Monday, March 12, 2012

The Constitution v. Big Business - Republican Leadership sides with Big Business

Tennessee Firearms Association, Inc.
Legislative Action Committee




Republican leadership in the General Assembly, primarily in the House under the heavy hand of Beth Harwell, Debra Maggart and Gerald McCormick have made it clear that they are aligned with the money from Big Business and are willing to disregard the clause in the 2nd Amendment which provides that the right of self-defense "shall not be infringed." They totally ignore Article I, Section 26 of the Tennessee Constitution. Thus, these elected officials are willing to impair the capacity of Tennesseans to provide for their own self-defense by commuting to and from work while legally armed. They are willing to effectively deny citizens the capacity legally carry a firearm in their personal cars without fear of losing their jobs or being criminally prosecuted.

This disregard of your ability to defend yourself going to and from work cannot be overstated or disregarded.

To address the risk that current law places on citizens simply going to and from work, TFA has pushed for changes in the law to enable employees to legally carry in their personal transportation a weapon and to leave that weapon secured in their personal transportation while at work. HB3560 and SB 3002 are bills address this problem by prohibiting employers from prohibiting citizens from keeping legally transported firearms securely stored in the employee's private vehicle.

Big Business employers including Federal Express, Nissan, and numerous others are using their substantial financial resources to buy the votes of your elected representatives. One Big Business spokesperson testified in the Senate Judiciary Committee that thousands of employees pose a risk if firearms are nearby because they are too likely to engage in violence at work. Senator Mike Bell was able to get the Federal Express spokesperson to admit that Federal Express (and presumably other Big Business as well) has significant business operations in at least 16 other states that have some form of safe commute laws already enacted. This Federal Express spokesperson - and for that matter no Big Business spokesperson - could not cite a single problem that has arisen because of those state laws.

House Republican leadership and presumably cohorts in the Senate are dancing like puppets in the financial purse strings of Big Business - and abrogating their oaths and obligations to the citizens - to defeat the Employee Safe Commute bill. This Axis of Evil is teaming with Big Business to distribute lie-filled propaganda to legislators. The House Leadership are reportedly leaning heavily on - if not outright intimidating rank and file legislators - to "compromise" their principles and vote as demanded by leadership. This propaganda claims that permit holders, including the more than 340,000 Tennesseans who have permits, are such a violence-prone group that allowing them to commute to and from work while legally armed will result in streets of blood, huge losses of human life or injury and devastating financial costs to employers. Really? That sounds like the same false prophecies that we hear from opponents - those who lack the capacity to trust those who put them in office - that we hear with any law that would have the effect of enabling a citizen to select an effective means of self-defense. Its the "Chicken Little" opposition strategy and sadly some Tennesseans buy into the foolishness.

Some opposition to the Safe Commute Act also claim that it unacceptably violates private property rights. This simple minded argument assumes that the issue is a zero sum analysis where its all or nothing in the balance of self-defense rights versus real property rights. They do not or cannot deal with the truth that the legislation merely seeks to establish a reasonable balance between the self-defense needs of citizen employees and the already heavily regulated (by the same government officials) ownership interests of parking lot owners. While the opponents may not consider the right to self-defense a factor of any significance, citizens who are at risk for car jackings, rape, robbery and murder while commuting do.

As noted below, there are two House bills related to this issue on notice this week on March 14 in the House Employee and Consumer Affairs subcommittee. HB3560 is carried by Rep. Eddie Bass and is the bill that House Leadership is trying its best to belittle and kill with the help of its Big Business financial supporters. This is the bill that we want to PASS. The other bill is HB3660 which is now being carried by House Leadership member Gerald McCormick. We are told that this bill is subject to amendment and, in the nature of Pelosi, the House Leadership does not want to share the proposed amendment so that the citizens can read it before its introduced.

Well sourced information indicates that HB3560 is going to be under heavy handed opposition from House Leadership including possible Naifeh-style leadership votes to make sure the bill is defeated in a subcommittee so that it never has the opportunity for a floor vote. Realizing that the bill already has 30+ sponsors, that is mere shenanigans by House leaders to kill a bill that they KNOW will pass if its comes to a full vote of all 99 Representatives. Its a denial of a Representative form of government because the elected representatives of most Tennesseans will be denied the opportunity to record their votes on the right of self-defense.

It is important to demand the passage of HB3560 and to demand the defeat of HB3660.

Call all members of the House Consumer and Employee Affairs subcommittee. Demand in particular that the committee chair push this bill to the full committee. Subcommittee members are

Committee Officers


Members


Please call your legislators. Their office numbers and email addresses are listed on the House and Senate directories which also contain lookup tools to find your specific legislators.

