What level of tyranny will it take for Americans to use the 2nd Amendment as intended?

What level of tyranny will it take for Americans to use the 2nd Amendment as intended?

By Dark Politricks

After all the furor of the last few weeks and the Sandy Hook shootings and the media debate afterwards what I want to know is what level of tyranny do Americans feel is enough to break the barrier and make their cherished 2nd Amendment useful.

As we are constantly told the 2nd Amendment is not so Americans can go hunting ducks with M16's or use their AK47's for shooting tin cans off the garden wall - no it's for preventing an over reaching, tyrannical government from taking control of their country.

As Thomas Jefferson said in 1803:

"None but an armed nation can dispense with a standing army. To keep ours armed and disciplined is therefore at all times important."

There are many levels to this debate and you can go on many tacks including:

1. American citizens have voted for the Congressmen and President that has then taken away their civil liberties. Therefore in a democracy the majority have spoken and it is their own fault for participating in their own loss of liberty and freedom.

2. Obama is in no way like Hitler, Mao or Stalin. They just declared their laws and the deed was done. They didn't have to battle for years in the Congress and Senate to get a health-care plan watered down and then passed after multiple compromises with political opponents. If Obama was truly a dictator he would have just clicked his fingers and used one of the "signing statements" to make "it so", so to speak. A dictator doesn't give in to an elected body he just says what he wants and it gets done.

3. For personal reasons I wouldn't like to live in a country full of guns. For one I would probably be dead, in a wheelchair or in prison by now after my teenage tearaway years. The other is that I know in the UK, although more violent than the USA (as a recent study showed) at least when we fall out of the bars drunk we fight with our fists and not guns. With our love of alcohol and a plentiful supply of guns we would see every town high street full of dead bodies every weekend, and that's not even thinking about our dodgy police who I have personally seen battering people for no good reason.

4. America has the most sophisticated and well equipped armed forces in the world. Despite the wishes of the founding fathers that there would be no standing army during peace time it seems the USA has got round this by engaging in a period of permanent war. The armed forces have replaced the militias and does any American think their handgun or automatic would take down an Apache helicopter if they turned on the citizens? What level of weapon should a citizen have anyway? Where does it say they can only have certain types of guns and not RPG's or even anti-aircraft weapons? Where is the line drawn?

However ignore all that and just think that YOU ARE ALREADY LIVING UNDER TYRANNY!

Therefore why crow on about the real reason of the 2nd Amendment when you have done NOTHING to stop the rise of tyranny over the last 18 years.

Ever since 9.11 you have:

Been living under Emergency laws that give the President dictatorial like powers.

Seen the removal of Habeas corpus and the introduction of death without judicial oversight on the Presidents say so.

Witnessed laws passed such as the NDAA that allow the President to assassinate or lock up indefinitely US citizens who he believes pose a threat to the country. As the released MIAC documents showed this includes PATRIOTS, Libertarians, Ron Paul supporters, ex-military and people who believe in the primary law of the USA - the constitution. They are all now to be treated as domestic terrorists!

A surveillance state in which you are monitored on and offline all day long. From your car to your home phone, mobile, shopping purchases to all your computer activities, and all without the need for warrant or due process. Numerous systems from TRAPWIRE to the TSA's naked body scanners, CCTV and now mobile radar vans all capturing your journey from home to work and back. All your Internet traffic has been monitored for ages and now your naked body is monitored as well. All this info is now stored and recorded in real time and then logged in huge city sized databases.

The rise of a two tier state between the super rich and everyone else. A country in which if you hang out with the President you can breach privacy laws, hack computers and never face the threat of imprisonment. But, if you are like Aaron Swartz, and don't have the luxury of a huge drug dealing, terrorist bankster operation behind you like HSBC or you don't own Facebook or Google (both companies who have committed similar hacks and many breaches of privacy) - BUT most importantly have ties with the CIA and NSA, plus their owners get to hang out with the President and other big wigs at Davos and Bilderberg. Then you are looking at 50+ years in prison as Aaron was.

It is now provable that if you are too big to fail you are also too big to prosecute. If you are tool cool to bend over to the state security apparatus as Google, Microsoft and other big Internet companies have all done you are okay, but if you don't like Aaron then you are just a target to be taken down in anyway possible.

