MCViewPoint

When you combine total domestic surveillance, construction of FEMA re-education camps, Cloward-Pivin style destruction of the economy, government encouragement of psychoanalysis and drug treatment of “victims” and continued expansion of the warfare welfare state-complete disarmament of the populace is a logical next step.  Think of the most prominent gun control advocates of the last century and THEIR methods.  Hitler, Stalin, Mao.  Progressives on steroids.

Jon Rappoport made a list of answers he wants to hear from Obama with regard to gun violence.  A few of which are:

Where is most of the violence occurring? Big city gangs.  Why no mention?

Is the Second Amendment designed in part for common folk to defend themselves from tyrannical government?

Why no mention of the plethora of antidepressants that drive people to murder or suicide?

The point Rappoport makes is that the impetus for gun control is not violence reduction but simple elimination of all privately owned firearms.

When you combine total domestic surveillance, construction of FEMA re-education camps, Cloward-Pivin style destruction of the economy, government encouragement of psychoanalysis and drug treatment of “victims” and continued expansion of the warfare welfare state-complete disarmament of the populace is a logical next step.  Think of the most prominent gun control advocates of the last century and THEIR methods.  Hitler, Stalin, Mao.  Progressives on steroids.

The end of the piece describes the ongoing CHICAGO trial of Sinaloa drug cartel member Jesus Vicente Zambada-Niebla.  Followers of Fast and Furious know that the bulk of the weapons were meant for the Sinaloa  gang.  Niebla’s story is the DEA traded guns for information on other gangs with promises of immunity.  A free hand in shipping drugs and death into the US.  Prosecutors are suppressing much evidence and delaying proceedings.

Rappoport asks “is this why no mention of gangs?”

I have to ask myself a deeper question “Why the free hand”.

Sinaloa has been handed a lot of latitude.  Are the DEA and Obama expecting something more in the future from Sinaloa?

Perhaps (North American) Union enforcers?

To help put down other groups in the future?

Groups other than drug gangs?  Maybe not just South of the border?

Us?

It is more efficient to be based in the country where you do business.

Besides, Sinaloa could take the drug dealing fund raising load off the CIA.

Be seeing you