DHS Trains to Shoot Pregnant Women, Old Men, Children With Guns (see photos)

How much more evidence do you need?

These targets (see images below) are used to train DHS employees to shoot American citizens and they depict pregnant women, old men, children and even young moms with guns. The purpose of the targets, according to the company that sells them, is to “eliminate any hesitation” that U.S. government employees might normally feel in shooting to kill pregnant women, children and old men. (I’m not making this up. The government’s plan to murder Americans is now right out in the open…)

Here are the images of the cardboard targets.

 

READ MORE: http://www.naturalnews.com/039177_gun_range_targets_pregnant_women_homeland_security.html

 

If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight?

Posted by Dean Garrison

solguns

I feel a tremendous responsibility to write this article though I am a little apprehensive. Thinking about the possibility of rising up against our own government is a frightening thing for many of us. I am not Johnny Rambo and I will be the first to admit that I do not want to die. The reason I feel compelled to write this, however, is simply because I don’t think the average American is equipped with the facts. I feel that a lot of American citizens feel like they have no choice but to surrender their guns if the government comes for them. I blame traditional media sources for this mass brainwash and I carry the responsibility of all small independent bloggers to tell the truth. So my focus today is to lay out your constitutional rights as an American, and let you decide what to do with those rights.

About a month ago I let the “democracy” word slip in a discussion with a fellow blogger. I know better. Americans have been conditioned to use this term. It’s not an accurate term and it never has been a correct term to describe our form of government. The truth is that the United States of America is a constitutional republic. This is similar to a democracy because our representatives are selected by democratic elections, but ultimately our representatives are required to work within the framework of our constitution. In other words, even if 90% of Americans want something that goes against our founding principles, they have no right to call for a violation of constitutional rights.

If you are religious you might choose to think of it this way… Say that members of your congregation decide that mass fornication is a good thing. Do they have the right to change the teachings of your God? The truth is the truth. It doesn’t matter how many people try to stray from it. Did I just compare our founders to God? In a way I did, but please note that I am not trying to insult anyone. For the purpose of the American Government our constitution and founders who wrote it are much like God is to believers. It is the law. It is indisputable.

Our founders did not want a “democracy” for they feared a true democracy was just as dangerous as a monarchy. The founders were highly educated people who were experienced in defending themselves against tyranny. They understood that the constitution could protect the people by limiting the power of anyone to work outside of it much better than a pure system of popularity. A system of checks and balances was set up to help limit corruption of government and also the potential for an “immoral majority” developing within the American People. We have forgotten in this country that we are ultimately ruled by a constitution.

Why is a democracy potentially just as dangerous as a monarchy? Let’s look at something that Benjamin Franklin said because it answers that question more fully and succinctly than I can.

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin

Even 230+ years ago our founders were perceptive enough to realize that democracy was a dangerous form of government. How so? Because the citizens of a country can become just as corrupt as any government. We have seen evidence of this throughout history. Ask Native Americans and African-Americans if this population can become corrupt.

I think in 2012 we are seeing evidence of what Franklin was trying to tell us. Just because a majority of people may support certain ideas it does not mean that those ideas are just. In simple terms, just because most Americans love our president and voted for him, it does not mean that he has the power to go against our constitutional rights.

Next I’d like to review the text of the second amendment. It is very clear. This is the law of this land. So when Senator Feinstein or President Obama talk about taking your guns, you need to think about something. Are they honoring their sworn oath to uphold the constitution?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

supremeThis is a pretty clear statement. The fact is that it took 232 years for the Supreme Court to even rule on this amendment because it has never been successfully challenged. In 2008 a case of Columbia v. Heller the Supreme Court ruled that a handgun ban in Washington D.C. was unconstitutional. One also has to take this into consideration. The Supreme Court supports your right to own guns. If you want to research this decision further you can start here.

For those who try to debate the spirit of the 2nd amendment, they are truly no different from people who will try to take Biblical quotes out of context to try to support their immoral decisions. The founders were very clear on the intent of the 2nd amendment. Let me share a few quick quotes here:

The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. -Thomas Jefferson

Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good. -George Washington

The Constitution shall never be construed….to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. -Samuel Adams

founderspicI could find hundreds of quotes like these. This country was built on the right to bear arms. It was built on the rights of an individual to bear arms, regardless of what his government or neighbor happened to think. This is crystal clear. Ironically the people who voice their opinions against this right have their free speech protected by your guns. Without guns in this country, all other amendments become null and void, simply because “We the People” will lose our power of enforcement.

