not to make use of this means. It would be stupid tameness, and unaccountable folly, for whole nations to suffer one unreasonable, ambitious and cruel man, to wanton and riot in their misery. And in such a case it would, of the two, be more rational to suppose, that they that did NOT resist, than that they who did, would receive to themselves damnation. (1)

I previously have quoted from Reverend Mayhew’s sermon and other works, and have earned some scoffing-at for claiming that Mayhew’s words could have any pertinence to contemporary America. I think that criticism is quite wrong. The good pastor used his words to describe the tyrannical rule of Charles I, but without much modification they could be used to describe the tyrannical, eight-year rule of Barack Obama and his lieutenants. The same words, without question, eventually could have been used to describe the tyranny that Hillary Clinton and her mad-feminist clique would have installed had she succeeded to Obama’s throne. In addition, Mayhew’s words are timeless in their description of the proper popular response to a tyrant.

The three people just mentioned constitute a trio of tyrants that no people would be required by God or law to forego overthrowing and executing. So far, sadly, only one member of the tyrant trio has received his just comeuppance. The other two, their party, and their Republican acolytes, given their post-election behavior, rhetoric, and funding for riots meant to kill Americans, may yet get their just deserts. To crib from what Pastor Mayhew said of Charles I, it seems fair to say that Obama and Clinton and their entourages “are black with guilt and laden with iniquity.”(2) Because the result of voting no longer seems to bring the republic tranquility and order, but rather chaos, violence, and corpses, it would be well if Mayhew’s assessment that the citizenry is bound by its duty to God and country to eliminate tyrants becomes fixed in the minds of contemporary Americans, and perhaps be acted upon before long.

As to Mayhew’s credibility, John Adams testimony out to be sufficient. Mayhew, Adams said, was “transcendent genius … who threw all the weight of his great fame into the scale of the country in 1761, and maintained it there with zeal and ardor till his death. … If the Orators on the 4th. of July, really wish to investigate the principles and Feelings which produced the Revolution .., they ought to study Dr. Mayhew’s Sermon on Passive Obedience and Non Resistance.”(3) Later, Adams would write,

Another gentleman, who had great influence in the commencement of the Revolution, was Doctor Jonathan Mayhew…. This divine had raised a great reputation both in Europe and America, by the publication of a volume of seven sermons in the reign of King George the Second, 1749, and by many other writings, particularly a sermon in 1750, on the 30th of January, on the subject of passive obedience and non-resistance, in which the saintship and martyrdom of King Charles the First are considered, seasoned with wit and satire superior to any in [Jonathan] Swift or [Benjamin] Franklin. It was read by everybody; celebrated by friends, and abused by enemies. … Mayhew seemed to be raised up to revive all their animosities against tyranny, in church and state, and at the  same time to destroy their bigotry, fanaticism, and inconsistency.(4)

Then, in 1818, Adams wrote to Thomas Jefferson that he had read Mayhew’s 1750 sermon “a year before I entered Harvard Colledge and I read it, til the Substance of it was incorporated into my Nature and indelibly engraved on my memory.”(5)

If that sermon’s words had such a profound and enduring impact on a man like John Adams, Mayhew’s admonitions are clearly pertinent to those Americans who still prize liberty and hate tyranny, people who are, not coincidentally, the most jealous guardians of the 2nd Amendment. (6)


–1.) Jonathan Mayhew, “A Discourse Concerning Unlimited Submission and Non-Resistance to the Higher Powers,” 30 January 1750, See,

–2.) Ibid.

–3.) andJohn Adams to William Tudor, Sr., 5 April 1818, at

–4.) John Adams to H. Niles, 18 February 1818, at

–5.) John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, 18 July 1818, at

–6.) The five foregoing endnotes are meant to give readers fairly easy access to the cited sources. Fortunately, however, there is now available a new, superb, and beautifully written and argued biography of Jonathan Mayhew that covers all the material in this piece and much more. The book restores Reverend Mayhew — after centuries of near total neglect — to his rightful place as a key founder of the American republic. It also places his writings where they rightfully belong, which is alongside those of the authors whose writings were most influential in convincing and inspiring Americans to shed themselves of British tyranny, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, and John Dickinson. Following is the citation for this wonderful book: J. Patrick Mullins. Father of Liberty. Jonathan Mayhew and the Principles of the American Revolution. Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas, 2017.


