Colorado Shooting Provides Opportunity For Gun Grabbers

Last Thursday’s senseless massacre in Colorado is now foremost in the minds of Americans for all the obvious and right reasons, but it also serves as a tool of the unsympathetic socialists in our government and throughout the world in their decades-long agenda for gun control in the U.S.

Gun “control,” though, is only the beginning. As years of mounting evidence has shown, total and complete disarmament of the nation’s citizens is the final goal for many powerful figures in the governments of the world (including our own) and their loyal operatives in the various channels of the mainstream media.

As was predicted by many of us, the mainstream media have jumped onto this tragic event in Colorado as an opportunity to highlight the fact that the shooter was a well-educated citizen whose firearms were all legally purchased and registered. They then generally fail to mention, though, that roughly 6,000 people a year are murdered in the U.S. and that an estimated 900 of those numbers involve the use of firearms. They also fail to mention that practically none of these homicides are committed through the use of legally purchased firearms in the hands of citizens with clean criminal records.

Recent events, such as the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty that Obama is determined to sign, have their roots in an agenda that dates back to the early 1960’s. This longstanding federal agenda calls for the gradual relinquishing of all the United States’ powers of law and law enforcement to the United Nations as the ultimate governing body. This agenda is spelled out to the letter in the State Department Publication Document 7277 from September of 1961, titled “Freedom from War.” This  memorandum’s subtitle outlines its intent: “United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World.”

This document, penned decades ago under the ruse of the prevention of war, outlines a multi-stage plan to disarm all American citizens as the new world order is ushered in by the U.N. The document denotes the federal plan to supposedly achieve “security for all states” with a “goal of general and complete disarmament.”

The plan’s various stages are outlined with respect to several objectives and subsequent explanations such as that “all disarmament obligations must be subject to effective international control. Adequate peace-keeping machinery must be established. Nations are unlikely to shed their means of self-protection in the absence of alternative ways to safeguard their legitimate interests. This can only be achieved through the progressive strengthening of international institutions under the United Nations and by creating a U.N. Peace Force to enforce the peace as the disarmament process proceeds.” The memorandum also outlines a necessary reduction in arms and armed forces levels in the U.S. and in the then Soviet Union by 2.1 million personnel each. The third stage of the disarmament plan states that the “manufacture of arms would be prohibited except for those agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order.”

The document’s final summary of all intended goals explains the intent to “establish a world where there shall be a permanent state of general and complete disarmament under effective international control and where the resources of nations shall be devoted to man’s material, cultural, and spiritual advance.”

To add a personal thought concerning this last point, there will be little personal and national material, cultural, and spiritual advance in a police state enforced by the U.N. There will only be the slaves and the slave masters. At this point, there seems to be little reason to believe that the U.S. armed forces would operate in any large-scaled unified effort to disarm Americans. For the most part, our military men and women have shown and voiced that they take their oath to protect citizens from “all enemies, foreign and domestic” very seriously. We must, though, realize that the values and norms of American society continue to take one step forward and two steps back from traditional moral standards toward a fully democratic system controlled by special interests and their enablers who aspire to nothing short of self-serving and evil concerns and ways of life. In time, this shifting sand of society is bound to infiltrate even the ranks of our own military leaders who make the calls that affect us all. A “new” military of the future may eventually have changed to the point that disarming citizens seems as justified to them as it does to those at the top of the federal government who initially put these policies in place and give final orders for their execution. These new age influences have already begun to influence the regulations and abilities of our military forces. To be realistic, by no fault of the brave and loyal members of our military, the armed forces of today are already not what they used to be.

Some thought should now be given toward the future of the freedoms of private citizens in this country. If you think it to be impossible that we could ever be disarmed by force, some consideration should be given toward the orders given to military personnel and various police departments of the country who responded during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. While it was probably just good sense for a citizen of New Orleans, Louisiana to have long since evacuated by the time mandatory evacuation had been announced, the lines between right and wrong seem to blur a bit at the point where temporary “law” began to be enforced upon remaining citizens. The New Orleans Chief of Police publicly announced that all guns would be taken from any remaining citizens of the city in the aftermath of the storm.

A recent public interview was conducted via telephone with a caller identified only as “Chris” from Oklahoma. He claimed to have been a part of the Army’s 45^th Infantry Brigade deployed to post-Katrina New Orleans at 21 years of age. He explained that he participated as ordered in the confiscation of local citizens’ firearms, though he now doesn’t seem to be proud of his execution of these orders. He described himself at the time as being young and “dumb as hell” and that he blindly followed orders as a gung-ho new recruit who was loyal to the Army. He explained that he and his unit were ordered to confiscate firearms from any remaining citizens, and that the response to physical resistance was to be open fire. He described how he and his unit broke entry into homes as they identified themselves and described the scene of the city to be a chaotic “free for all” where law enforcement agencies from several states were present on the scene (and that local women were repeatedly raped by members of the New Orleans Police Department.)

Obviously, this example only represents one isolated event confined to a single city, but these apparent events were only the result of the response to the aftermath of a hurricane. What could happen upon a future nationwide mandate, following enforcement for complete disarmament?

The former military caller expressed that he also believes in the overall loyalty of the military, but fears that there might be many more young recruits in the future who, like him, will loyally carry out these orders for disarmament without even fully understanding their implications.

Based upon the recent reductions in our armed forces and the current federal goal to relinquish more control over U.S. citizens to the U.N., in light of the previously citied 1961 document, we need not even focus further upon our own military. They are our only hope against the combined U.N. forces of various other nations that WILL eventually come to our shores to enforce these measures.

Historically, arms control is always the first major step taken toward the establishment of complete totalitarian rule over a nation. Following the loss of our 2^nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, there will be no remaining restrictions from the loss of the rest of our freedoms and property to any who would take them. Regardless of the remaining facts of the recent massacre that are yet left to be uncovered, it has become yet another incident that will likely be referenced along with other similar incidents in the future that will collaboratively provide convenient precedent for the infringement of our American freedoms and the inevitable unraveling of a civil society. Gun control does involve guns-as they are our most effective defense as citizens against tyranny-but it is more about control. Thomas Jefferson once said that “a government big enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take everything you have,” and it seems that we have now arrived at that point in America with respect to gun rights and every other freedom we hold dear.

As a Christian, it is clear that enslavement and destruction will eventually be a reality for all inhabitants of the world, but there is still an obligation to stand and fight for what is right and for what is true. From a biblical perspective, Jesus Christ himself instructed his disciples in Luke 22:36 that “…he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.” The “sword” of the modern day would be a firearm. Joshua 1:9 tells us to “…be strong and of good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee whithersoever thou goest.” Both of these references personally seem to provide some of the best advice that could be offered to Americans in these changing times.