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Hamblin County Mayor Addresses Firearms Group

The Lakeway Chapter of the Tennessee Firearms Association (TFA) hosted Hamblin County Mayor Bill Britain at their monthly meeting on Tuesday, November 15.

Mayor Britain opened the meeting by stating that 6 of 14 County Commission members were serving their first term, having been elected in 2010 or appointed since that time. Britain, himself, was also elected in 2010. Several TFA members silently hoped that the current county officials are more firearms friendly that the previous administration.

Britain told the audience that the county is in good financial shape, having a sizable cash reserve on hand and being in debt at only half of the legally permissible rate.

Turning to the subject of firearms, Britain said that Cherokee Park, the only county park, is posted “No Firearms” but it does not apply to Handgun Carry Permit holders. He indicated that he would look into correcting the sign. He also said that the City of Morristown parks allowed firearms to be carried by those in possession of a valid HCP.

He was asked about county government buildings being posted. It was argued that the carrying of weapons is prohibited during judicial proceedings but not elsewhere in county government buildings. The relevant portion of the Tennessee Code says:

39-17-1306. Carrying weapons during judicial proceedings.

(a) No person shall intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carry on or about the person while inside any room in which judicial proceedings are in progress any weapon prohibited by § 39-17-1302(a), for the purpose of going armed; provided, that if the weapon carried is a firearm, the person is in violation of this section regardless of whether the weapon is carried for the purpose of going armed.”


However weapons may be prohibited in any building which is properly posted in accordance with Tennessee Code :

39-17-1359. Prohibition at certain meetings -- Posting notice.

(a) (1) An individual, corporation, business entity or local, state or federal government entity or agent thereof is authorized to prohibit the possession of weapons by any person who is at a meeting conducted by, or on property owned, operated, or managed or under the control of the individual, corporation, business entity or government entity.

(2) The prohibition in subdivision (a)(1) shall apply to any person who is authorized to carry a firearm by authority of § 39-17-1351.

(b) (1) Notice of the prohibition permitted by subsection (a) shall be accomplished by displaying one (1) or both of the notices described in subdivision (b)(3) in prominent locations, including all entrances primarily used by persons entering the property, building, or portion of the property or building where weapon possession is prohibited. Either form of notice used shall be of a size that is plainly visible to the average person entering the building, property, or portion of the building or property, posted.

(2) The notice required by this section shall be in English, but a duplicate notice may also be posted in any language used by patrons, customers or persons who frequent the place where weapon possession is prohibited.

(3) (A) If a sign is used as the method of posting, it shall contain language substantially similar to the following:

AS AUTHORIZED BY T.C.A. § 39-17-1359, POSSESSION OF A WEAPON ON POSTED PROPERTY OR IN A POSTED BUILDING IS PROHIBITED AND IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE.

(B) As used in this section, "language substantially similar to" means the sign contains language plainly stating that:

(i) The property is posted under authority of Tennessee law;

(ii) Weapons or firearms are prohibited on the property, in the building, or on the portion of the property or building that is posted; and

(iii) Possessing a weapon in an area that has been posted is a criminal offense.

(C) A building, property or a portion of a building or property, shall be considered properly posted in accordance with this section if one (1) or both of the following is displayed in prominent locations, including all entrances primarily used by persons entering the property, building, or portion of the property or building where weapon possession is prohibited:

(i) The international circle and slash symbolizing the prohibition of the item within the circle; or

(ii) The posting sign described in this subdivision (b)(3).

(c) (1) It is an offense to possess a weapon in a building or on property that is properly posted in accordance with this section.

(2) Possession of a weapon on posted property in violation of this section is a Class B misdemeanor punishable by fine only of five hundred dollars ($500).

(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to alter, reduce or eliminate any civil or criminal liability that a property owner or manager may have for injuries arising on their property.

(e) The provisions of this section shall not apply to title 70 regarding wildlife laws, rules and regulations.

(f) This section shall not apply to the grounds of any public park, natural area, historic park, nature trail, campground, forest, greenway, waterway or other similar public place that is owned or operated by the state, a county, a municipality or instrumentality thereof. The carrying of firearms in those areas shall be governed by § 39-17-1311.”


An audience member also made the point that Hamblin County has no publicly accessible shooting range. Recently, one business owner had plans to construct a range in accordance with state law, however he was prohibited by the county government “until an ordinance could be passed to regulate such ranges.”


Mayor Britain listened politely to comments from the TFA members but did not make a commitment to use his office to take any action for or against the concerns of those in attendance.