Posted in Articles | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Las Vegas: Pray for the fallen, prepare to fight the governing elite’s war on liberty

No matter what more is learned in terms of specifics about the Las Vegas attack, the need for the American citizenry to be well armed has never been greater. The Las Vegas shootings should give Americans pause to look beyond the contradictory “facts” and the whining, scripted, and sentimental political blather the event produced, and consider the following obvious points, which, when taken together, seem to merit setting aside a bit more of the monthly budget for protective weaponry,

First, it is clear that the U.S. law-enforcement system at all levels cannot protect Americans. The governing elite’s decades of pro-criminal laws; the legislative and judicial bans that prevent police to profile the suspicious and dangerous; our open borders and the elite’s refusal to enforce immigration laws; the national government’s cultivation of intensifying international hatred with unnecessary interventionist wars; the mainstream media’s complete failure to report the increasing numbers of murders and other major crimes that destroy the myth of a multicultural-diversity-unlimited-immigration route to utopia, all of which have combined to make law enforcement’s job an impossibility. Americans are going to have help the police if they are to be defended, and may well have to do so alone if politicians keep ordering the police to stand down when the left riots.

Second, the bipartisan governing elite clearly has a deep-seated hatred for the views, ambitions, and beliefs of hard-working Americans. Split away Trump, the Freedom Caucus in the House, and Senators Paul, Cruz, Lee, and, pray God, Moore, in the Senate, and the other members of both parties are eminently expendable.  What does that mean? Well, it means that if the remainder do not begin to do their jobs or are not soon removed by the ballot, they will have to be removed by the bullet and the bayonet. Why? Look at Europe. The European governing elite has for thirty-years and more incrementally imposed socialism on the continent from globalist-dominated Brussels. It also has deliberately inundated the continent with many millions of the Muslim enemies of equality, rule-of-law, ordered liberty, parliamentary democracy, and Christianity. Europe’s elite has abandoned the political, economic, and social glories that long were Europe’s pride, in favor of a rapidly growing and thoroughly mongrelized population from which society’s scum is encouraged to be pampered, above-the-law slackers, rapists, terrorists, criminals, and torturers who feed like scurvy scavengers upon those who are the natives and taxpayers in Europe’s nations. Except for the band of U.S. liberty-lovers noted above, the rest of the elected representatives from both U.S. political parties — especially the Democrats — want nothing more than to make to make Americans into passive  and obedient automatons modeled on the cringing, submissive, unarmed, and resigned-to-slavery natives being bred by the EU regime in Europe’s fading nation-states.

Third, the hate-filled Democratic reaction to the Las Vegas shootings, with a pro-Hillary CBS vice-president saying those killed and wounded deserved their fate because they were listening to country music; a known trait of Trump voters, she said. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, and other worthless Democrats, and I suspect more than few Republicans, moved before the last Las-Vegas wound was staunched to demand the neutering of the 2nd Amendment and the ruin of the NRA. History and contemporary America and Europe show that the governing class that wants to disarm its citizenry is the one that knows that citizens hate it to core for what it has done to them and their country, and for what citizens suspect the elite intends to do to it and them in the future. If the U.S. disarmers have their way, Americans know that they will be treated just as the Spanish National Police treated peaceful and unarmed Catalan secessionist voters and their children last Sunday. That is, like animals that needed to be beaten and otherwise brutalized, terrorized, and abused to teach them to obey and unquestioningly serve their betters. Had the Catalans been armed, there would be a state funeral in Madrid later this week for scores of Spanish National Police who died truly well-merited deaths. Americans must always remained armed to the teeth so that such a funeral can be held in Washington if the U.S. governing elite, its media acolytes, and its armed, college-age henchmen try to make them into effete, unarmed, and submissive Europeans. What tyrant and pro-tyranny journalist, general, or civil servant, after all, would not look infinitely better when fixed squirming to a wall by a bayonet driven through his/her belly?