Permanent war. Even once bin-Laden has been killed you are still content on wasting trillions of borrowed and made up money to fight a people who have never been beaten and in which 92% of these people don't even know about 9.11 or have even heard of the Twin Towers. 

They just see you as another invader following on from the Soviets and the British Empire and the dozens of other beaten armies that also failed before them. You won't win in the Stan. I would bet a house on it!

Therefore if you don't think that a few of these facts, out of many others I could have listed, on their own reach the bar of tyranny that you are so fond of protecting then what level does the bar have to be raised for you to use to the 2nd Amendment as you see it designed?

Either stop voting for scoundrels and liars OR take people like Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Dennis Kucinich, Gary Johnson, Jill Stein and many other politicians seriously.

These are just a few people from all ends of the political spectrum who believe the US has already entered this realm of tyranny in which the CIA/NSA, banksters and warmongers have already won over the common person and that serious reform is needed to roll back this Amerikan police state.

Either there is no level it can be raised to and you will accept all forms of tyranny and you just need to admit that you really really like your guns and just shooting shit.

OR you honestly believe in the 2nd Amendment.

If it's the latter then I really want to know - what will it take for you to do something?

Amerika, A modern day East Germany

Amerika, A modern day East Germany

By Dark Politricks

The definition of a Police State is:

"A state in which the government exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic, and political life of the people, especially by means of a secret police force."

History shows that mankind has been plagued by authoritarian governments since the dawn of collective governance. We have many instances of governments that fit the definition of a Police State from the East German Stasi, Soviet KGB to the current Chinese government who still utilise whole teams of agents to follow westerners of interest around when they visit the country.

However these countries have all been authoritarian one party states and it has always been presumed that within western democracies the idea of a police state only existed in the nightmares of those sections of society who mistrusted the government no matter what it did.

However with the recent Washington post investigation into the size of the intelligence community within the United States of America it may be successfully argued that the time for nightmares has arrived.

The Washington Post expose looked into the huge expansion of the security services and other intelligence agencies since the attacks of 9/11 and revealed some stunning facts such as:

Some 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs related to counter terrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the United States.

An estimated 854,000 people, nearly 1.5 times as many people as live in Washington, D.C., hold top-secret security clearances.

In Washington and the surrounding area, 33 building complexes for top-secret intelligence work are under construction or have been built since September 2001. Together they occupy the equivalent of almost three Pentagons or 22 U.S. Capitol buildings - about 17 million square feet of space.

In case that second point escapes due attention it means that roughly 1 in every 150 adults within the USA has top secret security clearance and if that many people have the top level clearance how many more have one of the many lower levels? 

It does seem from this study alone that the USA is awash with spooks and spies and as we know from the past ten years of abuse they are not all engaged in fighting the war on terror and looking for the supposed architect of 9/11 Usama bin-Laden.

Instead the government has directed this huge intelligence apparatus onto the people they are supposed to protect and one can only wonder whether this was the original aim in the first place. No democratic country would have ever accepted such a huge intrusion of privacy, destruction of civil liberties and total disregard to the rule of law had the threat of terrorism not existed and been used as the excuse of the century to implement such draconian measures.

Like many governments throughout the ages from Roman times with Julius Caesar, to Hitler and the Reichstag fire, the terrorist attacks of 9/11 were used by politicians to expand the power of the state at the expense of the citizenry using an outside enemy as the excuse. Whether you believe the attacks of 9/11 were staged or not is not the point as it is clear from succeeding events that they were used by the Bush government, and now the Obama administration to increase the power of the government to intrude into the lives of the public.

The main piece of legislation that started the ball rolling towards a Police State was the Patriot Act. This law was rushed through congress without proper consultation and debate and many senators later admitted that they didn't even read the bill. The very suspiciously timed Anthrax attacks on likely opponents of the bill  ensured that the politicians passed through a truly anti-libertarian bill that had been sitting around for years just waiting for the right "event" to occur.

The law expanded the definition of terrorism to include many domestic activities and it enabled the federal government to increase it's surveillance of the public through a systematic warrant-less wire-tapping campaign that trawled through every conceivable piece of electronic information from phone calls, emails, Internet traffic and credit card transactions whilst it built up a huge database of real time events in which it hoped to find signs of terrorist connections in a huge game of connect the dots.

