" 7 December 1981, 1 hoped to reveal to the American People certain Facts regarding the World Marxist Conspiracy that are suppressed by the mass-media. I attempted to place the FED Board of Governors under legal, non-violent, citizen's arrest -- supported by D.C. statutes, and by Misprision of Felony statute under U.S. Treason and Sedition Law. I charge the FED with Treason, operation of a Fraudulent Enterprise, and un-Constitutional Private Corporate Operations. I intended to hold the Board prisoners in the Board Room, demand that their fellow conspirators at CBS provide national TV-hookup; then, over TV to figuratively hand over the felons to the American people with an explanation of my charges against the FED. I then intended to hand over the prisoners, unharmed, to the President of the United States. I expected to stand trial in a U.S. Federal District Court, and prove the FED's culpability to a jury of my peers. I expected the jury to find the FED guilty and my citizens arrest of the felons upheld by statute. Thus, We the People would issue a mandate to the Congress of the United States to bring proceeding against the FED, a privately held corporation, under Federal Tort Law.

I failed to achieve my objectives etc"

So, he casts the NWO in a different light, but with the same general theme. If you know anything about the Federal Reserve System, then you know what he's saying is the truth. So, regardless of his flawed personal beliefs regarding race, the facts about the FED remain true. They have single handedly bankrupted the United States while utilizing the media to obfuscate that fact by pointing fingers at easy political targets that everyone gets caught up arguing about via endless debates about who's fault it is for the state of affairs without ever really identifying the single most important factor of all: Who controls the money supply of the United States of American and why?

That question is answered, but without the depth that it needs to be. Now, as civilized people, let's take a better approach to this issue and support H.R.1207 so that we can get some transparency about this issue in a proper format where the American people can ask questions that have so far been shrouded in relative secrecy. Forget every other issue for the moment, Read Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution and ask yourself why have we "given" control of our money supply over to a private banking cartel? Then, you will understand how and already unstable whack job can "go the distance".

You're right about my not wishing to remove many of our laws. However, gun control is an issue. Laws should exist to help people conform to a standard of behavior and not as an imposing of a will. To clarify, you and I are law-abiding citizens. We do not use drugs, steal, kill, set houses on fire, etc, etc. Others do and often commit multiple crimes in a single spree. Responsible, law-abiding people do not set out to commit crime. If we do happen to kill, it's in self-defense. Gun control is an imposition as it takes away my right to own a gun - a right afforded to me by an amendment to the Constitution.

I am a gun owner. Why do I feel it's necessary to have a gun? Because I know that even though I live in a regular suburb, for some unknown reason it still takes police officers at least 30 minutes to respond to an incident at my house in the dead of night. I don't know about you, but if someone breaks into my house I don't know if I can detain criminals 30 minutes, while keeping my family safe, as we wait for the police.

Unlike many people, I served in the Marine Corps. I am familiar with my weapon. People can be educated to handle guns safely. If sensible legislation were proposed, I wouldn't have any problems. However, that is not the case. The proposed laws don't mandate that people be required to attend classes or serve their country... just to limit what we can have, if any.

More people killed in car accidents than by firearms. Should we pass auto control laws? No, that's ridiculous. We not only have people take classes before and pass exams before getting a drivers license but we also require more tests or refreshers when enough points are accumulated. Gun control laws are equally ridiculous. But I don't think as many people would complain to testing. It'd be like a roller-coaster ride - you must be at least this smart to own a gun.

Basically my point is gun control doesn't work though having it in place, as an added element, against criminals makes sense.

As for antiproliferation, the rogue nations/terrorists/etc. are the same as criminals, but on a much larger scale. Keep the WMDs out of their hands.

In both cases, be prepared to back it up with force. To do otherwise is foolish.

Since the moniker was not in good spirit, I have changed it.

I must admit that you impressed me with nuclear proliferation angle; however, that is not the same scope as you started.

Attempting to manage who has nuclear technology, particularly keeping it from those who clearly value no life - not even their own, is not the same as attempting to manage who can get a gun. Though I'm willing to concede that some gun owners - the criminals - place less value on life than you or I would.

So, if we can get back to the basic element where we started, how did gun control help this case?

It didn't. It never will. Because you can't keep guns out of the hands of a determined criminal. So, why restrict the law-abiding?

As a side question, do you think antiproliferation will continue to work? As time goes by, more countries are gaining that capability or working toward it. Antiproliferation will probably only continue to work with force. Will you support that force?

It's funny how your kind try to shift gears to conservative news. Must be a realization of how weak your position is.

You mentioned spin in your post. I simply claim to have no spin on the subject. The evidence of you not being able to recall your own post is a point of proof that I am smarter than you.

No spin, just truth. Does it hurt?