These then are the much-needed, post-Las Vegas reflections and realizations. Simply put, much of the existing U.S. national government is the mortal enemy of the citizenry, liberty, and the republic. If  the national government does not quickly shape up and begin to do the citizenry’s bidding, its members will have to go, violently if necessary. The 2nd Amendment, as the Founders intended, makes that perfectly possible.






Posted in Articles | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Iraq and Syria: Measuring the meaningless

In a necessary war, metrics like body counts, cities taken, factories dem0lished, and tanks/ships/planes destroyed are nice to have but not needed. A necessary war — one in which America’s survival is at stake — requires the relentless annihilation of all of the enemy’s human and material assets, and success is clear only in his unconditional surrender or disappearance from earth’s face. In an unnecessary war, these kinds of metrics are the only ones that can be used to temporarily hide the certainty of U.S. defeat from American citizens. Not surprisingly, Americans hear very little about the unnecessary war their national government is waging in Syria and Iraq save data about fallen cities, the number of Islamic State (IS) fighters killed, and IS vehicles, weapons factories, warehouses, and caches destroyed.

The reason for the irrelevancies that the citizenry is being told about the Syrian-Iraq war lies in the simple reality that the conflict has become uncontrollable and will inevitably become what Hobbes described as a war of all against all. Once again, Americans are seeing both their government’s usual defeat in unnecessary wars, and the always accelerating human and monetary costs of interventionism.

So where do the wars in Iraq and Syria stand? Well, in the 37 months since President Obama restarted America’s participation in the Iraq war those two countries have become a morass of insanity and death in which two longstanding nation-states are now probably beyond restoration. Although these wars have all but disappeared from the U.S. and Western media, the Muslim world’s media and some Arabic papers in Europe have continued to follow the downward spiral occurring in both countries. Many Western media outlets regard Third World media as not up to their standards (?) but the picture that emerges from their coverage is a bit different than the themes found in the sparse Western coverage. Consider:

–The Arab press claims that Syria –and especially Asaad’s power-holding Alawite sect — has been just about bled white by the war, which suggests that Syria, led by Asaad or anyone else who is not an Islamist, will not be able to govern the country without substantial foreign economic, political, and, especially, military power. In other words, the presence of Russian, Iranian, and Lebanese Hizballah forces will garrison the country, thereby ensuring the Islamists will continue fighting there and drawing volunteers from around the world.

–The claims of the casualties inflicted on the Islamic State and other Islamist groups in Syria and Iraq are absurd. Because the Western press has done little to cover the war on the ground, the main sources available for casualties are the state-owned media in Syria, Russia, Iran, and Iraq. Those entities’ claims, if totaled, would show that each Islamist fighter in Syria and Iraq has been killed at least three times over. The other source for Islamist casualties is the U.S. military, and that seems to involve the use of a wonderous formula that calculates how many of the enemy should have been killed by the ordnance that was dropped on them. Needless to say, there may be some room for error in such calculations. The formula may amount to a measure of military progress against IS and other Islamist organizations that is just as valid in as the “body count”, that spectacularly accurate indicator of the U.S. military’s approaching victory in Vietnam.

–IS’s loss of the territory on which it established a Caliphate in the heart of Arab world is a grievous, but not a final defeat. Bin Laden’s guidance that you win one day and lose the next, as God wills, is shared by all Islamist forces. For nearly two years, the U.S. and its allies have breathlessly chalked up the fall of Syrian and Iraqi cities — Aleppo, Palmyra, Fallujah, Mosul, Raqqa, etc. — counting them as sure signs of victory, as if Eisenhower was again progressing from Normandy to the Rhine in 1944. The Islamic State’s forces, however, have fought on and on and on. IS fighters held each of the cities for periods ranging from about 15o to 250 days against the regular ground forces of Iraq, Syria, Iran, and Russia, as well as Lebanese Hizballah and large Shia militias from Iraq and Iran. In addition, the anti-IS ground forces were supported by continuous attacks from the U.S., Russian, many Arab, Iranian, and NATO air forces, and the U.S. and Russian navies. In other words, the paltry accomplishments produced by the overwhelming military power and advantages of IS’s enemies — a dozen wrecked cities for which Western taxpayers will be forced to foot the bill to rebuild — has proven either the incompetence of the anti-IS generals running the war, or the mettle, steadfastness, and faith of the Islamists. Bet on the latter.

