King David, the word records, was a man after God's own heart.
And when he had removed him, [Saul] he raised up unto them David to be their king; to whom also he gave testimony, and said, I have found David the son of Jesse, a man after mine own heart, which shall fulfil all my will.
This verse could not be any clearer, any more plainly written - David was a man after God's own heart, who would fulfil all God's will. With this in mind, we will take a brief look at David's military life. As David was a warrior, as well as a man after God's own heart, we should therefore be able to glimpse in his life a little of what God thinks regarding military intelligence.
1 Samuel 17:1-3
Now the Philistines gathered together their armies to battle, and were gathered together at Shochoh, which belongeth to Judah, and pitched between Shochoh and Azekah, in Ephesdammim.
And Saul and the men of Israel were gathered together, and pitched by the valley of Elah, and set the battle in array against the Philistines.
And the Philistines stood on a mountain on the one side, and Israel stood on a mountain on the other side: and there was a valley between them.
Israel was under attack from the Philistines. Saul and the men of Israel gathered their armies and headed out to take them on in battle. This was God's people going out to battle, therefore, we can conclude that the right to self-defence is an inalienable human right built into the fabric of life. If God did not want his people going out to fight the Philistines here, he would have said so. If you want human rights, then start right here, with the God-given right to self-defence. Israel went to war to protect themselves.
1 Samuel 17:4-10
And there went out a champion out of the camp of the Philistines, named Goliath, of Gath, whose height was six cubits and a span.
And he had an helmet of brass upon his head, and he was armed with a coat of mail; and the weight of the coat was five thousand shekels of brass.
And he had greaves of brass upon his legs, and a target of brass between his shoulders.
And the staff of his spear was like a weaver's beam; and his spear's head weighed six hundred shekels of iron: and one bearing a shield went before him.
And he stood and cried unto the armies of Israel, and said unto them, Why are ye come out to set your battle in array? am not I a Philistine, and ye servants to Saul? choose you a man for you, and let him come down to me.
If he be able to fight with me, and to kill me, then will we be your servants: but if I prevail against him, and kill him, then shall ye be our servants, and serve us.
And the Philistine said, I defy the armies of Israel this day; give me a man, that we may fight together.
Goliath was so well trained in the arts of war and hand-to-hand combat, and so well equipped with the latest weaponry and body armour, that he had the confidence to stand single handedly in front of an entire army and shout his fat mouth off at God's people.
1 Samuel 17:11
When Saul and all Israel heard those words of the Philistine, they were dismayed, and greatly afraid.
Fear is our greatest enemy, not the Goliaths of the world, as we shall see.
1 Samuel 17:12-25
Now David was the son of that Ephrathite of Bethlehemjudah, whose name was Jesse; and he had eight sons: and the man went among men for an old man in the days of Saul.
And the three eldest sons of Jesse went and followed Saul to the battle: and the names of his three sons that went to the battle were Eliab the firstborn, and next unto him Abinadab, and the third Shammah.
And David was the youngest: and the three eldest followed Saul.
But David went and returned from Saul to feed his father's sheep at Bethlehem.
And the Philistine drew near morning and evening, and presented himself forty days.
And Jesse said unto David his son, Take now for thy brethren an ephah of this parched corn, and these ten loaves, and run to the camp to thy brethren;
And carry these ten cheeses unto the captain of their thousand, and look how thy brethren fare, and take their pledge.
Now Saul, and they, and all the men of Israel, were in the valley of Elah, fighting with the Philistines.
And David rose up early in the morning, and left the sheep with a keeper, and took, and went, as Jesse had commanded him; and he came to the trench, as the host was going forth to the fight, and shouted for the battle.
For Israel and the Philistines had put the battle in array, army against army.
And David left his carriage in the hand of the keeper of the carriage, and ran into the army, and came and saluted his brethren.
And as he talked with them, behold, there came up the champion, the Philistine of Gath, Goliath by name, out of the armies of the Philistines, and spake according to the same words: and David heard them.
And all the men of Israel, when they saw the man, fled from him, and were sore afraid.
And the men of Israel said, Have ye seen this man that is come up? surely to defy Israel is he come up: and it shall be, that the man who killeth him, the king will enrich him with great riches, and will give him his daughter, and make his father's house free in Israel.
At this point in his life, David was a teenager, probably around sixteen or seventeen years old. His father had sent him to see how his brothers were doing and to deliver mail and gifts from the family. While he was there, he witnessed Goliath's ultimatum. After watching with dismay Israel's fearful response, his blood boiled.
1 Samuel 17:26
And David spake to the men that stood by him, saying, What shall be done to the man that killeth this Philistine, and taketh away the reproach from Israel? for who is this uncircumcised Philistine, that he should defy the armies of the living God?
Calling Goliath an uncircumcised Philistine was about the most vehement curse David could have uttered. Nothing in our culture comes close to the disdain, contempt, and anger he felt for this Philistine.
1 Samuel 17:31-37
And when the words were heard which David spake, they rehearsed them before Saul: and he sent for him.
And David said to Saul, Let no man's heart fail because of him; thy servant will go and fight with this Philistine.
And Saul said to David, Thou art not able to go against this Philistine to fight with him: for thou art but a youth, and he a man of war from his youth.
And David said unto Saul, Thy servant kept his father's sheep, and there came a lion, and a bear, and took a lamb out of the flock:
And I went out after him, and smote him, and delivered it out of his mouth: and when he arose against me, I caught him by his beard, and smote him, and slew him.