The loosening of the terms that define what is and not terrorism should be a chilling warning to anyone concerned with the war on terror. We have seen here in the UK how the numerous anti terrorism laws have been misused by Police officers to prevent photographers from recording police assaults on the streets and in preventing legitimate protest. 

We have also seen our government abuse powers that were supposedly only there for exceptional purposes for non exceptional means such as when the UK froze the bank accounts of Iceland during the banking crisis.

The US government has now gone one step further in it's expansion of the war of terror against it's own citizens by enacting presidential powers that allow for the assassination of US born citizens throughout the world. The US government it seems is now perfectly willing to execute it's own citizens if they believe them to be linked to terrorism. No trial is required to contest any evidence that may or may not exist and the defendant is not allowed to answer any charges to a jury of his peers. If the government deems you to be a terrorist with it's newly relaxed definition of what constitutes terrorism then you may be assassinated.

Not only is the US government cranking up the war on terror by attacking those citizens it decides fall into the category of domestic or foreign terrorist it is also trying to crack down on the only forum in which free speech and dissent of government still exists e.g the internet.

In an age in which the dying print media is being deserted en mass and those that control it are scared of losing a major propaganda tool the attacks on the alternative media have increased tenfold. Claims that the old media is in the pocket of government and not doing it's job properly have increased since the 9/11 attacks and the war in Iraq. This was a war which was miss-sold to the public with the help of national newspapers prepared to look the other way as the government used them to drip feed false stories to a public who knew no better.

The only real voices of opposition are to be found in the blogosphere and the powers that be hate that they cannot control the news in the same way as they could buy off newspaper owners, editors and journalists. Instead of only worrying about a dozen or so national newspapers the government has to contend with millions of blogs and alternative news sites and the only tactic that would work is one that limits ownership of such a site or makes the available content illegal in some way or other. This is why there are now calls to regulate Internet bloggers such as the bill being brought forward by Bruce Patterson.

Obama's Information Czar, Cass Sunstein, has already wrote about his desire to crack down on blogs and sites that dare discuss topics that the government deems as conspiracy theory. This would include discussion of alternative theories surrounding the 9/11 attacks, or concluding that the JFK assassination involved more hit-men than Lee Harvey Oswald on his own. In fact it would cover anything that the government might deem beyond the limits of discussion by those who want to look beyond the official story immediately rolled out whenever a high crime is committed.

Then there are bills being introduced such as Senator Joe Lieberman’s 197-page Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, which aims to mimic China’s firewall and which would give the President powers to control IT networks and the flow of information in times of emergency such as a cyber attack.

Disabling the internet may be an extreme option to consider but deleting content that is deemed unsuitable is already a daily occurrence. With the merger of leading internet companies such as Google and the CIA it has become very easy for media deemed anti government to be pulled from sites such as YouTube or for search results to be tweaked to hide popular anti government search terms.

We already know how Google and the NSA are working together since the attack on Google by China earlier this year and there have also been claims that the CIA helped fund Google when it was starting up.

With all these links to the intelligence agencies it can safely be assumed that Google's massive database of user traffic, search terms, blogs, emails, videos and much more is seen as a prized asset by the intelligence community and who knows at what level they already co-operate when it comes to sharing data.

Whereas old school Police States were very obvious in their surveillance and monitoring techniques the modern day Amerika has no need to put half a dozen handlers onto someone they wish to monitor (not that they don't have the staff) as through their close links with Google and Microsoft and their new plans to access private information without a warrant they can literally let the information come to them.

We live in a semi virtual world where an online persona is just as important as your real one and due to the amount of social time people spend on social networking sites and the dependence of key infrastructure on the Internet means that control of the network literally can mean control over society.

We already know our governments monitor all our phone calls through the ECHELON system and there is no technical or it seems legal limitation preventing them from analysing every single packet of data transferred over the Internet if they so wished.

Therefore due to a political class that seems to be bought and paid for by those wanting to maintain the war on terror and the surveillance society it has sprung up at home there seems little hope of stopping the high tech police state we are now living in. The solutions are available to those with the means to implement them but in the end it comes down to a choice between a public uprising against the state or a change in the political class running it.

With elections in America due very soon it is a great opportunity to show the ruling elite that the public is not prepared to swap liberty and freedom for fear and the police state that enables it. Judge Napolitano always asks his guests the following question:

"which is more threatening to our way of live, terrorism or an ever increasing secretive and authoritarian state?"