–In Iraq and Syria, IS leaders have traded land and lives, for time to execute a planned realignment. As IS’s urban garrisons held off defeat for as long as possible, the group’s leaders redeployed forces and ordnance to the rugged mountains and trackless deserts of Iraq and Syria to prepare to do what IS does best, fight a renewed guerilla war. Because a guerrilla war requires far fewer men than does the building of a Caliphate, IS leaders sent some of their surplus fighters to reinforce the IS presence in Afghanistan, Iran, Yemen, the Sinai Peninsula, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Europe, Palestine, Malaysia, and the Philippines.  Those reinforcements — valuable more for their combat experience than their numbers — have allowed IS to expand its presence throughout Afghanistan; to make the Sinai Peninsula a death trap for Egypt’s military and police forces; to return to the outskirts of Surt in Libya, and to build strength in western and southern Libya, as well as Mali, Chad, and Niger; and to help the Philippine Islamists hold the city of Marawi for more than 1oo days against the full weight of the Philippine military.

As noted, there is no gainsaying that IS has suffered a severe military, political, and economic defeat. But what of the victor’s fortunes? Is there light at the end of the tunnel? Hardly.

–First, the gaggle of nations that have been militarily beating on IS for two years has won multiple ruined cities not a war, and, the fools will argue, responsibility for rebuilding two shattered nations. The anti-Islamist nations will now be drawn into an ever deeper military intervention to try to defeat the coming IS and al-Qaeda insurgencies, while trying to nation-rebuild, keep Shias and Sunnis from each other’s throats, thwart Iranian effort to solidify its presence and increase its control of the Iraqi regime, cope with IS’s expanding international jihad, and contest Russia’s determination to keep Asaad’s regime in power. It will be a lasting source of mirth to recall that while the West was rattling the sabres of war over Iran’s nuclear intentions, it was simultaneously facilitating its imperial and martial expansion.

–The United States, the Arab and NATO countries, and Russia have provided air- and ground-cover for the expansion of Iran’s power and political influence from Tehran’s western border to Syria’s border with Jordan. This reality — praise God — increases the likelihood of a regional Shia-Sunni war, but it also places substantial Iranian military capabilities closer to Israel than they have ever been before; this at a time when IS forces in the Sinai present a gradually growing threat to the Suez Canal and western Israel and Palestine. As always, the Jewish-American- sponsored, interventionist, and Neocon war against Saddam continues to close the Muslim noose around the neck of their country of first loyalty.

–The topper on this mess, of course, occurred this week when the Iraqi Kurds voted by a majority of about 90-percent for the creation of an independent Kurdish state; some Kurds outside Iraq also voted in the poll. The result of the vote was never in doubt, and that is why Iran and Turkey issued a torrent of statements demanding that Kurdish leaders delay the vote in words that moved from a barely disguised mailed fist to outright military and economic threats. The U.S. and NATO governments — being historically ignorant of the Kurds’ story and eager to have them do their fighting and dying — have allied themselves with the Kurds to fight the Islamic State, and have armed them to the teeth. While the Kurds have fought well, the Western aid and uneducated sympathy for the Kurds have made them a considerable player in the northern areas of a chaotic battlefield that now stretches from Syria’s borders with none-too-stable Jordan and Lebanon to the Iran-Iraq border. Tehran, Damascus, and Baghdad will not permit an independent Kurdish state to survive, and Turkey and Iraq already have interrupted foreign air travel to Kurdistan, and the Baghdad regime has given the Kurds three days to surrender control of its airfields to Iraqi officials. In the near-to-medium term, the region’s anti-Kurd regimes have only to block attempts by the Kurds’s to export their aspirational nation’s utterly landlocked oil resources to kill it. Surely, this would bring on a new humanitarian disaster, one that starts the travel of  yet another wave of angry Muslim refugees toward the welcoming and Europe-killing arms of Mama Merkel and the dying German nation.