Thy servant slew both the lion and the bear: and this uncircumcised Philistine shall be as one of them, seeing he hath defied the armies of the living God.
David said moreover, The LORD that delivered me out of the paw of the lion, and out of the paw of the bear, he will deliver me out of the hand of this Philistine. And Saul said unto David, Go, and the LORD be with thee.
David may have been a teenager, but make no mistake, he was already a warrior. Years looking after his father's sheep in the wild countryside, protecting them from savage animals had taught him a few skills in hand-to-hand combat, including being master of the sling, a deadly weapon at close range. He knew his weapon and he knew how to use it. He had seen Goliath, and he knew he could take him down. It was not recklessness or stupidity, he knew he had the hand-to-hand combat training and experience to take the guy down, and he knew that God was with him. That's what you call an unbeatable mindset.
1 Samuel 17:38,39
And Saul armed David with his armour, and he put an helmet of brass upon his head; also he armed him with a coat of mail.
And David girded his sword upon his armour, and he assayed [hesitated] to go; for he had not proved it. And David said unto Saul, I cannot go with these; for I have not proved them. And David put them off him.
These two verses simply state that David was uncomfortable with the latest body armour and weaponry because he'd had no training with them. They would slow him down and hinder him. We hear that many times today from our Special Forces, who rightly maintain that weighing themselves down with the latest heavy body armour could jeopardise operations where stealth and agility are of paramount importance. David knew he needed to be agile and fleet of foot to do the job so he put the ungainly and cumbersome armour and weapons from him. Instead, he took his staff, his sling, and selected five smooth stones from a nearby brook as ammunition.
1 Samuel 17:40-44
And he took his staff in his hand, and chose him five smooth stones out of the brook, and put them in a shepherd's bag which he had, even in a scrip; and his sling was in his hand: and he drew near to the Philistine.
And the Philistine came on and drew near unto David; and the man that bare the shield went before him.
And when the Philistine looked about, and saw David, he disdained him: for he was but a youth, and ruddy, and of a fair countenance.
And the Philistine said unto David, Am I a dog, that thou comest to me with staves? And the Philistine cursed David by his gods.
And the Philistine said to David, Come to me, and I will give thy flesh unto the fowls of the air, and to the beasts of the field.
Goliath was visibly shocked. He recognised the staff in David's hand as a shepherd's stick used to fend off wild dogs, which explains his comment, am I a dog that you come to me with a stick? Goliath was also publicly humiliated in front of both armies. There he was, defying the armies of Israel, and a teenager had come out to fight him with a stick. He was so angered and humiliated, he swore to tear David limb from limb with his bare hands and feed him to the animals. David, however, was not afraid. His blood was boiling.
1 Samuel 17:45-47
Then said David to the Philistine, Thou comest to me with a sword, and with a spear, and with a shield: but I come to thee in the name of the LORD of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast defied.
This day will the LORD deliver thee into mine hand; and I will smite thee, and take thine head from thee; and I will give the carcases of the host of the Philistines this day unto the fowls of the air, and to the wild beasts of the earth; that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel.
And all this assembly shall know that the LORD saveth not with sword and spear: for the battle is the LORD'S, and he will give you into our hands.
Hand-to-hand combat takes courage, strength, ability, training, and prowess. That kind of strength doesn't come from sitting all week in front of televisions, swallowing subversive propaganda about getting rid of your guns and dismantling your national defences. Why do you think the god of this world wants to take your guns and defences away from you anyway? Because he loves you and cares for you? Yeah right.
Remember, God didn't hate these Philistines, and he didn't hate Goliath. The Israelites were not the bullies here. If the Philistines had left God's people alone and stayed home, they would have been quite safe. Now they will suffer the consequences for their arrogance in attacking God's people.
It is difficult to comprehend the strength in this boy David, but that is the strength that comes from knowing God's word and living it. If this is the kind of strength you want, I recommend less television, opening your bibles and reading them.
1 Samuel 17:48-52
And it came to pass, when the Philistine arose, and came and drew nigh to meet David, that David hasted, and ran toward the army to meet the Philistine.
And David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slang it, and smote the Philistine in his forehead, that the stone sunk into his forehead; and he fell upon his face to the earth.
So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and smote the Philistine, and slew him; but there was no sword in the hand of David.
Therefore David ran, and stood upon the Philistine, and took his sword, and drew it out of the sheath thereof, and slew him, and cut off his head therewith. And when the Philistines saw their champion was dead, they fled.
And the men of Israel and of Judah arose, and shouted, and pursued the Philistines, until thou come to the valley, and to the gates of Ekron. And the wounded of the Philistines fell down by the way to Shaaraim, even unto Gath, and unto Ekron.
1 Samuel 17:57
And as David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, Abner took him, and brought him before Saul with the head of the Philistine in his hand.
It is interesting to look at what David didn't do here. He didn't try to talk to Goliath to broker a peace deal. He killed him, cut off his head and held it up to the Philistines. The Philistines for their part shit their pants and ran.
Note that the Israelites didn't just stand there and let the Philistines go either, they chased after them and killed as many of the bastards as they could. They didn't offer them social programmes or send them foreign aid, they killed them.