TFA will not meet in December but will return to the normal meeting schedule in January, 2012 on the third Tuesday of the month at Shoneys on AJ Highway in Morristown. One does not have to be a member of TFA to attend.









Wednesday, July 27, 2011

I know what it say, but what do it really mean?

One Hundred Forty Eight years ago this week the U.S. Congress passed the 14th amendment to the Constitution.

“Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”

This is probably the most poorly written and most misconstrued parts of the Constitution. The 14th is only 147 words shorter than the first 10 amendments combined.

Let’s take a look at it, from a non-lawyer point of view.

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Most people would say that Section One was written to grant citizenship privileges to former slaves, and I believe that was the writer’s intent. Did you notice the line about “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”? I cannot, for the life of me, figure out how anchor babies of illegal aliens can be considered “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” We need someone to stand up and say that at least one parent of a baby must be a citizen or legal resident (Article I, Section 8.4) in order for the baby to be a citizen. To the best of my knowledge, individuals were considered to be citizens of the several united (small u) States until this amendment. All of a sudden individuals became citizens of the United (capital U) States. It also states that no person shall be deprived of property without due process of law. More about this in Section 4.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Actually pretty simple. The writer intended to punish the Confederate States by denying voting privileges to them.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Also simple. Leaders of the Confederate States were banned from having a say in the new United (capital U) States.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

This is a hot button section currently. Originally it said that the debts incurred by the Union States would be paid. And, the creditors of the Confederate States were out of luck. Currently B. Hussein Ubama is trying to say that he, as President, can increase the amount of debt which is owed by the United (capital U) States, and bypass Congress in the process. Apparently B. Hussein has never read the original Constitution, Article I, Section 8.2.

Do you remember in Section 1 where it says that people cannot be deprived of property without due process? Then in Sections 2 and 3, a goodly portion of Confederates were denied representation on the national level. Tell me, if you can how due process was followed when slaves were taken away from their owners. (Rabbit trail follows: I’m not saying that slavery was right and I will not defend it. But I will say that slaves were considered property at that point in history.) I know, I know! Not all former officials (Section 3 applies) were slave owners and not all slave owners were government officials. But the lines do merge enough to deserve consideration.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Well! That overwhelms me. According to Section 5, Congress is free to expand and revise any law that they are able to connect, however remotely, to the 14th. For example, I wanted to comment on the SCOTUS ruling that it was OK to kill unborn babies, citing the 14th as authority. By their tacit approval of that ruling, Congress effectively made a law that authorizes murder.

The entire 14th amendment had only two purposes. First, it was written to punish the states that were following the 9th and 10th amendments. Second, it was the cornerstone of a larger and more powerful central government.

This union (small u) has been deteriorating ever since the 14th amendment was passed. God help us all.

Thursday, July 21, 2011

Cute as a Speckled Puppy




What weighs just over a half pound, is almost indestructible and may save your life?
It's called the BC Special, 5 shot derringer.
Boje and Dotti Cornils manufacture the tiny .22/.22 mag pistol in Russellville, Tennessee. Boje began his apprenticeship as a machinist in 1950. He has been modifying and building firearms for about 15 years.
The BC Special is entirely made of machined stainless steel, except for the wood grips made by Dotti. It's available in Stainless Steel, Titanium, and Black finishes. Each derringer is supplied with both a .22 LR and a .22 Mag cylinder. Dotti encourages potential buyers to dry fire the gun, a practice unheard of for .22 rim fire handguns. The trigger pull is necessarily heavy to prevent accidental discharge because there is no trigger guard. The basic Stainless Steel model begins at less than $300 and the black finish with screw-on compensator goes for around $450. Titanium finish is somewhere in between. A laser sighting device is also available and is easily mounted with just one screw.
Loaded with hollow point ammo, the BC Special would be an adequate self defense weapon that could be carried in a purse or behind a large belt buckle.
They welcome visitors at their shop in Russellville. They can be reached at (423) 587 5779 for an appointment.
Before embarking on the derringer, Boje made most of the improvements to the AA 12 shotgun shown in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4ebtj1jR7c. He is shown in the following video demonstrating the results of his work on the AA 12. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siOEEOTjGqM&feature=related Note the lack of recoil, even when held upside down.
I met Boje and Dotti at the July meeting of the Tennessee Firearms Association, Lakeway Chapter in Morristown, Tenn.

