While simultaneously launching effort to disarm the American people
Paul Joseph Watson
January 11, 2013
Despite launching a gun control agenda that threatens to disarm the American people, President Obama has signed a bill that would afford him armed Secret Service protection for life.
“The legislation, crafted by Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina, rolls back a mid-1990s law that imposed a 10-year limit on Secret Service protection for former presidents. Bush would have been the first former commander in chief affected,” reports Yahoo News.
The new bill, which will cost American taxpayers millions of dollars, is a re-instatement of a 1965 law which will see presidents protected for life as well as their children up to age 16.
The irony of Obama seeking to surround himself with armed men for the rest of his life while simultaneously working to disarm the American people via a gun control agenda that is likely to be enforced via executive decree represents the height of hypocrisy.
But it’s not the first time that Obama has lauded the notion of responsible Americans using firearms to protect himself and his family while concurrently eviscerating that very same right for the American people.
During an ABC Nightline interview broadcast on December 26 yet recorded before the Sandy Hook shooting, Obama said one of the benefits of his re-election was the ability “to have men with guns around at all times,” in order to protect his daughters.
In addition, the school attended by Obama’s daughters in Washington D.C. has no less than 11 armed security guards on duty at all times, yet the idea of arming teachers and school officials to prevent school massacres has been dismissed by gun control advocates who want school campuses to remain “gun free zones” where victims are disarmed and shooters are free to carry out their rampage unimpeded.
The hypocrisy of gun control advocates who feverishly work to create victim disarmament yet surround themselves with armed men is rampant amongst the political class.
As we reported last month, despite in the same year calling for “Mr. and Mrs. America” to “turn in” their guns, California Senator Dianne Feinstein, author of a draconian bill set to be introduced later this month that would treat gun owners like sex offenders, admitted to carrying a concealed weapon for her own protection after she was threatened by a terrorist group.
Other prominent gun control advocates such as Mayor Michael Bloomberg have also aggressively pushed to disarm Americans while themselves employing armed bodyguards at all times.
Michael Moore, another vehement proponent for gun control, also has armed bodyguards, one of whom was arrested for carrying an unlicensed weapon at in New York’s JFK airport back in 2005.
A White House petition created at the end of last month calls for making the White House and all federal buildings gun free zones. “If the government believes gun free zones are a solution for citizens, the same standard should apply to government servants and employees,” states the petition, which currently has over 12,000 signatures.
(List of United States federal legislation, 2001-present)
The Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009 (Pub.L. 111-22) is a recently enacted public law in the United States. On May 20, 2009, the Senate bill was signed into law by President Barack Obama. The stated purpose of the act, a product of the 111th United States Congress, was to allow bankruptcy judges to modify mortgages on primary residences, among other purposes; however, that provision was dropped in the Senate and is not included in the version that was eventually signed into law. In addition, the bill amends the Hope for Homeowners Program as well as provide additional provisions to help borrowers avoid foreclosure.
On May 20, 2009, President Obama signed the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act into law (Pub.L. 111-22), reauthorizing HUD’s Homeless Assistance programs. It was included as part of the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009. The HEARTH Act allows for the prevention of homelessness, rapid re-housing, consolidation of housing programs, and new homeless categories. In the eighteen months after the bill’s signing, HUD must make regulations implementing this new McKinney program. 
In late 2009, some homeless advocacy organizations, such as the National Coalition for the Homeless, reported and published perceived problems with the HEARTH Act of 2009 as a HUD McKinney-Vento Reauthorization bill, especially with regard to privacy, definitional ineligibility, community roles, and restrictions on eligibile activities.
(These “journalists” have no clues about the U.S. Constitution, the histories of tyrannies, the New World Order, Agenda 21, false flag operations, CIA mind-control experiments, and psyops. None has independently investigated the Aurora, Sikh Temple, or Newtown shootings, much less 9/11. These are not journalists, but spoon-fed gossipers who need to get off their rears and get out in the field and to their jobs properly. DW)
Journalists react in shock to Drudge Report header featuring Hitler and Stalin
Shocked journalists this afternoon were quick to react to the Drudge Report’s controversial header photo comparing President Obama to Hitler and Stalin. The item linked to a Weekly Standard article reporting that President Obama was willing to address the gun issue with an executive order.
“Hitler and Stalin!” exclaimed BuzzFeed Editor Ben Smith on Twitter alerting most of his followers by linking directly to the Drudge Report.
“Our right is nuttier than your right (US to 193 countries),” wrote the Al-Monitor’s Laura Rozen.
The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent begged his followers not to talk about or visit the Drudge Report.
“Dear everyone: Talking about how Drudge’s visuals are ruse to get attention = giving Drudge attention,” he wrote.
“Also, don’t link to Drudge – link to twitpic,” the Washington Post’s James Downie added.
“Why didn’t @Drudge just go all the way and put Obama’s photo between Adolph and Josef?” asked Michael Rosten, a social media editor for the New York Times.
“The new gold standard in Godwin’s Law violations,” wrote Business Insider’s Joseph Weisenthal in reaction to the picture.
“Seriously Drudge?” asked Newsweek’s Michael Moynihan who added a link to one of his own columns, “Someone needs to read my @tabletmag column.”
“Yep, Obama is just like Hitler and Stalin by trying to clean up databases on gun purchases and violence,” Sam Stein from the Huffington Post tweeted sarcastically.
“Has the Drudge Report ever been Drudgier than it is right now?” tweeted The Washington City Paper’s Mike Madden.