You soldiers out there, many of you retired, beating yourselves up every week because you've killed men in battle. Why? How many cases of PTSD are entirely due to being stressed out over how many people you've shot and killed? God isn't mad at you, you did your job, he's proud of you. Killing men in battle isn't murder, it's what you're supposed to do when you're attacked. If a wild dog attacks your children and you kill it, are you going to stress yourself out over the dog? I don't think so. Killing enemy troops is no reason to be distressed. Get over it and be proud of your service. God is proud of you, and you should be proud you served your country.
This, of course, doesn't apply to cowards who run around city streets murdering unarmed civilians. Any asshole can run around gunning down unarmed civilians who don't shoot back. You religious nuts, why don't you read this class and get yourself born again? God will forgive you, and you can take his word to your people and do some good with your life.
Perhaps if our governments hadn't stolen all our guns and stripped us of our defences by making it illegal to carry them, these things wouldn't happen.
This principle of self-defence applies to not just military warfare, but to any form of attack from any quarter, be it military or economic (think climate change). God's people have a duty to fight for the freedoms God has given them and to kill as many of their enemies as is needed to be left alone in peace.
1 Samuel 18:6
And it came to pass as they came, when David was returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, that the women came out of all cities of Israel, singing and dancing, to meet king Saul, with tabrets, with joy, and with instruments of musick.
God's people came out with joy, singing, and dancing after winning against their enemies. Thousands of Philistines had been slaughtered on the battlefields, run through with swords, their heads caved in with axes, their bodies pierced with arrows, and there was joy, singing, and dancing among God's people. This is a little different to what is portrayed in the world's media today regarding war, wouldn't you say?
No doubt in David's day, the Daily Philistine News would have been filled with jubilant front page stories of Goliath standing for his human rights against the nasty Israelites, with pictures of him rattling his sword against his shield and the flames of war burning in his eyes. I doubt the same newspaper would have published a picture of his headless corpse the next day though. More than likely they were publishing stories of Israeli atrocities and running off to the International courts with ridiculous stories of Israeli war crimes. Nothing much has changed in a few thousand years. What are you going to read? The daily newspapers or God's word?
You would be stunned if you knew just how powerful an image can be. Take this picture of Che Guevara for example, a murdering communist terrorist which has been seen and admired by just about everyone on the planet, and then compare it with the second photo below taken just after he had been shot dead. The world's media only show us the first image and not the second because they are owned and controlled by the enemy.
This record of David and Goliath isn't unique in the word either. Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Ehud, Barak, Gideon, Samson, Hezekiah, and others took on their enemies and soundly defeated them. The god of this world does not have our best interests at heart. He may couch his devices in pleasant sounding glib phrases like human rights, solidarity, and tolerance, but dispel the smoke screens and you will recoil in horror at what you see slavering before you. National disarmament is insane. Taking guns away from citizens is insane. If we want to live safely and peacefully in this world we are going to have to have weapons and know how to use them. There is a track record throughout the old testament of God blessing his people militarily and helping them to defeat their enemies.
2 Chronicles 17:1-5
And Jehoshaphat his son [a godly king of Judah] reigned in his stead, and strengthened himself against Israel [the northern tribes who were not very godly at that time].
And he placed forces in all the fenced cities of Judah, and set garrisons in the land of Judah, and in the cities of Ephraim, which Asa his father had taken.
And the LORD was with Jehoshaphat, because he walked in the first ways of his father David, and sought not unto Baalim;
But sought to the LORD God of his father, and walked in his commandments, and not after the doings of Israel.
Therefore the LORD stablished the kingdom in his hand; and all Judah brought to Jehoshaphat presents; and he had riches and honour in abundance.
Jehoshaphat had riches and honour in abundance because he did the will of God by building his military, defeating his enemies in battle, and putting garrisons in places that could not be trusted. Read the word and see it for yourself. When Israel left Egypt under the command of Moses, the word says they went out as an army.
And it came to pass the selfsame day, that the LORD did bring the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt by their armies.
You are not an army unless you have weapons, and an army that doesn't have men who know how to kill the enemy isn't an army either. When Israel left Egypt, they were an army. They had lances, swords, bows, and any other weapons that were available. Israel was armed, they were trained, and they were ready to fight and kill. Any free nation today that wishes to remain free requires men who are trained and committed to fight. However, more and more, through the influence of the United Nations and generations of traitors, we are cutting our best men out of the military and replacing them with homos.
Do you still think God is wrong about homos? There is a record of an incident that occurred during the Falklands war. One of the British warships sailing to the islands had all its main deck guns put out of action in one night and the ship had to return to the UK. The culprit was found and, yes, he was a homo, a coward who had no stomach to do his duty. That wasn't reported on the news, was it?
Our military men and women are the cream of society, and they should be paid more than anyone else, including politicians. Civilians should take their hats off and show top respect to our military, and any civilian who does not, in my opinion, has no right to the free air they breathe that was paid for with the blood of better men than they.
Any nation that desires to remain free has to be willing to protect itself. It is ridiculous to disarm and think everyone else is going to disarm too. They will not. As soon as they think they are stronger than you are, they will take what is yours from you and more than likely put you to death. We should be spending more money on national defence instead of squandering it through social services on bums and deadbeats. You cannot protect domestic tranquillity by disarming the military and disarming private citizens. Military strength, being stronger than those who would attack you, is an essential component to living in free countries.
Now, the god of this world is not stupid. He knows all this. He knows what the word says, and he knows any country that upholds biblical principles will be strong. Therefore, he puts unbelievable reserves of energy and effort through the courses of the world into disarming us. Now is the time to strengthen ourselves and repair the damage that has been done by generations of traitors.
