Bigunreal, as usual your post is very articulate & informative...backed by solid logic. This whole fiasco reeks of (another) black op IMO.
[url]http://www.infowars.com/articles/us/va_tech_shooting_cops_he lp_kill_32_students_claims_furious_blogger.htm [/url]
Lightfire & Freedom, welcome to the board. It's good to know younger folks are looking/seeing beyond the facade of the "Caste System" and it's proponents in the (Globalist Elite controlled) "mainstream" media. Help spread the word about Caste Football!
***Folks, here's exactly what the Globalist hoped to leverage this tragedy for...
Second Amendment In Danger Under Anti-Gun Bush
Gun control advocates should love the President
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Thursday, April 19, 2007
In the wake of the tragic shooting massacre in Virginia this week gun control advocates have once again come crawling out of the woodwork to capitalize on the ill informed and automated response of blaming the destructiveness of a mentally ill person's rampage on the second amendment.
The problem is that the gun control advocates are preaching to the converted when they clamor and claw at the government to restrict gun ownership in America.
Gun control advocates should applaud Bush for what he has done for their cause, instead they reveal the enormity of the false left/right paradigm that exists in US politics by berating him and his ilk as right wing gun nuts.
Many point to the fact that Bush allowed the assault weapons ban to expire in 2004 as an indication that he caved in to the NRA. John Kerry even accused Bush of conspiring to "chose his powerful friends in the gun lobby over the police officers and families that he promised to protect."
In Reality Bush wanted to renew the assault weapons ban but was forced to let it expire when it became clear that he may not retain office in 2004 should he alienate core Republican voters.
At the time Bush was applauded by Democratic Senators Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer for his stance.
The assault weapons ban is just one of the numerous anti-gun positions taken by the Bush Administration. Additional examples include disarming airline pilots, forfeiting gun rights for misdemeanors, and arguing that the total DC gun ban is a reasonable restriction on the 2nd Amendment.
Speaking in late 2005 on the topic of the second amendment, former Republican Congressman, CIA official and board member on the NRA Bob Barr said that his position had enabled him to judge the difference between how the Clinton and Bush administration's approached the issue of gun control. Barr echoed the sentiments of many other prominent conservatives in expressing his frustration about how the Bush administration was even more anti-second amendment than the Clinton office.
"it's my impression to be honest with you, and this is confirmed by a lot of folks who are involved very heavily in regulatory matters involving firearms, that it is more difficult dealing with this administration than it was dealing with the prior administration."
In the past another Republican Congressman, and now Presidential candidate, Ron Paul has accused the Bush administration of attempting to set in motion a militarized police state in America by enacting gun confiscation martial law provisions in the event of emergencies such as an avian flu pandemic or natural disasters.
"I think they're concerned about the remnant, the remnant of those individuals who don't buy into stuff and think that they should take care of themselves on their own, that they should have their own guns and their own provisions and they don't want to depend on the government at all and I think that is a threat to those who want to hold power. They don't want any resistance to their authoritarian rule."
Paul, a staunch gun-rights supporter, has previously blasted the administration's position on so-called "assault weapons" while claiming it is gun-rights oriented as hypocritical.
In making his point, Paul quoted Georgetown University professor Robert Levy, who recently offered this comparison: "Suppose the Second Amendment said, 'A well-educated electorate being necessary for self-governance in a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed.' Is there anyone who would suggest that means only registered voters have a right to read?"
"Tortured interpretations of the Second Amendment cannot change the fact that both the letter of the amendment itself and the legislative history conclusively show that the Founders intended ordinary citizens to be armed," said Paul.
Edited by: DixieDestroyer 