“Drudge thinks that there hasn’t been enough Drudge talk lately,” surmised Mike Memoli a reporter in the Tribune/LA Times DC Bureau.
“Really? Drudge is shocking people?” asked Roll Call’s David Druckersarcastically. “C’mon.”
“Whoa. Drudge sending a message today. Wow,” tweeted Breitbart.com’s Matthew Boyle.
“So Drudge is right now comparing President Obama to Hitler and Stalin on his homepage,” reported John Avlon, a Senior Columnist for Newsweek & The Daily Beast.
“Current splash on Drudge Report should satisfy the entirety of their mouthbreather audience,” tweeted the Huffington Post’s Drew Guarini.
“Disgusting,” tweeted The Huffington Post’s Amanda Terkel retweeting a Teletubbies parody of the controversial headline tweeted by the @HuffPostHill account. The message read: “Drudge has crossed the line: pic.twitter.com/BYCn6MPE”
Americans, never give up your guns
By Stanislav Mishin
These days, there are few things to admire about the socialist, bankrupt and culturally degenerating USA, but at least so far, one thing remains: the right to bear arms and use deadly force to defend one’s self and possessions.
This will probably come as a total shock to most of my Western readers, but at one point, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on earth. This was, of course, when we were free under the Tsar. Weapons, from swords and spears to pistols, rifles and shotguns were everywhere, common items. People carried them concealed, they carried them holstered. Fighting knives were a prominent part of many traditional attires and those little tubes criss crossing on the costumes of Cossacks and various Caucasian peoples? Well those are bullet holders for rifles.
Various armies, such as the Poles, during the Смута (Times of Troubles), or Napoleon, or the Germans even as the Tsarist state collapsed under the weight of WW1 and Wall Street monies, found that holding Russian lands was much much harder than taking them, and taking was no easy walk in the park but a bloodbath all its own. In holding, one faced an extremely well armed and aggressive population Hellbent on exterminating or driving out the aggressor.
This well-armed population was what allowed the various White factions to rise up, no matter how disorganized politically and militarily they were in 1918 and wage a savage civil war against the Reds. It should be noted that many of these armies were armed peasants, villagers, farmers and merchants, protecting their own. If it had not been for Washington’s clandestine support of and for the Reds, history would have gone quite differently.
Moscow fell, for example, not from a lack of weapons to defend it, but from the lying guile of the Reds. Ten thousand Reds took Moscow and were opposed only by some few hundreds of officer cadets and their instructors. Even then the battle was fierce and losses high. However, in the city alone, at that time, lived over 30,000 military officers (both active and retired), all with their own issued weapons and ammunition, plus tens of thousands of other citizens who were armed. The Soviets promised to leave them all alone if they did not intervene. They did not [intervene], and for that were asked afterwards to come register themselves and their weapons: where they were promptly shot.
Of course being savages, murderers and liars does not mean being stupid and the Reds learned from their Civil War experience. One of the first things they did was to disarm the population. From that point, mass repression, mass arrests, mass deportations, mass murder, mass starvation were all a safe game for the powers that were. The worst they had to fear was a pitchfork in the guts or a knife in the back or the occasional hunting rifle. Not much for soldiers.
To this day, with the Soviet Union now dead 21 years, with a whole generation born and raised to adulthood without the SU, we are still denied our basic and traditional rights to self-defense. Why? We are told that everyone would just start shooting each other and crime would be everywhere….but criminals are still armed and still murdering and too often, especially in the far regions, those criminals wear the uniforms of the police. The fact that everyone would start shooting is also laughable when statistics are examined.
While President Putin pushes through reforms, the local authorities, especially in our vast hinterland, do not feel they need to act like they work for the people. They do as they please, a tyrannical class who knows they have absolutely nothing to fear from a relatively unarmed population. This in turn breeds not respect but absolute contempt and often enough, criminal abuse.
For those of us fighting for our traditional rights, the US 2nd Amendment is a rare light in an ever-darkening room. Governments will use the excuse of trying to protect the people from maniacs and crime, but are in reality, it is the bureaucrats protecting their power and position. In all cases where guns are banned, gun crime continues and often increases. As for maniacs, be it nuts with cars (NYC, Chapel Hill NC), swords (Japan), knives (China) or home-made bombs (everywhere), insane people strike. They throw acid (Pakistan, UK), they throw fire bombs (France), they attack. What is worse, is, that the best way to stop a maniac is not psychology or jail or “talking to them.” It is a bullet in the head, that is why they are a maniac, because they are incapable of living in reality or stopping themselves.
The excuse that people will start shooting each other is also plain and silly. So it is our politicians saying that our society is full of incapable adolescents who can never be trusted? Then, please explain how we can trust them or the police, who themselves grew up and came from the same culture?
No, it is about power and a total power over the people. There is a lot of desire to bad -mouth the Tsar, particularly by the Communists, who claim he was a tyrant, and yet under him we were armed, and under the progressives, disarmed. Do not be fooled by a belief that progressives, leftists hate guns. Oh, no, they do not. What they hate is guns in the hands of those who are not marching in lock step of their ideology. They hate guns in the hands of those who think for themselves and do not obey without question. They hate guns in those whom they have slated for a barrel to the back of the ear.
So, do not fall for the false promises and do not extinguish the light that is left to allow humanity a measure of self respect.
The article reprinted with the kind permission from the author and originally appears on his blog, Mat Rodina