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

There are lies and they are damn lies

Disinformation Tactics: The Methods Used To Keep You In The Dark

By Giordano Bruno | Neithercorp Press

Posted on pakalert on February 7, 2010

http://www.pakalertpress.com/2010/02/07/disinformation-tactics-the-methods-used-to-keep-you-in-the-dark/

There was a time, not too long ago (relatively speaking), that governments and the groups of elites that controlled them did not find it necessary to conscript themselves into wars of disinformation. Propaganda was relatively straightforward. The lies were much simpler. The control of information flow was easily directed. In fact, during the early Middle-Ages in most European countries commoners were not even allowed to own a Bible, nor was the Bible allowed to be interpreted from Latin to another language, let alone any other tome that might breed "dangerous ideas". This was due, in large part, to the established feudal system and its hierarchy of royals and clergy. Rules were enforced with the threat of property confiscation and execution for anyone who strayed from the rigid socio-political structure. Those who had theological, metaphysical, or scientific information outside of the conventional and scripted collective world view were tortured and slaughtered. The elites kept the information to themselves and removed its remnants from mainstream recognition, sometimes for centuries before it was rediscovered.

With the advent of anti-feudalism and, most importantly, the success of the American Revolution, elites were no longer able to dominate information with the edge of a blade or the barrel of a gun. The establishment of Democracies (and Democratic Republics), with their philosophy of open government and rule by the people, compelled Aristocratic minorities to plot more subtle ways of obstructing the truth and thus maintaining their hold over the world without exposing themselves to retribution from the masses.

Thus, the complex art of disinformation was born. The technique, the "magic" of the lie, was refined and perfected. The mechanics of the human mind and the human soul became an endless obsession for the elites.

The goal was malicious but socially radical; instead of expending the impossible energy needed to dictate the very form and existence of the truth, they would allow it to drift, obscured in a fog of contrived data. They would wrap the truth in a "Gordian Knot" of misdirections and fabrications so elaborate that they felt certain the majority of people would surrender, giving up long before they ever finished unraveling the deceit. The goal was not to destroy the truth but to hide it in plain sight.

In modern times and with carefully engineered methods, this goal has, for the most part, been accomplished. However, these methods also have inherent weaknesses. Lies are fragile. They require constant attentiveness to keep them alive. The exposure of a single truth can rip through an ocean of lies, evaporating it instantly. In this article, we will examine the methods used to fertilize and promote the growth of disinformation, as well as how to identify the roots of disinformation and effectively cut them, starving out the entire system of fallacies once and for all.

Media Disinformation Methods

The mainstream media, once tasked with the job of investigating government corruption and keeping elitists in line, has now become nothing more than a PR firm for corrupt officials and their Globalist handlers. The days of the legitimate "investigative reporter" are long gone, and journalism itself has deteriorated into a rancid pool of so called "TV Editorialists" who treat their own baseless opinions as supported fact.

The elitist co-opting of news has been going on in one form or another since the invention of the printing press. However, the first methods of media disinformation truly came to fruition under the supervision of newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst, who believed the truth was "subjective" and open to his personal interpretation. Hearst's legacy of lies and sensationalism lives on in the Hearst published magazine 'Popular Mechanics', who accuse the growing 9/11 Truth Movement of outrageous "conspiracy theory" while at the same time consistently publishing articles about UFO sightings and secret government flying saucer programs.

As we will show, this strange juxtaposition of mixed signals and hypocritical accusations is characteristic of all purveyors of disinformation.

Some of the main tactics used by the mainstream media (MSM) to mislead the masses are as follows:

Lie Big, Retract Quietly

Mainstream media sources (especially newspapers) are notorious for reporting flagrantly dishonest and unsupported news stories on the front page, then quietly retracting those stories on the very back page when they are caught. In this case, the point is to railroad the lie into the collective consciousness. Once the lie is finally exposed, it is already too late and a large portion of the population will not notice or care when the truth comes out. A good example of this would be the collusion of the MSM with the Bush administration to convince the American public after 9/11 that Iraq had WMDs, even though no concrete evidence existed to prove it. George W. Bush's eventual admission that there had never been any WMDs in Iraq (except chemical weapons which the U.S. actually sold to Saddam under the Reagan / Bush administration) was lightly reported or glazed over by most mainstream news sources. The core reason behind a war that has now killed over a million people was proven to be completely fraudulent, yet I still run into people today who believe that Iraq had nukes.

Unconfirmed Or Controlled Sources As Fact

Cable news venues often cite information from "unnamed" sources, government sources that have an obvious bias or agenda, or "expert" sources without providing an alternative "expert" view. The information provided by these sources is usually backed by nothing more than blind faith. A recent example of this would be the Osama Bin Laden audio tapes which supposedly reveal that the Christmas "Underwear Bomber" was indeed Al-Qaeda:

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/osama-bin-laden-addresses-president-obama-audio-tape/story?id=9650267

The media treats the audio tape as undeniable fact in numerous stories, then at the same time prints a side story which shows that the White House cannot confirm that the tape is even real:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60N16I20100124

If the White House cannot confirm the authenticity of the tape, then why did the media report on its contents as if it had been confirmed?