Didn't Obama sign a nuclear arms treaty with Russia that agreed to reduce America's operational nuclear weapons while the nice Russians agreed to reduce theirs to twice as many as America? And that's not taking into account China. Didn't Obama also unilaterally announce that any nation that attacked the United States with biological or chemical weapons would not be attacked back with nuclear weapons? On whose side do you think he is?
These traitors will dismantle your military, take your weapons from you, dismantle your space programmes, give all your money to bums and deadbeats, destroy your economy, move your businesses to China, put you all on welfare, and then laugh as your country caves in. That is their intent and they know what they are doing. They hate you with a passion you do not understand and as long as you keep your heads immersed in their television instead of in God's word, you will never see it.
Being armed and knowing how to use weapons, while having the strength and character of mind to be willing to use them, is godly and right. In fact, it is our duty. Was Samson, one of the greatest men of God of all time, afraid of a fight?
And when he came unto Lehi, the Philistines shouted against him: and the Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon him, and the cords that were upon his arms became as flax that was burnt with fire, and his bands loosed from off his hands.
And he found a new jawbone of an ass, and put forth his hand, and took it, and slew a thousand men therewith.
And Samson said, With the jawbone of an ass, heaps upon heaps, with the jaw of an ass have I slain a thousand men.
Samson killed one thousand men in hand-to-hand combat with a shard of animal skull. Anyone reading this want to argue that Samson wasn't a man of God? Go on then, make a fool of yourself in public. Whenever and wherever God's people are strong, no one dare mess with them. Whenever and wherever God's people are weak, they lose everything, including their lives. That is the nature of this world, because it is the devil's world.
The devil has murdered hundreds of millions of God's people through the centuries because they allowed their weapons to be taken from them. God's people have a right to defend themselves, their property, and their countries. The United Nations is committed to removing those rights from you.
From even a cursory reading of the bible, it can be seen that whenever Israel were strong militarily, they were strong as a nation, and whenever Israel were weak militarily, they were weak as a nation. For God's people, military strength is a requirement to live in prosperity and peace.
By the way, sending our soldiers to be mercenaries for the United Nations is not what I'm talking about here. Our soldiers in Afghanistan are nothing more than mercenaries for the United Nations and its drug running operations. We are sending our men and women over there to fight and die for drug running criminals, that's all. It would take just a few hours to destroy all the opium crops in Afghanistan. Instead opium production has exploded over 900% since we ousted the nasty Taliban. We're not over there to destroy opium or to keep the peace, we're there to protect the opium and protect the United Nations gangsters who make trillions of dollars from it.
When America took Afghanistan, America should not have handed the country over to the United Nations. America should have kept the country, policed the country, administered the country, and made it America. The same goes with Iraq. Taking countries and then handing them over to the United Nations is no different to going to war for the communists, spilling your blood for them at your expense, and then handing the country over to them free of charge so they can rape and plunder it.
Okay, so that's the biblical perspective; what about the world's perspective? Well, we can begin from the premise that the devil will do everything he can to disarm God's people. That is exactly what the devil does through the United Nations. But don't just take my word for it, here is what Adolf Hitler had to say about gun control:
The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.
Gun control is the work of our enemies, those who lust after our countries. If you think having your guns taken from you reduces crime and makes your communities safer to live in, you watch too much television. God wants to protect his people, but if God's people are so stupid as to allow the devil to take their guns away from them, whose fault is that?
It is a documented fact that gun control does not reduce violent crime, it increases it. That's right, unrestricted access to firearms for everyone results in a safer and more civilised place to live. In highly populated cities where the right to own firearms is rigidly restricted, crime flourishes. Where gun ownership is not restricted, crime falls - often dramatically. That is a documented fact. Your televisions and newspapers lie about this. How surprising.
Statistical proof confirms what has been evident for years. As a case in point, the women of Orlando, Florida, began to flock to gun stores to protect themselves after a spate of rapes over a nine-month period. The police offered firearms safety courses and women carried guns. Everybody in Orlando knew this, and in the following nine-month period, there were only three rapes. Violent crime in general declined dramatically. Orlando, Florida, was the only US city with a population of over 100,000 that had a reduction in violent crime that year.
Opponents of Florida's right-to-carry legislation had claimed their state would become known as the Gunshine State. They were wrong and this is where most people don't see the forest for the trees. The opponents of right-to-carry legislation are not misguided for the most part, they know they are lying and they know what they are doing. They know gun control increases crime and still they advocate it and push legislation through government. Check their backgrounds, educations, political and religious persuasions, as well as affiliations with secret societies and you will begin to see a pattern emerging.
As to statistics, well, you can manipulate statistics to say anything you like. In Caithness in the Highlands of Scotland where the Dounreay Nuclear reactor was built, a news report in the media in the 1980s claimed that there was a substantial increase in the likelihood of contracting leukaemia if you lived near the reactor. The statistics were sound. However, what the media didn't tell you was that these statistics were based on there being three cases of leukaemia over a period covering many decades when the national average should have been two. That's right, three cases instead of two. That isn't statistics, that is manipulation of information, propaganda, psychological warfare, and domestic terrorism. And it's related to gun control. Dounreay was involved in the production of nuclear weapons.