Saddam and Mubarak stand as the only political leaders who told the world the obvious truth in late 2002, namely, that s U.S.-led invasion of Iraq would open the gates of hell.  Today, Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Bolton, Rumsfeld, Rice, Blair, and the mainstream media’s pundits  continue to claim that the problems caused by their personal, for-Israel, Iraq war, while lamentable, are simply unpredictable consequences. These are the statements of men and women who are either liars, historical illiterates, or people whose sanity is maintained only by finding shelter in a plausible-sounding excuse for the ramifications of an unnecessary and unconstitutional war that has wrecked much of the Arab world, globalized the Islamist insurgency, killed and maimed tens of thousands of U.S. Marines and soldiers, bankrupted the U.S. Treasury, and killed and maimed more Syrian and Iraqi men, women, and children than Asaad and Saddam could have killed if both lived to be a thousand years old.

Now that the lethal Kurdish shoe has dropped, the gates of the hell that Bush’s war opened wide will soon heat up even further  and emerge as a full-scale Hobbesian war. In the name of God, President Trump, enough is enough. Evict the Neocon generals from your White House and get all Americans out of Iraq and Syria, Then free your campaign’s non-intervention/America First placard from mothballs and speak to the nation on this issue, using a speech written by your own hand. Put that placard nearby as you speak and tell Americans that we are done fighting unnecessary wars, reinforcing defeat in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan, and allowing our foreign policy to be shaped by war-lovers like McCain and Graham, disloyal Jewish-Americans, and the media-supported, anti-American ideologues who champion multiculturalism, diversity, and women’s rights.

You can do this off your own hook, Mr. President, and it is an action for which future generations of your countrymen will call you blessed. That’s not a bad way to be remembered.



Posted in Articles | Tagged , | 5 Comments

Madness abounding: The UK government’s pet Muslims attack, and it resents Trump’s noting the truth

On 15 September 2017, Islamist fighters again attacked a London subway car. There were close to two dozen casualties, but so far there have been no deaths. Britons and Prime Minister Theresa May’s government were fortunate, as the bomber’s explosive device only partially detonated.

President Trump responded to the attack with twitter messages supportive of May’s hapless government. His words, however, apparently angered Mrs. May and Scotland Yard. They interpreted Trump’s tweets as insulting to their performance as the lawful and only protectors of the native British population against the violence and other depredations of the Muslim immigrants — legal and illegal — the government so obviously prefers, champions, and kowtows to.

Can you imagine that? Do they think no one sees their abject dereliction of duty? British officialdom is angry because Trump hit the nerve, dead-on, that leads directly to their certain but never-spoken knowledge that they are completely responsible for enabling the Islamists’ Friday attack, as well as all other Islamist bombings, acid-throws, rapes, stabbings, frauds, kidnappings, and thefts over the past decade. Indeed, British prime ministers, Parliaments, and media have done everything possible during those years to make sure the attacks keep occurring. Most recently, they have defied the electorate by prolonging the UK’s exit from the EU, as well as by depending on costly deradicalization programs that are still proliferating even though they have manifestly failed in every country in the world, leaving no lessening of Islamism and its always attendant violence and cruelty, but enriching the crackpot university professors who peddle the programs.

It is, without question, the British government — under the Tories and Labor — that has put the United Kingdom on the precipice of internal war with its near-fascist implementation of the EU’s policies of unchecked internal movement and open-immigration laws; its savage implementation of multicultural and diversity laws that apply to and destroy only non-elite, native-born Brits; and its hounding and persecution of all persons who dare mention in public or on social media the irrefutable reality that the foregoing policies and laws are destroying British citizens, society, history, and culture. If Britons had not allowed themselves to be disarmed, all the prime ministers after Lady Thatcher would have found their rightful and thoroughly merited rewards by twisting in mid-air at the end of a rope.