Calculated Omission

Otherwise known as "cherry picking" data. One simple piece of information or root item of truth can derail an entire disinfo news story, so instead of trying to gloss over it, they simply pretend as if it doesn't exist. When the fact is omitted, the lie can appear entirely rational. This tactic is also used extensively when disinformation agents and crooked journalists engage in open debate.

Distraction, and the Manufacture of Relevance

Sometimes the truth wells up into the public awareness regardless of what the media does to bury it. When this occurs, their only recourse is to attempt to change the public's focus and thereby distract them from the truth they were so close to grasping. The media accomplishes this by "over-reporting" on a subject that has nothing to do with the more important issues at hand. Ironically, the media can take an unimportant story and, by reporting on it ad nauseum, cause many Americans to assume that because the media won't shut-up about it, it must be important! An example of this would be the recent push for an audit of the Federal Reserve which was gaining major public support, as well as political support. Instead of reporting on this incredible and unprecedented movement for transparency in the Fed, the MSM spent two months or more reporting non-stop on the death of Michael Jackson, a pop idol who had not released a decent record since "Thriller," practically deifying the man who only months earlier was being lambasted by the same MSM for having "wandering hands" when children were about.

Dishonest Debate Tactics

Sometimes, men who actually are concerned with the average American's pursuit of honesty and legitimate fact-driven information break through and appear on T.V. However, rarely are they allowed to share their views or insights without having to fight through a wall of carefully crafted deceit and propaganda. Because the media knows they will lose credibility if they do not allow guests with opposing viewpoints every once in a while, they set up and choreograph specialized T.V. debates in highly restrictive environments which put the guest on the defensive, and make it difficult for them to clearly convey their ideas or facts.

TV pundits are often trained in what are commonly called "Alinsky Tactics." Saul Alinsky was a moral relativist and champion of the lie as a tool for the "greater good;" essentially, a modern day Machiavelli. His "Rules for Radicals" were supposedly meant for grassroots activists who opposed the establishment, and emphasized the use of any means necessary to defeat one's political opposition. But, is it truly possible to defeat an establishment built on lies, by use of even more elaborate lies and by sacrificing one's ethics?

Today, Alinsky's rules are used more often by the establishment than by its opposition. These tactics have been adopted by governments and disinformation specialists across the world but they are most visible in TV debate. While Alinsky sermonized about the need for confrontation in society, his debate tactics are actually designed to circumvent real and honest confrontation of opposing ideas with slippery tricks and diversions. Alinsky's tactics, and their modern usage, can be summarized as follows:

1) Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.

We see this tactic in many forms. For example, projecting your own movement as mainstream and your opponent's as fringe.

Convincing your opponent that his fight is a futile one. Your opposition may act differently or even hesitate to act at all, based on their perception of your power.

2) Never go outside the experience of your people and, whenever possible, go outside of the experience of the enemy.

Don't get drawn into a debate about a subject you do not know as well as or better than your opposition. If possible, draw them into such a situation instead. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty in your opposition. This is commonly used against unwitting interviewees on cable news shows whose positions are set up to be skewered. The target is blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address. In television and radio, this also serves to waste broadcast time to prevent the target from expressing his own positions.

3) Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.

The objective is to target the opponent's credibility and reputation by accusations of hypocrisy. If the tactician can catch his opponent in even the smallest misstep, it creates an opening for further attacks.

4) Ridicule is man's most potent weapon.

"Ron Paul is a crackpot." "Dennis Kucinich is short and weird." "9-11 twoofers wear tinfoil hats." Ridicule is almost impossible to counter. It's irrational. It infuriates the opposition which then reacts to your advantage. It also works as a pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

5) A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.

The popularization of the term "Teabaggers" is a classic example. It caught on by itself because people seem to think it's clever and enjoy saying it. Keeping your talking points simple and fun keeps your side motivated and helps your tactics spread autonomously without instruction or encouragement.

6) A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.

See rule number 6. Don't become old news. If you keep your tactics fresh, it's easier to keep your people active. Not all disinformation agents are paid. The "useful idiots" have to be motivated by other means. Mainstream disinformation often changes gear from one method to the next and then back again.

7) Keep the pressure on with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.

Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. Never give the target a chance to rest, regroup, recover or re-strategize. Take advantage of current events and twist their implications to support your position. Never let a good crisis go to waste.

The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.