One has only to glimpse what happened to the christians in Rwanda between April and July of 1994 to imagine what lies in store for Europeans and Americans. The genocide was planned, not by the Hutus or the Tutsis, but by the United Nations who disarmed them prior to the murders. After the people had been disarmed by governmental decree in the early 1990s, military forces began to systematically massacre them. Using machetes rather than bullets to save money, a state of abject fear and terror was instilled as they butchered hundreds of thousands. Estimates of the death toll have ranged between 500,000 and 1,000,000, or as much as 20% of the total population of the country.
Nor is this an isolated case. In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million Russian dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, around 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1938, Hitler established gun control in Germany, and from 1939 to 1945, over 13 million people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1935, China established gun control. From 1948 to 1952, over 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and murdered, many of them drowned by having their heads pushed into barrels of human excrement. In 1964, Guatemala established gun control. From 1964 to 1981, around 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. Uganda established gun control before exterminating over 300,000 christians. Cambodia established gun control prior to murdering over one million 'educated' people who were unable to defend themselves. Whenever and wherever a government disarms its citizens, murder is in its heart.
Currently, restrictive gun control laws are in force throughout Europe, with the exception of Switzerland where the devil hoards his money. Every home in Switzerland is armed with automatic rifles given to them by the government. Why isn't this ever mentioned on television? American gun control laws are under siege. Australian statistics since the government enforced new gun control laws there show that in the following 12-month period murders were up 3.2 percent, assaults 8.6 percent, and armed robberies 44 percent. Australian politicians claim to be at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased after such monumental effort and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and other historical facts prove it. As Janet Reno publicly stated regarding gun control in America: Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal. Gun control is not about protecting you, it is about dismantling your defences. Gun control isn't about guns, it is about control.
Unfortunately, a number of religious authorities back gun control, stating that the bible says we should not kill. How they can arrive at such a conclusion from scripture is criminal. How anyone can swallow such perverting of scripture is unbelievable. When God told Joshua to take the Promised Land, one wonders how Joshua was going to do it without killing anyone. What, he was going to negotiate terms with them? If your minister advocates a policy of disarmament, get out of his shit hole church. More than likely, he's a homo anyway.
The original word used in the commandment thou shalt not kill means thou shalt not murder. There are plenty of records in the bible where God told people to kill. Take the death penalty for example. God commanded us to carry out the death penalty in certain cases. How can you execute someone without killing them? It is misinterpretation and criminal misrepresentation of the bible to use the scripture thou shalt not kill as a means to remove our weapons of self-defence.
If guns cause crime, then cameras cause pornography. Know guns, know peace, know safety - no guns, no peace, no safety. Assault is a type of behaviour, not a type of hardware. Firearm safety is a matter of education, not legislation. Honest citizens don't carry guns to kill people, they carry guns to keep from being killed. They don't carry guns because they are evil but because they have lived long enough to see the evil in the world. They don't carry guns because they're angry but so they don't spend the rest of their lives living with the consequences of failing to be prepared to deal with criminals. They only carry guns because they want to die of old age, not by a roadside somewhere tomorrow. Men don't carry guns to make them feel like men, they carry guns because real men know how to take care of those they love.
By the way, it isn't a police responsibility to protect you and your family, it's yours. Gun control survives as an ideology because most believe that the police are there to protect us and, therefore, we don't need guns. If you don't know why that belief is founded on myth, then you cannot destroy gun control. Antigun lobbyists get away with proposing to completely disarm us only because most of us assume the police will protect us. That assumption is false. The police owe no legal duty to protect individuals from crime. The police in most places do not even have to come when you call.
Gun prohibitionist lobbyists, human rights groups, the United Nations, and the media have sold us the lie of police protection. Picking up the phone is not self-protection. Trusting in a phone number for your own safety and the safety of those you love won't work. Many people have died as a result of violent crime because the police did not or could not help them. You cannot defend yourself by picking up a phone, only by picking up a weapon and knowing how to use it. God expects us to know how to use weapons and protect ourselves. The world is not telling us the truth about guns.
Do you think there are no solutions to the world's problems? An Australian SAS soldier went to Colombia in 2006 to work as a private bodyguard. His method was to follow at a distance behind his clients' cars on a motorbike, then ride up and shoot criminals in the act of kidnapping. He was so successful that kidnappings in Colombia decreased over 80%. That is a verifiable fact. One man reduced violent kidnappings in an entire country single handedly by over 80%. Rest in peace Sooki, we need more like you.
While on the subject, let's look at the concept of peacekeeping and peacemaking, the military wing of the United Nations. Bear in mind, of course, that soldiers merely carry out orders and do what they believe to be their duty. They are men who are willing to put themselves in harm's way for their countrymen, and who feel the freedoms we enjoy worth the sacrifice they pay. The UN misuses them. As an example, here are a few excerpts from an article written by an Australian soldier who was sent to Rwanda as part of a UN peacekeeping force.
There is a section of 2/4 RAR riflemen and an RMO and some medics at the RAP. The RAP is located to the right on a small knoll with an old mission nearby us. We are forced to stay within the UN rules of engagement and that is not to discharge our weapons unless directly fired at.
The Tutsi soldiers are continually firing into the women and children in the hope of hitting the men who are using them as shields. There are many dead and dying in front of us, but we can only help a few when they drop close to us.
One man in his 20's makes a break from the crowd and runs toward us for shelter. He is hit about 20 metres from our location. He is wounded in the upper thigh and judging by the amount of dark blood coming from the wound the bullet has obviously hit a major artery. We call for him to crawl to us as we are not allowed to collect him. It is against the UN rules. He is crying for us to help. But we cant. It would be breaking the rules.