We need to keep this in mind as our “representatives” try to push gun bans. I don’t care if 99% of people are in support of gun bans (which is far from the case), it is a violation of our constitutional rights, plain and simple.

A constitutional republic protects the rights of the individual even when their ideas are very much  in the minority. If I were the only person in America who believed in the 2nd amendment, I would still be within my rights to call upon it. You would all think I was insane and possibly celebrate if I was gunned down, but in the end I would be the only true American among us.

Our framers were very clear on this. If my government comes to take my guns, they are violating one of my constitutional rights that is covered by the 2nd amendment.

soulonfireIt is not my right, at that point, but my responsibility to respond in the name of liberty. What I am telling you is something that many are trying to soft sell, and many others have tried to avoid putting into print, but I am going to say it. The time for speaking in code is over.

If they come for our guns then it is our constitutional right to put them six feet under. You have the right to kill any representative of this government who tries to tread on your liberty. I am thinking about self-defense and not talking about inciting a revolution. Re-read Jefferson’s quote. He talks about a “last resort.” I am not trying to start a Revolt, I am talking about self-defense. If the day for Revolution comes, when no peaceful options exist, we may have to talk about that as well. None of us wants to think about that, but please understand that a majority can not take away your rights as an American citizen. Only you can choose to give up your rights.

Congress could pass gun ban legislation by a 90%+ margin and it just would not matter. I think some people are very unclear on this. This is the reason we have a Supreme Court, and though I do not doubt that the Supreme Court can also become corrupt, in 2008 they got it right. They supported the constitution. It does not matter what the majority supports because America is not a democracy. A constitutional republic protects the rights of every single citizen, no matter what their “elected servants” say. A majority in America only matters when the constitution is not in play.

I just wrote what every believer in the constitution wants to say, and what every constitutional blogger needs to write. The truth of the matter is that this type of speech is viewed as dangerous and radical or subversive, and it could gain me a world of trouble that I do not want. It is also the truth. To make myself clear I will tell you again. If they come for your guns it is your right to use those guns against them and to kill them. You are protected by our constitution.

Most of the articles I am reading on the subject are trying to give you clues without just coming out and saying it. I understand that because certain things in this country will get you on a list that you don’t want to be on. I may well be on that list. This blog is small and growing so I may not be there yet, but I have dreams. I also have my own list of subversives and anyone who attempts to deny my constitutional rights is on that list.

I am not the “subversive” here, it is the political representatives who are threatening to take away my inalienable rights. If they come to take my guns and I leave a few of them wounded or dead, and I somehow survive, I have zero doubt that I will spend a long time in prison and may face an execution. But I would much rather be a political prisoner than a slave.

If I go down fighting then I was not fighting to harm these human beings. I was simply defending my liberty and yours. It is self-defense and it is what our country was built on. We won our freedom in self-defense. We would not be ruled by a tyrannical government in the 1770′s and we will not be ruled in 2012 by a tyrannical government. There is no difference.

This is a case of right and wrong. As of now the 2nd amendment stands. It has never been repealed. If Feinstein or Barack have a problem with the constitution then they should be removed from office. They are not defending the constitution which they have sworn an oath to protect. It is treasonous to say the least. They would likely say the same about me, but I have the constitution, the founders, and the supreme court on my side. They only have their inflated egos.

I am not writing this to incite people. I am writing this in hopes that somehow I can make a tiny difference. I have no idea how many of my neighbors have the will to defend their constitutional rights. 2%? 20%? I am afraid that 20% is a high number, unfortunately. When push comes to shove many people may give up and submit to being ruled. I believe that our government is banking on this.

What I do know is that this country was founded by people who had balls the size of Texas and Patriotic Americans take shit off of no one, especially our own government. For evidence of that, you might research the Revolutionary War. My question is how many Patriots are left?

I would hope that our officials come to realize that, regardless of our numbers, we still exist because they are calling Patriotic Americans to action. They are making us decide if we want to die free or submit to their rule. I can not tell you where you should stand on that. I do know that it may make the difference between living a life of freedom or slavery.

thinkingYou must start thinking about this because I believe that the day is coming soon and I personally believe it has already been planned. Not all conspiracy theories are hogwash. They may throw down the gauntlet soon and my suggestion is that you prepare yourself to react.

I mean no disrespect to our elected officials but they need to understand that “We the People” will not be disarmed. If they proceed then it is they that are provoking us and we will act accordingly. We are within our rights to do so.

