Citizens Against Senseless Violence: “Join Us! Tell Everyone Your House Is Completely Unprotected!”
By Mac Slavo
January 18, 2013
This is one you don’t want to miss.
Citizens Against Senseless Violence goes door-to-door and asks supporters of gun control legislation to join the movement by putting signs in front of their homes letting everyone know that they proudly live in a gun free zone.
The group visits a host of key anti-gun proponents including the publishing team at the Journal News, which recently posted a public map of homeowners with registered weapons.
They also visit the home of our very own Attorney General Eric Holder who has said we need to “brainwash” people about gun ownership, yet ironically, was the lead law enforcement officer in charge of an operation that transferred (without a background check or registration, no less!) military style assault rifles with high capacity magazines to the Los Zetas Mexican drug cartel.
All have called on President Obama and Congress to disarm Americans.
While they’ve been quite vocal about ensuring that Americans give up their guns through reeducation, intimidation and policy, as you’ll see, they are not exactly receptive to the idea of letting everyone else in their neighborhood know how proud they are to be gun-free.
Since these reporters and editors did not consider it a violation of the privacy and safety of others to reveal which homes have guns and which homes don’t, we went to see which of them would be willing to put up a sign publicly declaring their homes to be gun free zones.
While we didn’t find any members of the media with the strength of their convictions, we did find quite a few guns and some good explanations for why they might be necessary.
Foreground: Dr. Fredrick Toeben, who after repeated times in prison has now seen the Jews even steal his home for the last two decades by court action after he could not pay a gigantic fine for telling Holocaust truth.
01/18 @ 10:57 : Gerpinnes, BE[LGIUM]
John de Nugent, 681 Canal Road,
Apollo PA 15613 USA
tel: (724) 596-4284
============MY COVER STORY FOR THE LATEST BARNES REVIEW MAGAZINE
I have been writing since 1997 for the Barnes Review magazine, published on Capitol Hill in Washington DC. (http://www.democratic-republicans.us/solutreanism/important-info/important-articles-and-threads)
Here is the latest article, the cover story for January-February 2013, as you can see.
This is the website version (the cover story in each issue is readable online):
Here is the article itself off the Barnes Review website, taken originally from a weblog I did here several months back.
Margaret also had a translation in this same issue, from the Spanish into English, of an article by the great historian Joaquin Bochaca, dealing with Hitler’s march into the artificial state of Czechoslovakia, created out of five mutually antipathetic nationalities at the Treaty of Versailles conference to weaken Germany.
(From the table of contents)
The Barnes Review can be subscribed to for $47 here: http://www.barnesreview.org/subscriptions-to-emthe-barnes-reviewem-p-437.html?cPath=24
It can also be subscribed to for a measily $4 a month via credit card!
=================THE PSYCHOPATH LANCE ARMSTRONG
I am bringing the Armstrong article below because I have been a victim of psychopaths myself, who have brazenly lied to me and stolen either my money or my honor, taking and taking and taking from me until it was time to go over completely to the enemy and prosper in that new way.
And when I say that this movement is full of government infiltrators and “turned” individuals who, while glorifying courage and national-socialist values, will say and do anything to get out or stay out of jail, then they attack me all the more. I can think of several individuals who make war on me who all have been in federal prison, then “something changed,” and now they do exactly as they are told.
I recently intercepted an email that confirms all of this, an email I was not supposed to see but which was sent to a friend (since arrested by the feds himself) — and it was blasting me.
After the friend left, I went to open my own Yahoo email account but instead it opened to his account, because he had been allowed to check his emails on our computer during a visit and had gone there. I had just clicked on Yahoo Mail. And there it was, a “friend” in an email blasting away at ME to a guy who soon was to be arrested himself…. and this “friend” is a friend of my number-one defamer online, the one the feds arrested years ago.
That defamer is the same one who committed SIX political crimes (under ZOG rules) and yet, unlike other comrades, is miraculously walking around free, of which one is:
Harboring a fugitive: punishable by fines or up to one year in jail.
Finnish Criminal Code, Section 15, Article 11.
Then I found out the “friend” of mine, an ally of the defamer, tried to get one of my closest friends arrested too!
Get’em all in prison so you can make a “deal.” And the deal is:
Blast John de Nugent if you want to get out of jail.
