Tucker Carlson Interviews Trump Supporter Lisa Gallagher About Being Raided By The FBI Over The False Report That She Was At The Capitol On January 6th
Lisa: "After seeing Joe Biden's speech the night before I thought oh my God this is political, and I was frightened." pic.twitter.com/vwNEyynGrj
Former President Trump was robbed of the 2020 election because he was a hinderance to those seeking to enslave us. ‘President Trump outlined the geopolitical context of the world, without ambiguity:
“We’re at war, in a true sense we’re at war, and we are fighting an invisible enemy,”1
Before we explore the nature of this present war against a “horrible invisible enemy”, we must first understand that in war, ‘to the victor go the spoils’. For millennia, conquered lands not only gave up their territory, but also many of their men, women and children as slaves. They would be duly commoditized as an asset that went to the victor. But what exactly is ‘slavery’?
This definition offers some key components of slavery which are worth considering:
What is legal?
What is obedience?
What is the labor required of a slave?
If we look way back in time, we can see that the Spartans did not mess around. They conquered a region, killed off the strong men, and enslaved everyone else. These assets provided Sparta with everything they required to wage war. The legality of this scheme was dictated by the swords, spears and shields of Spartan warriors. A slave remained obedient if they wanted to remain alive. The slave’s work was whatever Sparta required. All in all, it was a very simple system.
It was the Athenians, Carthaginians, Romans and Khazarians who developed more sophisticated methods of enslavement. Rather than directly enslaving peoples, their empires revolved around trade. Trade brought such immense wealth and prosperity that their empires did not need to impose the brutal militancy of Sparta in order to acquire slaves. They simply bought and traded slaves as they saw fit.
Trade, and the ownership of trade routes, therefore, became the path to power and prosperity. Slaves were a luxury afforded by the strongest and wealthiest civilizations. Slave trade represented a terrible threat to the weak and poor that were within the grasp of these empires.
The Khazarians, in particular, implemented the most sophisticated strategy by placing themselves right in the middle of the most valuable trade routes of Western civilization. Anything travelling east, west, north or south was taxed by the Khazarians, who would crush anyone that did not pay the 10% tax on their goods. Khazaria become extremely wealthy and powerful by ensuring 10% always went to the “big guy”; in this case this was the Kagan of Khazaria.
A few centuries later, the Holy Roman Emperor began granting privileges to various ‘Hanses’, which were medieval guilds of merchants or traders in certain German city states. This initiative would morph into the monopolization of trade on the North and Baltic Seas, eventually giving birth to the mighty Hanseatic League.
If any kingdom was not ‘obedient’ to the terms-of-trade doled out by the League, it was seen as an act of war. The Hanse towns would cut off the supply chain to any ‘rogue’ kingdom, and duly plunge it into famine and economic depression. Once sufficiently weakened, the Hanseatic League would then wage direct warfare, subduing their enemy back into obedience.
In terms of the components of slavery, there is much we can learn:
It was legal because an agreement (in the form of a Treaty, contract or mandate) was signed by the Sovereign;
It was forced-labor because the terms of trade would create an unfair advantage to the Hanseatic League, which in turn reinforced their power over that kingdom; and
It was forced-obedience because the Monarchs didn’t want their subjects placed into famine and poverty, which could potentially give cause for the overthrow of their monarchy.’ For the entire article go to https://prussiagate.substack.com/p/evolution-of-slavery-part-iv
‘In a few days, Idaho’s largest city and capital will host a Pride festival that features a children’s drag queen show. And it is sponsored by major American corporations, according to the festival’s website.
On Sunday, Sept. 11, there will be a “drag kids” show at 12:45 p.m., an hour after drag story time.
Drag kids is described as:
“You have watched the Queens and Kings and now it is time to see the Kids. A drag show like none other the Drag Kids range from ages 11-18 and are ready to bring it all to the Boise Pride Festival stage! Come and cheer them on as they bring drag to the younger generation!”
‘On August 31, while announcing his new initiative to restrict gun rights, Joe Biden reportedly stated that if “brave right-wing Americans,” as he mockingly dubbed them, wanted to exercise rights under the Second Amendment to “fight against the country” that had become tyrannical, they “would need an F-15.” “You need something more than a gun,” he added, later referring to perhaps “nuclear weapons.”
Such is a common trope from the Left, but it completely misunderstands the Second Amendment.
Here is the understanding of the Second Amendment offered by Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, whose 1833 Commentaries on the Constitution is widely (and rightly) regarded as among the most authoritative treatises about the Constitution’s original meaning: “The importance of the Second Amendment will scarcely be doubted by anyone,” he wrote, because a well-regulated militia, comprised of the citizenry, “is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers.” (Emphasis added). “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic,” he continued, “since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
As Justice Story makes explicit, the purpose of the Second Amendment is three-fold: 1) for defense against foreign invasion; 2) for defense against domestic threats (whether “insurrection,” rebellion, or from just ordinary thugs and thieves); and 3) as importantly, for defense against domestic tyranny by the government itself.
Was he blind to the concern that armed citizens could not “out gun” the military capacity of the government? Hardly. Indeed, he expected the latter would be successful “in the first instance,” but he saw the right to keep and bear arms primarily as a “moral check” against tyrannical government, not a physical one. His description therefore speaks more to the character of the people being willing and able to resist tyranny, not to whether the weapons owned by individual citizens had to be on a par with those of the military itself.
A citizenry habituated to provide for its own defense is also one that has the character to oppose tyrannical tendencies of their government. F-15s and nuclear weapons are not necessary if the people remain vigilant in opposing usurpations of power by their own government. (Though having once been in an F-15 when my brother was an F-15 pilot, that sure would be neat to have!) ‘https://amgreatness.com/2022/09/04/president-bidens-egregious-misunderstanding-of-the-second-amendment/
whatyareckon 