The answer is clearly the latter and we need to elect officials that believe so too.

Only when the phony war on terror is seen for what it is can we start to rollback all the police state apparatus that has build up around us over the last decade. A large section of the population has fallen for the tricks played out by power hungry politicians throughout history and willingly handed over liberty in return for perceived security. 

The time has come to realise this was a false trade and that Thomas Jefferson was correct when he said:

“Those who would trade safety for freedom deserve neither.”

Israel Massacre Kids and Women with Snipers - World Says Nothing

Israel Massacre Kids and Women with Snipers - World Says Nothing

By Dark Politricks

As Israel carries on massacring women, children and disabled people, using the excuse that they were all Hamas, when that was plainly wrong.

There may have been some Hamas fighters in the protest but for snipers to kill women and kids is just disgusting and I expect a security council vote and veto by the USA as they always do.

The protest is about their storage in the biggest open air prison on earth and Israel is using the excuses of Syrian fire, people with burning tyres attacking them (against one of the most sophisticated armies in the world), Hamas organisation when it was the adversary of their displacement.

Why do we let Israel get away with this?

Why does the US shut their mouth - the Saudi Petrodollar agreement, Israels hold over the US Congress and the fact that the US thinks that it and Israel can just start wars and kill innocent people with no recompense.

The USA is the most dangerous country in the world. They believe they can just enter other countries and bomb them for the sake of Israel or mineral resources.

No other country does this.

Others may follow along the US Axis of War like the UK, French and Israelis but now that Iran has stopped selling it's oil in US dollars (the Petrodollar), the US press and UK press are going to be pushing hard on Iran and maybe even going so far as to start a war with Iran as they have with previous nations who dared stop using the petrodollar. This is where all oil has to be bought in dollars, so countries have to transfer first from their own currency to US money before buying the oil.

In return Saudi Arabia, a 7th century hell hole that jails and whips gang raped women, and sends US armaments, that they buy in the billions, to Jihadists in Syria and other nations, and send Wahabist terrorists across the world.

Saudi Arabia and Israel want to stop Iran becoming a strong player in the region, however they forget that it was the war in Iraq that was holding a balance between Kurds, Sunnis and the Shi'ites in the south near Iran.

Iran shouldn't forget what happened when Iraq and Libya stopped using the dollar, they used false flags and WMD BS, bombings before UN reports their data to be incorrect like the recent Syrian attack and then convince the masses on their owned MSM news channels to follow along.

Killing hundreds of thousands of people, leaving Libya a terrorist playground, turning Iraq and Syria into a bombed out mess, the creation of ISIS which even the CIA funnels weapons from Libya to Syria to, before training their supposed enemy to fight President Assad and Russia.

If we had any morals at all we would be bombing Saudi Arabia and forcing Israel to stop their massacres on innocent people.

However we make money from war, our arms industries are some of the most profitable in the world. Why stop the Saudis and US massacring the poorest nation on the planet, causing disease and famine in Yemen for morals.

It seems only the US can dictate moral behaviour, start preemptive wars which they banned after Nuremberg and drop freedom and democracy from the air on the end of a drone when they don't even have it at home.

The UK has already started printing stories about English prisoners in Iranian jails and US news shows attack Palestinians for daring to try and break out of their open air prison.

I mean a man killed by a sniper sitting in a wheelchair must have been a suicide bomber waiting to attack....

I have here a list of Jimmy Dore Videos which lay it out for you.

The Jimmy Dore Show

Watch the The Jimmy Dore Show.

Remember The Pentagon Plane Attack Impossibilities

Remember The Pentagon Plane Attack Impossibilities

By Dark Politricks

I have been into 9.11 almost as soon as I saw it on the TV screens of secretaries at my work in 2001. I always thought the "Pentagon Plane was really a missile" story was a fake or government spined lie to discredit the 9.11 Truth movement. If the witnesses at the WTC, thousands who saw a plane or two hit the Twin Towers then why shouldn't the witnesses at the Pentagon be believed just as much.

However after examining it more extensively and with Pilots for 911Truth getting FOI data showing that the plane actually flew over the building and listening to talks from people who saw no plane debris at the "official" impact site, I changed my mind.

The Plane simply does not fit and cannot fly at 550 mph that low to the ground, and this is the supposed exit point the aluminium plane managed to punch through 3 rings of reinforced concrete walls. 