This goes hand in hand with Rule #1. Perception is reality. Allow your opposition to expend all of its energy in expectation of an insurmountable scenario. The dire possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.

9) The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure on the opposition.

The objective of this pressure is to force the opposition to react and make the mistakes that are necessary for the ultimate success of the campaign.

10) If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside.

As grassroots activism tools, Alinsky tactics have historically been used (for example, by labor movements) to force the opposition to react with violence against activists, which leads to popular sympathy for the activists' cause. Today, false (or co-opted) grassroots movements use this technique in debate as well as in planned street actions. The idea is to provoke (or stage) ruthless attacks against ones' self, so as to be perceived as the underdog or the victim. Today, this technique is commonly used to create the illusion that a certain movement is "counterculture" or "anti-establishment."

11) The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.

Never let the enemy score points because you're caught without a solution to the problem. Today, this is often used offensively against legitimate activists, such as the opponents of the Federal Reserve. Complain that your opponent is merely "pointing out the problems." Demand that they offer a solution.

12) Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. The targets supporters will expose themselves. Go after individual people not organizations or institutions. People hurt faster than institutions.

The next time you view an MSM debate, watch the pundits carefully. You will likely see many if not all of the strategies above used on some unsuspecting individual attempting to tell the truth.

Internet Disinformation Methods

Because the MSM's bag of tricks has been so exhausted over such a long period of time, many bitter and enraged consumers of information are now turning to alternative news sources, most of which exist on the collective commons we call the internet. At first, it appears, the government and elitists ignored the web as a kind of novelty, or just another mechanism they could exploit in spreading disinformation. As we all now well know, they dropped the ball and the internet has become the most powerful tool for truth history has ever seen.

That being said, they are now expending incredible resources in order to catch up to their mistake, utilizing every trick in their arsenal to beat web users back into submission. While the anonymity of the internet allows for a certain immunity against many of Saul Alinsky's manipulative tactics, it also allows governments to covertly attack those trying to spread the truth. In the world of web news, we call these people "disinfo trolls." Trolls are now being openly employed by governments in countries like the U.S. and Israel specifically to scour the internet for alternative news sites and disrupt their ability to share information.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Raw_obtains_CENTCOM_email_to_bloggers_1016.html

http://www.thenational.ae/article/20090104/FOREIGN/882042198/1002

http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/news/1/10793-twitterers-paid-to-spread-israeli-propaganda-internet-warfare-team-unveiled.html

Internet trolls, also known as "paid posters" or "paid bloggers," are increasingly being employed by private corporations as well, often for marketing purposes. In fact, it is a rapidly growing industry.

Trolls use a wide variety of strategies, some of which are unique to the internet. Here are just a few:

1) Make outrageous comments designed to distract or frustrate: An Alinsky tactic used to make people emotional, although less effective because of the impersonal nature of the web.

2) Pose as a supporter of the truth. Then make comments that discredit the movement: We have seen this even on our own forums -- trolls pose as supporters of the Liberty Movement, then post long, incoherent diatribes so as to appear either racist or insane.

The key to this tactic is to make references to common Liberty Movement arguments while at the same time babbling nonsense, so as to make those otherwise valid arguments seem ludicrous by association.

In extreme cases, these "Trojan Horse Trolls" have been known to make posts which incite violence -- a technique obviously intended to solidify the false assertions of the notorious MIAC report and other ADL/SPLC publications which purport that constitutionalists should be feared as potential domestic terrorists.

3) Dominate Discussions: Trolls often interject themselves into productive web discussions in order to throw them off course and frustrate the people involved.

4) Prewritten Responses: Many trolls are supplied with a list or database with pre-planned talking points designed as generalized and deceptive responses to honest arguments. 9/11 "debunker" trolls are notorious for this.

5) False Association: This works hand in hand with item #2, by invoking the stereotypes established by the "Trojan Horse Troll."

For example: calling those against the Federal Reserve "conspiracy theorists" or "lunatics". Deliberately associating anti-globalist movements with big foot or alien enthusiasts because of the inherent negative connotations. Using false associations to provoke biases and dissuade people from examining the evidence objectively.

6) False Moderation: Pretending to be the "voice of reason" in an argument with obvious and defined sides in an attempt to move people away from what is clearly true into a "grey area" where the truth becomes "relative."

7) Straw Man Arguments: A very common technique. The troll will accuse his opposition of subscribing to a certain point of view, even if he does not, and then attacks that point of view. Or, the troll will put words in the mouth of his opposition and then rebut those specific words. For example: "9/11 truthers say that no planes hit the WTC towers and that it was all just computer animation. What are they, crazy?"