After about 2 hours, he managed to crawl close enough for me and a mate to dart out and haul him into the RAP. But he is too far gone. The RMO bandages the wound and gives him a dose of morphine. But he won't survive.
The Tutsi are still firing into the crowds and the dead and wounded are everywhere. The young man with the leg wound dies and I'm thankful I no longer have to look into his eyes. I will never forget those eyes.
We are angry, but there is nothing we can do but watch the massacre. The Tutsi have a Quad .50 cal set up on a truck with the barrels pointed at the RAP. The gunners stand nearby. Whenever we look like moving forward to pick up someone, the gunners jump onto the truck and point the .50 cal at us. There is nothing we can do but watch.
The Tutsi commander finally gives us permission to put the wounded women and children into the old mission and treat them. We collect about 200 people and begin to help and treat them as best we can. But it was a trick. We are ordered out of the mission and sent back to the RAP. This isn't good. Again, there is nothing we can do.
We move back to the RAP and watch as the Tutsi close up the doors to the mission, leaving the women and children inside. They set fire to the mission. We can hear the gunshots and screams. It is sickening. And so it goes on.
We stood among the dead and wounded with our symbols of world peace on our blue helmets and our representation of humanity on our shoulders. We looked and tried to comprehend what we saw before us. My boots were covered in human faeces and everywhere I looked, babies lay next to dead mothers who had been murdered the night before.
Through the smell and the stench came a young girl, no older than seven. On her back was her baby brother and in her arms was her baby sister. She had walked over many bodies to speak to these saviours with the UN helmets on their tired and unshaven heads. As she looked up at me with tears in her eyes and with an empty water bottle in her hand, I had to tell her to return to where she came from for I had no water.
I do not understand what I am doing here or how the world can know and yet we can or will do nothing. This uniform means nothing to me now, for I have watched a man as he was shot three times, not twenty metres in front of me and I could do nothing. Why?
The murderers who committed this atrocity stand free next to me and laugh as I treat a three year old with machete wounds. I am angry and cannot comprehend.
If you were to ask me how it feels to come home after helping these people in the name of humanity and world peace, I am sorry but I don't have an answer. I only have unanswered questions and tragic memories of something which in its madness will someday happen again.
If this is your idea of world peace, you can shove it up your ass.
It is evident that winning is not news in our western countries. All we ever hear about is when we lose. Our soldiers can win fifty battles and lose one and we would never hear about the fifty victorious battles, all we would see on our televisions would be weeks of reports and inquiries on the one battle we lost. I guess our media would call this freedom of speech. Quite how the world gets away with such blatant propaganda is testament to the power of television when the bible is neglected.
Recently, the Australian Special Forces acting on intelligence regarding Taliban leadership, stormed a compound in Afghanistan and killed the bad guys. No civilians were injured during the operation, which was carried out in hazardous conditions. The mission was a complete success. If just one civilian had been injured, it would have been front page news all over the world the following day, yet not one word of this operation was breathed in the Australian or the world's media for weeks. When the story was finally released the headline read - Four Australian Solders injured in Afghanistan.
Fortunately, one of the Australian soldiers had worn a helmet camera and filmed the operation. On reading the news report, the footage was released on YouTube and disseminated around the world through Facebook.
The Australian Ministry of Defence, after weeks of demands to know why the story had been deliberately suppressed and the facts twisted, eventually made a press release to the effect that to release information could jeopardise ongoing operations. Really? Then how come if one civilian had been injured or killed full details of the entire operation would have been front page news all over the world the following day? Someone somewhere is lying. The question is, who and why?
Another common pattern, which is easy to see in any conflict in which the United Nations is involved, is that when the terrorists are winning, the United Nations stands by and does nothing. Whenever a government dares to take a stand against terrorism and fights back, the UN brokers a peace deal. In reality, all the United Nations does is act as bodyguards for terrorists. Once the terrorists recover sufficiently, the United Nations pulls out and it's back to business as usual. When terrorists are winning, the United Nations does nothing.
Look, the UN are liars. They are only interested in having the world. As long as legitimate governments are weakened, the UN does nothing. Whenever terrorists, rebels, freedom fighters, call them what you will, are attacked by government forces, the UN steps in to protect them. When the UN feels the danger to the terrorists is over and they have had sufficient time to regroup and rearm, the UN pulls out and the government finds itself once more in the position it was in before any UN intervention.
One must ask, how does such blatant and obvious support for terror by the UN and the International Red Cross go unnoticed and unchallenged? Good question. Did you know the same men who use Al Jazeera to spew their subversive propaganda out through the loudspeakers of the entire Arab and Muslim world are the same men spewing poison into your brain every time you switch on the news or pick up your daily paper? Haven't you ever noticed that in any armed conflict, the United Nations and the International Red Cross always work on the side of terrorists against governments? Unless, of course, it's China, Russia or North Korea. Why is that?
In Vietnam, the communist terrorists required enormous supplies of food and arms to be able to keep fighting. The logistics were staggering. The Ho Chi Minh trail was the lifeline through the jungle that supplied them from communist China. It moved like an army of ants, 24hrs a day, back and forth, in all weathers, transporting food and arms to the front lines. Amazingly, America knew where it was and had it watched but were forbidden by the UN to attack it, so they didn't. Try to find that fact in any of your school history books.