Suddenly the whole pattern began to become clear. It was all stimulated by the latest event: 1) a kid who stole $4,000 from me and walked free, and then 2) a real comrade, Gottfried Küssel, on the other hand, who just got nine years in prison (and his associates nine and four!!)
They had not “played ball.”
They had not made a deal.
No sentence or short sentence: they made a deal.
Long sentence: they did NOT make a deal.
Rudolf Hess made no deals at all, ever, and did 46 years IN SOLITARY.
Glen n Miller, a former Green Beret who was drawn into the activities of a major 1980s WN revolutionary organization, “the Order,” has written how almost every member of “the Order” was broken and told that if he did not “give up” all his comrades — including Miller, who had merely RECEIVED money that came from bank robberies — and accuse them of this or that, he would get the death penalty, life in prison, or 200 years.
And in an age of cowardice and treachery, most WNs have less honor than even the Mafia, which at least had a code of honor that you never ratted out your friends, or shot a guy in front of his wife and kids, or harmed them.
As a “stand-up guy,” any true Mafioso (also called a “made man” and referred to in public conversations as “a friend of ours”)) would rather go to prison and get “the max” (the maximum prison sentence) than betray the trust of his friends and say in court whatever the feds demanded that he say to save his own neck.
I decided back in the 1980s that what the white race needed was a new religion, because merely knowing the “facts” about race, or the Jews, or about Germany and the Third Reich, and the Holocaust that never happened, was having NO EFFECT morally on how people acted.
This is why I quit Dr. William Pierce’s National Alliance in 1984, where I had a great career going, wrote a large part of the membership bulletin, composed magazine articles, moderated the 1984 national convention, founded and ran the Washington-Baltimore Unit, and was paid something too.;-)
And when in the later 1980s almost all the members of the Order “gave each other up” to the feds, my view was confirmed. Yes, those men were very, very brave initially, but when faced with the death penalty or life in prison, they all “cooperated.” They were not part of a structure to keep people on the straight and narrow. Unlike the Mafia, there was no one to say “if you rat out your friends, after swearing an oath to our organization, we will get you and your family both.” NO MERCY TO TRAITORS.
But the Order was nothing like that.
It became EVERYMAN FOR HIMSELF.
Just as the Jew wants.
And reading how the Jews are nasty, or the blacks are violent, or how the Chinese are taking our jobs and the Mexicans are taking over — none of that transforms a white nerd, coward and weirdo, or Stormfront keyboard commando, into an Aryan at all..
The most important essay I have ever written was on psychopaths. It appeared first in The Barnes Review of January-February 2007, and has since been enhanced.
Lance Armstrong, arrogant and unaware, did little to repair his image in mea culpa with Oprah
Across 90 minutes with Oprah Winfrey, Lance Armstrong did more than admit he cheated to win his seven Tour de France titles. He revealed a measure of the man that he is and this much is certain: If you never met this jerk, well, count your blessings.
Defiant, distant, difficult.
Arrogant, unaware, flippant.
Oh, Lance had a plan to try to look open and honest, and that was what was so obvious: It was a plan. It sounded rehearsed. But when he went off script, well, that’s when he went off the rails.
He apologized, and that’s worth something, worth a lot to those of us who aren’t outraged anymore over doping in sports. But in doing so, in tuning into the Oprah Winfrey Network, you could only marvel at that personality on display, the same one that while we celebrated his victories was, behind the scenes, leaving a path of personal destruction in its wake.
This was a glimmer of the true Lance Armstrong coming out. No Nike commercial edits. No press conference sound bites. No glowing magazine profiles. This was the guy who left scores and scores of people cursing that their paths ever crossed.
It’s not about the bike, indeed. This was about Lance’s sociopathic spectacle.
At one point during the interview, he couldn’t recall how many people he’d sued. Really. He not only didn’t know the number, he couldn’t even be sure when asked about specific individuals that his mighty, powerful legal team relentlessly tried to bury.
It’s worth noting that many of the people he’s sued through the years in an effort to protect his lies and glory were one-time close friends, roommates, teammates, business partners and associates.
Lance Armstrong is interviewed by Oprah Winfrey in Austin, Texas. (REUTERS)Is there another person in America who has sued so many people he once liked – for telling the truth, mind you – that he can’t remember all of them? Anyone?
What you and your bank account and those sleepless nights you can’t forget — he can’t remember.
Good Lord, what a guy.
At one point Armstrong addressed Betsy Andreu, the wife of a former teammate Frankie Andreu, who testified that while lying in a hospital bed in 1996 Armstrong told his doctor that he had doped.
Over the years Lance and his henchman bullied and bruised Betsy relentlessly. They called her names. They tried to wipe her out. They, according to Betsy, blackballed her husband’s career. She kept standing up and speaking out. There was even a voicemail from an Armstrong associate who said he hoped “somebody breaks a baseball bat over your head.”
Lance knows he was terrible to Betsy so he said he called her the other day to begin making amends. You know for, among other things, calling her “crazy.” He decided to tell Oprah about it, including what is apparently his idea of a sense of humor.
“I did call her crazy,” he said. “I did. I did … I think she’d be OK with me saying this, I said, ‘Listen, I called you crazy; I called you a bitch; I called you all of these things, but I never called you fat.’ ”
[Related: Lance Armstrong's admission could hurt cycling's Olympics future]
Then he smirked.
Now that’s a novel way to gain forgiveness: make a fat joke about a woman on national television.
Needless to say, Betsy wasn’t OK with him saying it.
“I guess we know why I was [a bitch] all these years, putting up with that,” Betsy said on CNN on Thursday night after watching the clip. “How was I supposed to act? Sweet as apple pie? … That exchange right there, it has me furious.”
Take a number Betsy.
Across the spectrum there is fury and regret. Mike Anderson, a former personal assistant who claims Lance tried to ruin him, avoided watching the interview. Then he inadvertently was exposed to a replayed segment while waiting to comment on CNN.
“I didn’t want to hear his voice ever again,” Anderson said.
Fellow riders say they wish they’d never hooked on with him. Support staff claim they wish they’d never taken a job. Sponsors are lining up to sue. Journalists who carried his water for years are writing they wish they’d never bought the lie.
The more Armstrong talked Thursday, the more it became obvious: This seems like the last and least likable individual you’d want to hang around.
He was, and likely remains, nothing but a machine of personal glorification, no concept of his real place in the world. Now that the truth is out, it’s not about the cheating so much as it’s about the way he fought dirty to protect the cheating.
“I was a bully,” he acknowledged. “In the sense that I tried to control the narrative, and if I didn’t like what somebody said, I tried to control that and say that’s a lie.”
Except he didn’t stop at saying “that’s a lie.” He’d start there, then go on the attack, often trying to ruin his accusers professionally and, perhaps, personally, maybe legally and certainly financially.
Emma O’Reilly tends to Kevin Livingstone during the 1999 Tour de France. (AP)Consider Emma O’Reilly, an Irish massage therapist who began working for his team while in her 20s. She later told the truth about Lance and drugs. For that she’s testified Team Armstrong responded by calling her a whore and a drunk. But Armstrong didn’t stop there. No, he tried to sue into oblivion this woman of limited financial means.
What did Armstrong say of Emma? He couldn’t remember if he even attempted legal action against her.
“To be honest Oprah,” he chuckled lightly, “we sued so many people, I’m sure we did.”
“She’s one of those people I have to apologize to,” Armstrong said.
“She got run over, got bullied,” he continued. He was in the wrong tense then. She got run over, got bullied. Not, “I ran her over. I bullied her.” Because make no mistake, it was him. It was only him.
On and on it went.
“Look at this arrogant prick,” he said as he watched video of his 2005 testimony when he denied he’d ever used performance-enhancing drugs, and, well, on that he was telling the truth.
Armstrong admitted that it was “too late” to come clean and for that he may be correct. Some won’t ever forgive or forget. Those who know the ins and outs of the case in detail were quickly picking apart his comments with ease, suggesting he was still lying, or forgetting, or conveniently misremembering all sorts of details.
Oprah did a fine job drilling down on pertinent issues. For most of us, though, the specifics barely mattered. It wasn’t about whether he cheated or not; it was that awful, unavoidable personality.
And there’s still another hour to go with Oprah (Friday, 9 p.m. ET).
After the first session the only question left unanswered is how he ever found so many friends to stab in the back in the first place.