For those who are in support of taking the guns, you need to ask yourself a very important question, and I am not just talking about the politicians, because if you support them, you have chosen your side.

Are you willing to die to take my guns?

Anyone who wants to re-post this on their blog or website is also given permission to do so, so long as nothing is changed in the text of the article, and a link is provided back to Dean Garrison site The D.C. Clothesline.

If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight?

This week on ‘The Hal Lindsey Report’ March 15th, 2013

Hal Lindsey1

Hal-Lindsey  Last week, the junior senator from Kentucky, Rand Paul, stood to his feet in the Senate chamber and began to speak. He said, “I rise today to begin to filibuster John Brennan’s nomination for the CIA. I will speak until I can speak no more.”

Though Senator Paul’s 13 hour filibuster stalled the nomination of Brennan to be the new director of the CIA, his real intention was to direct the public’s attention toward the Administration’s use of weaponized drones. He wanted to force the government to publicly declare that it did not have the right to use drones to kill Americans on American soil.

When he had earlier demanded a response from President Obama, he got the run-around. He told the Senate that he had asked the President, “Can you kill an American on American soil?” He was disappointed in the answer he received. Senator Paul said, “It should have been an easy answer. It’s an easy question. It should have been a resounding, an unequivocal, ‘No.’ The President’s response? He hasn’t killed anyone yet.”

Senator Paul explained his motives, “I wanted to sound an alarm bell from coast to coast. I wanted everybody to know that our Constitution is precious and that no American should be killed by a drone without first being charged with a crime….”

Finally, Attorney-General Eric Holder wrote a letter to Senator Paul. In it, he answered the Senator’s question: “Does the President have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil? The answer to that question is no.”

Between you and me, it’s stunning that anyone even needed to ask the question, or that a government official had to begrudgingly answer it. According to our Constitution, killing an American on American soil — or even “holding” him or her — without due process is NOT an option.

Unfortunately, this is not the America most of us grew up in. So many of the rights and freedoms we have traditionally taken for granted are now being eroded, challenged, or even arbitrarily stolen from us. And most of us are going like sheep to the slaughter — silently and meekly.

Why?

Two reasons. One, we’re afraid. 9/11 left Americans angry and fearful. So fearful that we have allowed our government to slowly dispense with the freedoms and Constitutional safeguards that have been our heritage as Americans.

Sadly, the fear has outlasted the anger.

Two, we’ve become greedy and lazy. To keep the bureaucrats feeding us, subsidizing us, educating us, protecting us, and making us feel like we deserve it, we let them do whatever they want.

Frankly, the amount of power now in the hands of government, especially the federal government, would terrify America’s founders. We are now undoing what they worked so hard to secure for future generations.

This week, I’m going to examine the current status of our rights as Americans by discussing our “Rights and the Bible,” our “Rights and Power,” and our “Rights and Righteousness.”

One last note. As I’m sure you know by now, the Roman Catholic church has a new leader. Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Argentina, was elected last Wednesday evening by the College of Cardinals at the Vatican. He has chosen to be known as Pope Francis. Because of our production schedule, his election occurred too late for me to cover it in this week’s program. We will, however, cover it thoroughly on next week’s show.

Don’t miss this week’s Report on TBN, Daystar, CPM Network, The Word Network, various local stations, http://www.hallindsey.com or http://www.hischannel.com. Check your local listings.

God Bless,                  Hal-LindseyHal Lindsey
mail: HLMM, P.O. Box 470470, Tulsa, OK 74147
email: comments@hallindsey.com
web: http://www.hallindsey.com

Pope FrancisWikipedia: Francis is the 266th and current pope of the Catholic Church, elected on 13 March 2013.

Homeland Security Drones Designed to Identify Civilians Carrying Guns

Recently uncovered government documents reveal that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) unmanned Predator B drone fleet has been custom designed to identify civilians carrying guns and track cell phone signals.

“I am very concerned that this technology will be used against law-abiding American firearms owners,” said founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation, Alan Gottlieb. “This could violate Fourth Amendment rights as well as Second Amendment rights.”

READ MORE: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/03/05/Homeland-Security-Drones-Designed-To-Identify-Civilians-Carrying-Guns

 

Should Drones Be Used In American Airspace?