Sometimes, these strategies are used by average people with serious personality issues. However, if you see someone using these tactics often or using many of them at the same time, you may be dealing with a paid internet troll.

Government Disinformation Methods

Governments, and the globalists who back them, have immense assets -- an almost endless fiat money printing press -- and control over most legal and academic institutions. With these advantages, disinformation can be executed on a massive scale. Here are just a handful of the most prominent tactics used by government agencies and private think tanks to guide public opinion and establish the appearance of consensus:

1) Control The Experts: Most Americans are taught from kindergarten to ignore their instincts for the truth and defer to the "professional class" for all their answers. The problem is that much of the professional class is indoctrinated throughout their college years, many of them molded to support the status quo. Any experts that go against the grain are ostracized by their peers.

2) Control The Data: By controlling the source data of any investigation, be it legal or scientific, the government has the ability to engineer any truth they wish, that is, as long as the people do not care enough to ask for the source data. Two major examples of controlled and hidden source data include: the NIST investigation of the suspicious 9/11 WTC collapses, in which NIST engineers, hired by the government, have kept all source data from their computer models secret, while claiming that the computer models prove the collapses were "natural". Also, the recent exposure of the CRU Climate Labs and their manipulation of source data in order to fool the public into believing that Global Warming is real and accepting a world-wide carbon tax. The CRU has refused to release the source data from its experiments for years and now we know why.

3) Skew The Statistics: This tactic is extremely evident in the Labor Department's evaluations on unemployment, using such tricks as incorporating ambiguous birth / death ratios into their calculation in order to make it appear as though there are less unemployed people than there really are or leaving out certain subsections of the population, like those who are unemployed and no longer seeking benefits.

3) Guilt By False Association: Governments faced with an effective opponent will always attempt to demonize that person or group in the eyes of the public. This is often done by associating them with a group or idea that the public already hates. Example: During the last election, they tried to associate Ron Paul supporters with racist groups (and more recently, certain Fox News anchors) in order to deter moderate Democrats from taking an honest look at Congressman Paul's policies.

4) Manufacture Good News: This falls in with the skewing of statistics, and it also relies heavily on Media cooperation. The economic "Green Shoots" concept is a good example of the combination of government and corporate media interests in order to create an atmosphere of false optimism based on dubious foundations.

5) Controlled Opposition: Men in positions of power have known for centuries the importance of controlled opposition. If a movement rises in opposition to one's authority, one must usurp that movement's leadership. If no such movement exists to infiltrate, the establishment will often create a toothless one, in order to fill that social need and neutralize individuals who might have otherwise taken action themselves.

During the 1960's and 1970's, the FBI began a secretive program called COINTELPRO. Along with illegal spying on American citizens who were against the Vietnam conflict or in support of the civil rights movement, they also used agents and media sources to pose as supporters of the movement, then purposely created conflict and division, or took control of the direction of the movement altogether. This same tactic has been attempted with the modern Liberty Movement on several levels but has, so far, been ineffective in stopping our growth.

The NRA is another good example of controlled opposition. Many gun owners are satisfied that paying their annual NRA dues is tantamount to actively resisting anti-gun legislation when, in fact, the NRA is directly responsible for many of the compromises which result in lost ground on 2nd amendment issues. In this way, gun owners are not only rendered inactive but actually manipulated into funding the demise of their own cause.

6) False Paradigms: Human beings have a tendency to categorize and label other people and ideas. It is, for better or worse, a fundamental part of how we understand the complexities of the world. This component of human nature, like most any other, can be abused as a powerful tool for social manipulation. By framing a polarized debate according to artificial boundaries and establishing the two poles of that debate, social engineers can eliminate the perceived possibility of a third alternative. The mainstream media apparatus is the key weapon to this end. The endless creation of dichotomies and the neat arrangement of ideologies along left/right lines offers average people a very simple (though hopelessly inaccurate) way of thinking about politics.

It forces them to choose a side, usually based solely on emotional or cultural reasons, and often lures them into supporting positions they would otherwise disagree with. It fosters an environment in which beating the other team is more important than ensuring the integrity of your own. Perhaps, most importantly, it allows the social engineer to determine what is "fair game" for debate and what is not.

Alinsky himself wrote: "One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other."

One merely needs to observe a heated debate between a Democrat and a Republican to see how deeply this belief has been ingrained on both sides and how destructive it is to true intellectual discourse.

Stopping Disinformation

The best way to disarm disinformation agents is to know their methods inside and out. This gives us the ability to point out exactly what they are doing in detail the moment they try to do it. Immediately exposing a disinformation tactic as it is being used is highly destructive to the person utilizing it. It makes them look foolish, dishonest, and weak for even making the attempt.