The fact is that only elite Brits, educated at the country’s elite universities, could believe that the violent and lawless Muslim rabble they have welcomed willy nilly into the UK is ever going to assimilate and become law-abiding citizens. Some will, most will not, and those who will not will always abet the Islamist killers. Most of them will remain on the dole while native Britons pay for them until they are killed by the Muslims their government and police are pampering and supporting.

These marauding Muslims also will continue to assiduously “groom” — meaning sexually attack without fear of prosecution — young, white British girls and women, run narcotics, and establish armed, urban enclaves into which British police will not dare enter. It is a lucky thing, therefore, that the oh-so-sensitive British police can keep themselves busy — and avoid the risks involved in rooting out and killing the Islamists — by prosecuting the citizens who are manly enough to rhetorically attack May’s government, and the socialist, Islamophile clowns leading the Labor Party, for protecting, supporting, and favoring Muslim killers. It currently appears that the Tories and Labor are intent on doing so until the native Brits who speak their mind, work hard, and pay taxes are all killed by the violent, British-hating, on-the-dole Islamists their government and police coddle.

Watching these events in Britain, and knowing America might be only one presidential election away from a similar internal war, leads to the inevitable conclusion that armed civilian opposition to the government and its favored, out-for-blood Muslims probably is the only option for Britons. Brits and Americans come from a common heritage, one that has ever held that the first and most important duty of government is to protect and preserve the lives and property of the law-abiding citizenry. When a government deliberately refrains from performing that duty, its usefulness is at an end and it must be eliminated either by an election or — more likely — destroyed, along with its acolytes and favored groups, by armed citizens.

One prays that at least a few British men are quietly developing ways to surreptitiously bring weapons and ammunition into the UK to arm those being attacked by their government and its beloved Muslim rabble. If there are, I hope they will look to private Americans — who still have the right to bear arms we inherited from our English ancestors — for the financial, manpower, and ordnance help we can surely provide.



Posted in Articles | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Of 9/11 anniversaries, Jewish-American bigotry, and the return of the Papist scourge

I believe that I have written in this space on each of the last decade’s 9/11 anniversaries. This will be the last of my last 9/11-anniversary pieces, as the occasion has become meaningless for much of the citizenry; a cynical excuse for the bipartisan governing elite to prolong and start more unnecessary wars; and a day for the mainstream media to cover the only issue they can cover professionally; namely, the faux sentiment and grief of media-coverage seeking celebrities and politicians. I also have taken the chance here to briefly comment on two other troubling issues.

–The utter meaninglessness of the 9/11 anniversary: If there is life after death, the 9/11 dead are able to see that the U. S. national government has done next to nothing to ensure that date and its casualties “will never be forgotten”. By now the 9/11 casualties know, through his own words, that President Clinton had the chance to kill Osama bin Laden on multiple occasions — and likely prevent 9/11 — but refused to do so because he feared that his elite friends at home and abroad would think he was no better than bin Laden. As I have said here before, Bill Clinton never has, in his life, drawn a single breath when he was a better man than bin Laden. All of those who were killed or wounded on 9/11 are a butcher’s bill that belongs solely to Bill Clinton. Those people are now forgotten and unavenged, and all of the U.S. military personnel who have been killed, wounded, or maimed in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, and Yemen since 9/11 are the wasteful consequence of three things: (1) Bill Clinton’s narcissism and moral cowardice; (2) a war-loving, bipartisan governing elite that has used, and will use 9/11 as an excuse for unnecessary wars; and (3) a set of U.S. general officers who are too political and timid to achieve victory, and too historically ignorant to recognize irretrievable defeat when they see it. Again, the only remaining use of 9/11 anniversaries is the pernicious one of to keeping unnecessary wars going and finding new ones to wage  For that reason, the national government ‘s silence toward those it allowed to be killed on 9/11 is perhaps the only way to let them rest in peace.