Drone   Drones are becoming more and more a part of the way America does business – they have been used in modern day warfare to target those believed to be dangerous or a threat to the security of the United States, but very soon they will be a permanent fixture on America’s landscape. The FAA has been adopting new rules to expand the use of small drones domestically, and by 2013 UAVs are expected to dominate the country’s airspace. Trevor Timm of the Electronic Frontier Foundation brings his take on whether Americans should worry about what law enforcement is doing.



A polarizing debate is emerging over whether the unmanned aerial vehicles, commonly referred to as “drones,” should be allowed into U.S. airspace for use by local law enforcement and private businesses.

“No longer a tool used strictly by the military to take out terrorists overseas, drones of all shapes and sizes will soon be in our skies here at home for surveillance missions by local police departments, energy companies looking to build pipelines and farmers looking to feed thirsty crops,” CNET’s Jeff Glor reported Wednesday.

Drone technology may already be a billion-dollar industry, but as Ryan Gallagher blogged Tuesday for Slate, “One of the most significant barriers the industry faces is undoubtedly public opposition. There are critics on all sides of the political spectrum. In the United States, that includes not only campaign groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU, but also libertarian Fox News firebrands.”

An industry trade group aimed to preempt the growing controversy by releasing the first-ever code of conduct for the operation of drone aircraft earlier this week. “The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International said Monday that the recommendations for ‘safe, non-intrusive operation’ are meant to guide operators and reassure a public leery of the possibility of spy drones flying undetected over their homes,” Kevin Begos wrote for the Associated Press.

But as CBS News reported, the dialogue about domestic drone usage took an unexpected turn when news broke that a University of Texas professor and his students “were able to hack into (a civilian) drone’s GPS signals (and) later, in an exercise done in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security at White Sands, N.M., they were even able to make the drone land.”

ABC News columnist Lee Dye responded to the recent development and the security issues it inevitably raises by noting how soon drones are slated to dot American airspace: “There isn’t a lot of time to fix this problem. Congress has mandated that the Federal Aviation Administration come up with the rules to allow civilian drones in U.S. airspace by 2015. And after that, they could be everywhere.”

Wired’s Danger Room national security blog reported that the U.S. military is already operating 64 drone bases in America, with another 22 in the planning stages. (This map shows the Army is already operating drones out of Dugway, Utah, with plans in place for Special Operations Command to begin launching drones from Camp Williams at some future date.)

DRONES Over The U.S. – Maker wonders why people are so worried: http://youtu.be/CjdhqyUVFq8

Debate over use of drones in American airspace:
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2183302850001/debate-over-use-of-drones-in-american-airspace/?playlist_id=938973798001

FAA takes major step in expanding drone use in America — RT

RQ-4 Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle  (Reuters)

US President Barack Obama has approved legislation that is expected to immediately accelerate the use of domestic surveillance drones within the United States.

On Thursday, Pres. Obama signed the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, a bill that the Federal Aviation Administration’s AnneMarie Ternay describes as containing requirements for integrating unmanned aircraft systems and vehicles such as drones into the national airspace starting immediately.

With the president’s approval this week, the FAA has already begun soliciting proposals from cities across the country that are interested in becoming one of six soon-to-be established test sites where drones and UAVs will be sent into the sky as America takes the next step towards accepting the latest generation of aircraft.

The FAA says that locations in over 30 states have already showed interest in the program. Soon the agency will be tasked with picking a mere half-dozen locations so that drones can formally be introduced into official US airspace and not just strips of sky above designated areas.

FAA takes major step in expanding drone use in America — RT.

11 Body Parts Defense Researchers Will Use to Track You

The Ear

Cell phones that can identify you by how you walk. Fingerprint scanners that work from 25 feet away. Radars that pick up your heartbeat from behind concrete walls. Algorithms that can tell identical twins apart. Eyebrows and earlobes that give you away.A new generation of technologies is emerging that can identify you by your physiology. And unlike the old crop of biometric systems, you don’t need to be right up close to the scanner in order to be identified. If they work as advertised, they may be able to identify you without you ever knowing you’ve been spotted.

Read More: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/01/biometrics/

New GenerationWikipedia: "New Generation" is the third and final single from the album Dog Man Star by Suede, released on January 30, 1995, on Nude Records.

5 creepiest surveillance tactics

5 creepiest surveillance tactics

5 creepiest surveillance tactics – Salon.com.

CIA claims it needs more drones — RT

Drone Wars

CIA claims it needs more drones — RT.

One-third of Americans fear drones — RT

An unmanned Predator drone

One-third of Americans fear drones — RT.