World terrorism today requires a much larger 'Ho Chi Minh' trail to keep the world's terrorist armies in ammunition, food, and medical supplies. The International Red Cross is the modern Ho Chi Minh trail that keeps international terrorism thriving on every continent in the world, transporting colossal loads around the world labelled as humanitarian aid.
Where do you think all the money that is raised in charity drives on television to feed the world's poor goes? Do you think it goes to help people? What's left after the funds have been plundered by the greedy bastards who own the charities goes to feed, house, train, and arm terrorists across the globe. Every penny you send to the United Nations and the International Red Cross through their fund drives and humanitarian aid drives goes straight into the terrorist purse. If you give money to them you are funding world terrorism, you are funding your own extinction. The next time these beggars interrupt your dinner with heart-rending pleas on television to send all your money to them, tell them to fuck off.
Everything the United Nations does helps the terrorist cause. The UN banned the SAS from using sawn off shotguns in the jungles of Malaya. Why? Because the SAS were killing too many terrorists, that's why. Sawn off shotguns were too effective, so the UN banned them for being 'inhumane', to give the terrorists more of a chance. We should give the SAS back their sawn off shotguns, and while we are at it, we should pay them big bonuses for every terrorist head they bring back in a plastic bag.
Of course, Hollywood - and by the way, magic wands are made from holly wood - plays a big part in keeping the world sympathetic to the terrorist cause. What do you think of when you think of Robin Hood? A dashing young man putting the world to rights, helping oppressed people by sorting out the nasty government? Robin Hood was a terrorist who robbed and murdered honest people to fund his campaign to overthrow the government. And here perhaps, we find our first clue to what is really going on in the world. You see Robin Hood's spiritual advisor was a Roman Catholic 'holy' man sent by the vatican whose only intent was the overthrow of the throne in Great Britain and the installation of a Roman Catholic king, Richard the so-called Lionheart, who was off murdering Muslims on the orders of the pope. I have no idea why some Muslims are mad at America for the crusades, it was the vatican who ordered their extermination. America was not even around at the time.
Wars are engineered. All of them. They don't just happen. War is being engineered right now between the west and the Muslims. Why is America and Britain on side with terrorists, fighting to overthrow Arab and Muslim countries for the UN? Why are the Russians and the Chinese not directly involved? If the UN wants these Muslim countries democratised, why don't they send in the Russian and Chinese military? Why are we now fighting for world communism? Why is America being seen as the enemy of the Muslim world when it is the UN giving the orders? Why are the Arabs and Muslims not getting mad at the United Nations? Who is feeding, housing, arming, and paying the wages of all these so-called rebels anyway? Who is supplying their medical needs? Everyone today is mad at the Muslims, and the Muslims are mad at us. Why instead are we not both getting mad at those who are stirring things up between us?
So, who engineers wars and for what purpose? Let's look at the Falklands as an example, as it's happening again right now, in 2014. In 1964, Argentina and the United Nations discussed Argentina's right to sovereignty over the Falklands and immediately drew Britain to the negotiating table. In 1964, Lord Caradon declared that the interests of the inhabitants of the territories were paramount after the Falkland islanders conveyed to the UN General Assembly that under all circumstances they wished to remain a British dependency. Argentina then played the imperialist card, no doubt at the prompting of the UN.
Costa Mendes, the Argentinean foreign minister at the time - a UN crony educated in Internationalism at Oxford - saw the pursuit of Argentina's claim as a means of strengthening the nation's identity. In July 1966, a series of secret meetings were held in London between Henry Hohler of the Foreign Office and Juan Carlos Beltramino. As a result of these meetings, a group of armed terrorists hijacked a Dakota over Patagonia and flew to Port Stanley where they 'arrested' two British officials. Instead of executing those terrorists, we returned them to Argentina at the tax payer's expense.
In 1967, meetings continued between the UN, Argentina, and Britain, Costa Mendes now meeting with his new British counterpart, George Brown. This secret initiative was only discovered by Parliament in 1968. When it was discovered that secret negotiations over sovereignty of the Falklands was being discussed, uproar resulted in Britain and George Brown was forced to resign.
On three occasions, in 1968, 1977, and 1981, British governments could have suspended talks on the grounds that the principle of self-determination represented an impossible obstacle to progress. However, a few of our politicians deliberately kept the process in being. The damage was done and the nation was now on a course for war. The United Nations engineered the Falklands War.
The Middle East is another good example. The KGB founded the PLO. That's right, Arafat and the PLO were founded and financed by the communists, and it was the UN through the Oslo peace accords that put Arafat and the PLO into power. Arafat was a hard core Communist. Even the Muslims know that. Paradoxically, it was also the UN behind the founding of present day Israel and therein lays the key to the current Middle East conflict. This whole political mess was engineered, conjured up out of nothing, and the Palestinians and the Israelis are paying the price. The United Nations does not want peace in the Middle East, the United Nations is responsible for it and actively encourages it.
Look, the bad guys want us dead, and, funnily enough, they also want the Muslims dead. They want our countries, they want our lands, our properties, everything. If the west and the Muslims go to war and destroy each other, the United Nations and the communists get their one world government because there will be no one left to oppose them.
The United Nations is a terror organisation, as is the International Red Cross. They both work in conjunction through their worldwide network of human rights groups to subvert legitimate governments in furtherance of one world governance so they can bring us what they call peace on earth. The only problem is, we have to go so they can have their world. How they get rid of us isn't important, just so long as they get their world.