–Why is it okay for Jewish-American Senators to claim an individual’s Christian beliefs disqualify them for federal posts?: We have now had the geriatric Senators Bernie Sanders and Diane Feinstein publicly and viciously attack two Christian-American nominees to national government posts because of their faith. Well, what’s good for the goose is always good for the gander. From this point forward it must be seen as fair game for members of Congress to assume that any Jewish-American nominee for a national government post is disqualified simply because of  his or her Jewish beliefs. If Jewish-American senators can now freely attack a Christian-American nominee’s 1st Amendment rights by seeking to deny him or her employment because of their religious beliefs, it is time for Christian-Americans to stop turning the other cheek and treat Jewish-Americans with the same kind of public contempt, denigration, and blatant violation of constitutional rights. The 1st Amendment, after all, says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” not  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, except for Christian believers;”. If the 1st Amendment retains any meaning and force in this lawless age, the Senate must harshly censure Feinstein and Sanders for their public display of illegal religious bigotry and thereby begin to put the 1st  amendment back on an even keel. If the Senate does not take punitive action against those two white Jewish supremacists, Americans of all faiths will know that the powerful Jewish-American elite controls far more than just the republic’s foreign policy.

–Were the Protestants right about Papists? I have been a member of the Church of Rome for all of the 64 years since my baptism.  Trained as historian of the British Empire, I also know that for more than two hundred years Catholics in America and elsewhere in that empire were, because of their faith, severely discriminated against socially, politically, and in terms of employment. Such discrimination in America was based on several factors, but the central issue for non-Catholic citizens was whether Catholics — aka: Papists — were citizens who would obey the republic’s laws or who would instead truckle to the dictates of their Pope. (NB: This question remained an issue in the Kennedy-Nixon election in 1960.) Over the past two centuries, American Catholics slowly climbed a very steep ladder — some rungs of which lead to their murder — to social, economic, and political acceptance through hard manual-and-menial work, distinguished service in the U.S. military and America’s wars, educational achievement, and a vigorous, die-hard kind of patriotism. But regression now seems the order of the day. Pope Francis has condemned Americans for wanting to end illegal immigration; for electing President Trump — the only American president pledged to stop abortion; for defending its interests militarily; and for not paupering the republic by mindlessly agreeing to fund the European socialist elite’s climate-change scam. Pope Francis also has told Americans that they can save themselves politically only by abandoning the republic and joining the plans afoot for an authoritarian and murderous world government. This week, U.S. Catholic bishops joined the Pope in beginning to reinvigorate the idea that American Catholics may be more loyal to the Pope than to their country  Terming President Trump’s termination of Obama’s clearly unconstitutional DACA Executive Order “reprehensible”, the bishops wrote,

“Today, our nation has done the opposite of how Scripture calls us to respond. It is a step back from the progress that we need to make as a country … [it is a] heart-breaking moment in our history that shows the absence of mercy and goodwill, and a short-sighted vision of the future.” (3)

The bishops and their hapless, Marxist Pope apparently believe that Americans will be safer, happier, and more prosperous in a country that is overwhelmed with illegal aliens, ruled by would-be tyrants like Obama, devoid of the rule of law, and governed under a Constitution no longer worth the paper is written on. Instead of this reprehensible intervention in American affairs, the Catholic bishops and their Pope ought to try to repair the wreckage of their ethically and morally crippled church, and let Americans decide by what means their republic is to survive. If the Pope and his bishops decide to hoe their own row, they would do well — at long last — to start by annihilating the plague of pedophilia that seems to infest the Church of Rome at all levels, makes mock of Christ’s message, and destroys the lives of children. Failure to do so, as the bishops might say, will “show the absence of mercy and goodwill, and a short-sighted vision of the future.” It also will alarmingly suggest that perhaps the Protestants have been correct all along in fearing that a despicable and dangerous scourge lay in the heart of Catholicism.




–3.) Arlington [VA] Catholic Herald, 7-13 September, p. 3


Posted in Articles | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment