‘Standing Army’ Oath-Breakers Attack Civilian RKBA

https://www.oathkeepers.org


[Spoken like a true talking point parrot and oath-breaking tool. (Americans for Responsible Solutions/Facebook) ]

by: David Codrea 
“Veterans Are Key Allies in the Fight to Reduce Gun Violence,” retired U.S. Army Gen. Peter Chiarelli writes in Time.
“While our gun-violence crisis is complex, there is no doubt that our weak, gap-ridden gun laws help fuel the violence by making it too easy for dangerous people to access firearms,” he explains. “Right now under federal law, felons, domestic abusers and the dangerously mentally ill have the option of buying a gun without a background check and with no questions asked. Even people who are considered by the the [sic] Federal Bureau of Investigation to be a known or suspected terrorist can pass a background check and legally buy a gun.”
Chiarelli is, of course, an agenda-motivated liar, which is disgraceful. Anyone convicted of the crimes he cites is a “prohibited person,” barred by federal law from gun possession.

"Extremist groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS have long urged their followers to use our country’s weak gun laws to acquire deadly weapons and commit active shooter terrorism here in America,” Chiarelli elaborates, playing the terror card to spook the herd. Why the hell such savages are in this country in the first place – not just “allowed,” but whose presence is part of a “fundamental transformation” plot by subversives in positions of power – is a question deflected by shifting public focus to guns (and calling people who question it “Islamophobes”). The “progressive” establishment media is, of course, enthusiastic to play along, and to help smear anyone who objects as an isolationist xenophobe and worse.
Besides, it’s not like anyone but us “rightwing extremist anti-government haters” is much interested in looking more closely at that “rigorous security screening” those same subversives assure us keeps such terrorists out. That’s not the kind of talk the wannabe rulers, their lackeys and their useful idiots want to hear.

What Chiarelli actually objects to is a pesky impediment to totalitarianism known as “due process.” He’s already proven disdain for the Bill of Rights with his gun nonsense, so subverting the rest of the Constitution should come as no surprise.
Naturally, he blames “the gun lobby.” The controllers find it useful to direct their “two minutes hate” at a monolith, meaning it does not serve their purposes to acknowledge that “lobby” includes every one of us who believe without apology in our right to keep and bear arms.
And Chiarelli’s “solution”?
Team up with Mark Kelly and Gungrabby Gabby to pose as supporters of “common sense” in what we’re being told is a “Veteran’s Coalition.”  There appear to be a lot of high-ranking veteran names on that “team,” many of them prominent generals and admirals, and many of them with careers that reflect achievements and distinction, making their participation all the more insidious.

We’ve talked about oath-breaking veterans before, several times, including some with distinguished service records. But it’s not what they did, in the past; it’s what they’re doing now that we need to concern ourselves with. Sadly, and in the more ambitious cases unforgivably, giving aid and comfort to domestic enemies and working against their oaths and the rights of their countrymen is what’s relevant here.
Whether motivations for supporting incremental civilian disarmament steps are sincere or self-serving hardly matters, and many would no doubt maintain they “support the second Amendment BUT.” The long game agenda of those pushing a “monopoly of violence” is exactly that, and anything that allows their efforts to move closer to that goal establishes a beachhead from which to launch the next incursion.
For now, the cards the “Veteran’s Coalition” is willing to show are meant to seem “reasonable,” at least to anyone who doesn’t inspect them too closely:

• Urging our elected leaders to close the loopholes in our background check laws that let felons, domestic abusers and the dangerously mentally ill buy guns without a criminal background check.
• Strengthening existing laws and ensuring lawmakers and stakeholders have the resources and training they need to prevent gun tragedies.
• Partnering with other groups in the veterans community on suicide prevention and mental health. 

In other words:

• Lie about what’s lawful and eliminate private sales in a scheme that the National Institute of Justice admits won’t work without gun registration, something which all convicted criminals are exempted from being required to do.
• Throw in a nebulous statement that says nothing but allows everything in order to promise something that can’t be delivered.
• Further screw over and disarm veterans while ignoring true due process that affords the same protections against rights being stripped as a jury trial.

It’s curious to note that the first goal  — the so-called “universal background check” being pushed by Bloomberg money in the states because there’s no belly for it (yet) in Congress  — is something the government and military “leaders” have totally dropped the ball on when it comes to America’s most dangerous enemies, the very ones they exist to protect against.

“Pentagon admits ‘lapses in accountability’ led to loss of hundreds of thousands of us guns in Afghanistan and Iraq,” Zero Hedge reports. “This is a stunning admission by the DoD of the lack of accountability in tracking assets that could ultimately be used by terrorists to fight our own troops.”
That would be the same Department of Defense that can’t account for $6.5 trillion, a situation that’s only grown significantly worse since $2.3 trillion was reported unaccounted for in 2001.
These are some of the people now demanding accountability for our guns?
We know the Founders feared a standing army, and that the military is supposed to be subordinate to civilian authority. We also know the attitudes of Chiarelli and some of his partners in civilian disarmament like Stanley McChrystal, David Petraeus and Wesley Clark give cause to still hold those fears.  It’s fair to ask what directives those now in charge won’t execute when so ordered by an administration sharing their disdain for an armed citizenry, and the non-optional mandate “shall not be infringed.”
It brings home the urgency of rededicating ourselves to spreading the word about “orders we will not obey.” It also stands as a stark reminder that at one time, one of our most respected military leaders was a guy named Arnold.

—–

UPDATE: The Captain’s Journal has more.