Disarmament is a synonym for extinction. We need our military now more than at any time before in earth's history. So, either we get real about what is happening in the world, or we're marched to the gas chambers of the new world order.
Before closing, let's consider who we are at war with. If we face Chinese troops on the battlefield, does that mean we are at war with the Chinese? Not at all. China is an illegally occupied country and has been for nearly a century. Their military men and women simply do what they believe to be their duty. I have no quarrel with the Chinese. I was brought up in Hong Kong and learned to love the Chinese at a very young age. Their art is unparalleled in passion and heart. They are a wonderful people.
So is communism our enemy then? Communism is but a political device. To say we are at war with communism is to say we are at war with dreams. Go to war with such concepts and you will be fighting shadows. Folks should think of communism less as an army of boogie men and more as a disease. The belief that one world governance is the answer to all the world's ills is a virus that can infect the man next to you in your workplace. Communism transcends race, gender, skin colour, and religion, turning men into traitors, men who consider the destruction of their own country and their own fellow countrymen worth the price of a new world order. This they call selfless. In truth, they are corrupted by moral disease, they are traitors, and they are worthy of death.
Before you can defeat your enemy, you must be able to see him. Who controls communism? Where did communism come from? Do we have communist traitors among us?
Roosevelt, who gave Poland to the communists and who was the first western leader to grant communist Russia diplomatic recognition, was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (the CFR). He referred to Stalin as Uncle Joe and ensured the Russians were the first to reach Berlin by holding back the Allied Forces.
Following the victories in Europe and the Far East, the Truman administration continued with this policy of aiding communists. They permitted huge amounts of Japanese armaments to fall into the hands of Mao Tse Tung's forces in China. When the Chinese leader Chiang Kai Shek refused Truman's orders to admit communists into his government, Truman cut off all aid to him. The communists took China in 1949 and the legitimate Chinese government fled to Taiwan. China is an illegally occupied country whose legitimate government is still in Taiwan. In 1950, America went to war in Korea under Truman. Truman was a member of the CFR.
Clinton granted full diplomatic recognition to communist Vietnam. He granted favoured nation status to communist China, and he did nothing to prevent the Panama Canal from falling under the control of the Chinese military. Clinton dismantled the American military to the point that it was almost ineffectual. He binned Star Wars leaving America and its Allies defenceless to missile attack. Clinton was a member of the CFR.
Dulles was senior United States adviser at the San Francisco conference at which the United Nations came into being. Dulles was a member of the CFR.
Alger Hiss was a communist spy. Alger Hiss was one of the American delegates at the forming of the United Nations. Alger Hiss was a member of the CFR.
President Woodrow Wilson who signed into law two planks of the Communist Manifesto but who failed in his bid to institute a one world government through the League of Nations, was a member of the CFR.
Paul Warburg, who with other International bankers staged the secret meetings and the sinking of the Titanic which brought about the American Federal Reserve system, effectively giving financial control of America to the International bankers, was a member of the CFR.
The CFR has come to be known as The Establishment, or the invisible government. At least forty-seven CFR members were among the American delegates to the founding of the United Nations in San Francisco in 1945. Members of the CFR group included Harold Stassen, John J McCloy, Owen Lattimore, Alger Hiss, Nelson Rockefeller, John Foster Dulles, John Vincent Carter, and Dean Acheson.
So completely has the CFR dominated the State Department over the past few decades that every Secretary of State except Cordell Hull, James Byrnes, and William Rogers has been a member of the CFR.
Among the communications corporations represented in the CFR are National, Columbia, Time, Life, Fortune, Look, Newsweek, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the New York Post, Simon and Schuster, Harper Bros, Random House, Little Brown and Co, Macmillan, Viking, Business Week, etc, ad nauseum.
David Rockefeller himself, in his own words, wrote:
We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The super national sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practiced in past centuries.
To conclude this chapter, here are three excerpts from the writings of those who would destroy us. These men exist. They are intelligent, they are educated, they are powerful, they are rich, and they are committed. Note the tie in here with climate change, the current economic nuclear weapon aimed at America with the power to destroy it.
It is indispensable for our purpose that wars, so far as possible, should not result in territorial gains: war will thus be brought on to the economic ground, where the nations will not fail to perceive in the assistance we give the strength of our predominance, and this state of things will put both sides at the mercy of our international agentur; which possesses millions of eyes ever on the watch and unhampered by any limitations whatsoever. Our international rights will then wipe out national rights, in the proper sense of right, and will rule the nations precisely as the civil law of States rules the relations of their subjects among themselves.
Remember the French Revolution, to which it was we who gave the name of 'Great': the secrets of its preparations are well known to us for it was wholly the work of our hands.
Should anyone of a liberal mind say that such reflections as the above are immoral, I would put the following questions: If every State has two foes and if in regard to the external foe it is allowed and not considered immoral to use every manner and art of conflict, as for example to keep the enemy in ignorance of plans of attack and defense, to attack him by night or in superior numbers, then in what way can the same means in regard to a worse foe, the destroyer of the structure of society and the commonweal, be called immoral and not permissible?
The same men who engineered the French Revolution, for engineered it was - planned and systematically implemented - are the same men, in an organisational sense, who planned the communist takeovers of Russia and China. Who wrote those words? We shall soon see.
Chapter 24 - Weishaupt and the Illuminati