It is impossible for a plane to fly that low, and punch through three rings of concrete building. 

From the video given out to the public only after numerous FOI requests, we are expected to believe that a Boeing 757 managed to fly only a few feet off the ground horizontally, for some time, without down-force crashing it into the ground or it's engines, and for it's huge body to disappear into a small hole on the first floor of the Pentagon before punching it's way through 3 re-enforced walls of concrete and coming out of a small exit hole 3 rings later.

Witnesses, TV crew and employees spoke about the lack of debris, bodies, bags and engine parts when they walked through this 3 ring puncture to escape.

I have a detailed talk from Barbara Honegger, an ex Reagan official who appears in this short video, and I think she puts the pieces together well.

She talks about 2 attacks at the site which get around the problems of the first pictures of pristine grass outside the impact zone and no debris and if you watch her speech in the article she explains it as 2 attacks.

One by a drone, coloured to look like a plane and then the main attack at a different section of the building which was a bomb. This was why there was no debris outside or plane engines buried 10 feet in the ground as they would have been if flying that low to the ground to hit the first floor.

Problems with the official story include:

1. The incompetence of the pilot supposedly at the wings of the 757 to make such a complex maneuver. Something experienced pilots would need many attempts on simulators to get anywhere near right.

2. The official path of the plane does not fit with the witness evidence or the broken light poles on the road.

3. A plane cannot fly at 550 mph at only a few feet off the ground which is required to hit the 1st floor "official impact zone".

4. If you watch this video of a test to see what a plane would do a re-enforced concrete wall like the Pentagon had you will see that the possibility of an aluminium plane using kinetic energy would not punch through 3 walls but be destroyed into tiny bits on the first impact. Notice in the video the plane is on train tracks due to the fact you cannot fly a plane that low to the ground at that speed.

So from all the CCTV that the FBI confiscated which could have caught the plane, drone, missile, or flock of concrete beaked seagulls hit the Pentagon we got a short clip from a CCTV camera that showed a few frames that showed no plane and an explosion.

The FBI must know what happened from other CCTV and their threats to staff who went public but they themselves are as corrupt as every part of the US Oligarchy.

The plane did not nose dive down into the first floor it apparently flew parallel to the ground for a good few hundred yards. This is something when I asked my father who worked for one of the UK's top Air Research Facilities as a chief engineer who designed plane engines how difficult it would be. He said "very", and "almost impossible".

He said the same as many other pilots who said that just the huge turn in the air and path the plane took was impossible for this type of plane.

Many ex military men and pilots have come out to say this. John Lear tried to sue the Government and in his affidavit he explains how planes flying at 550 mph (roughly) could not be controlled in the manner they were as they are designed as cruise ships in the sky at 40,000 feet not Jet fighters performing exotic turns at low altitude.

Conspiracies like the official 9.11 Report show that.

1. The Commissioners lied to the public about outside funding from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia when asked numerous times due to the release of the 28/29 pages which admits Saudi Involvement in the attack.

2. Why did the extensive news coverage on the day about white vans being stopped on the Washington Bridge with Israeli Mossad agents inside along with box cutters and bombs not heard about after the event on the day?

3. How did the "Dancing Israelis" know to park their van across the Jersey river to get pictures and footage of the first plane hitting the WTC. They are on record saying they were "Sent to document the event", so how did they know the event would even happen.

4. Whatever turned the WTC into dust, metal beams just frazzling up as they fell, the lack of seismic data from the buildings hitting the floor, toasted cars a block away with perfectly fine paper from the WTC offices floating about. Nano thermate particles (or rust) found in the huge dust cloud that covered NYC for days and is now giving first responders cancers, from asbestos and other concrete particles or maybe radiation from a mini nuke under the towers as Russian agent and material witness Dimitri Khalezov believes is unimportant. We know from the extensive library of firemen, police, WTC workers and people like William Rodriguez, a janitor who helped many people escape and described multiple explosions below and above him that there was probably a number of fail safe techniques used to ensure the towers fell that day.

These recent articles are all updates for the upcoming 9.11 anniversary. You can find many more on the site.

(I have to constantly find new videos and images for this article due to YouTube taking them down - why, I d0n't know, it's history. However it is a constant battle to keep this page updated)

By Dark Politricks

© 2018 Dark Politricks