Internet trolls, most especially, do not know how to handle their methods being deconstructed right in front of their eyes and usually fold and run from debate when it occurs.

The truth is precious. It is sad that there are so many in our society that have lost respect for it; people who have traded in their conscience and their soul for temporary financial comfort while sacrificing the stability and balance of the rest of the country in the process. The human psyche breathes on the air of truth. Without it, humanity cannot survive. Without it, the species will collapse in on itself, starving from lack of intellectual and emotional sustenance. Disinformation does not only threaten our insight into the workings of our world; it makes us vulnerable to fear, misunderstanding, and doubt; all things that lead to destruction. It can lead good people to commit terrible atrocities against others or even against themselves. Without a concerted and organized effort to diffuse mass-produced lies, the future will look bleak indeed.

************************************************************************************************************************************************

"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." --Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (121-180)



Thursday, May 19, 2011

The Constitution Ain’t What It Used To Be

Greenville attorney and constitutional scholar Jeffery Cobble addressed the Tennessee Firearms Association, Lakeway Chapter on Tuesday, May 18.

The Tennessee Constitution, Article I Section 26 says, “That the citizens of this state have a right to keep and to bear arms for their common defense; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime.”

Cobble said that originally, in 1798, that was understood to say that all free men could bear arms. Keep in mind that black slaves were not the only ones in servitude. At that time it was common for white Europeans to be in a state of indentured servitude. Then in 1835 it was changed to mean that free white men could bear arms. Following the War for Southern Independence, as a condition of regaining statehood in the union, the state constitution was rewritten in 1870 to include the current version above.

In 1840, according to Cobble, “arms” referred to any weapon in common use by the military. In 1870 “arms” was redefined to include weaponry on a case by case basis. Theoretically, if they had existed in the mid 1800’s, a fully automatic rifle could have been the preferred walking around weapon.

When the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution was adopted, the primary intent was to grant citizenship to former slaves. “Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”

The 14th amendment has been interpreted under the incorporation doctrine to mean that the U.S. Constitution pre-empts state laws. If one follows that line of thinking then the Tennessee Constitution phrase “but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime.” is nullified by the U.S. 2nd amendment which says “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Remember that the federal government required the addition of but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms with a view to prevent crime.” as a condition of statehood.

Cobble’s point is that both the Tennessee and U.S. Constitutions are subject to changing interpretations, even though the language of each is relatively simple and straight forward. He also stated that, in his opinion, the 14th amendment has had all the sense interpreted out of it and that it should be repealed.

Cobble pointed out that until the early 20th century, state militias were the primary defense force. A national standing army came into it’s own at about the time of World War I. He proposed that the states should activate the concept of true state militias. The founding fathers were leery of standing armies and so should be today’s citizens.

On a rabbit trail, Cobble said that capitalism will not work without morality. He said that there is no Wealth without Work and there is no Work without Wealth. Nothing is accomplished, he said, by going after and punishing the wealthy.

Cobble is an interesting man to hear and seems to be well versed in constitutional issues. He does not hesitate to opine that any constitutional discussion can have two or more sides.

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Tennessee Firearms Association, Inc.
Legislative Action Committee



Tennesseans have pushed for a change in the existing laws for many years so that individuals who have handgun carry permits can commute to and from work without fear of losing their job simply because the want to be capable of providing for their own defense in the event of an emergency while commuting.

For years, big business has opposed this change in the law and have used its money and resources to defeat this change in the law.

For years, Republicans have asserted to Tennessee's conservatives and particularly its firearms owners "give us control in the General Assembly and we will fix these problems." Well, the Republicans now have control - complete control. Tennessee's conservatives, the people, have put the Republicans in office. Now it is time to demand that the Republicans honor their promises to the citizens and remove infringements on our rights to keep, bear and wear arms under Article 1, Section 26 of the Tennessee Constitution. To date, there is no clear sign that these promises are being kept - much less remembered.

What is evident is that those who are in power are once again dancing to the carrot stick of big business as evidenced by the amendment to House Bill 2021. It is time, therefore, that we remind them that it was citizen voters - not big business - that elected them to office! To borrow a phrase from Bill Cosby, ""You know, I brought you in this world, and I can take you out...." If Tennessee voters do not fully understand and agree that conservatives are now in power, then those who are in power but failing in their promises can be removed and others can take their place.

Go to the TFA's action alert system and send them a message that they are being held accountable for their "campaign promises." Call to Action Email Alert - Send your own Message

Forward this message and this call to action to every firearms owner, to every conservative, to every Tea Party member you know.