| Welcome
To Kurt's Controversy Central Section |
Part Two of YOU CAN'T TRUST A "PATRIOT"
People like Norman Olson, of the Michigan Militia, feed on this
ignorance to sell guns. Norman claims to be a Baptist minister yet trains people to fight
the U.S. Government and kill its employees. He owns a gun store and probably makes a good
living preaching fear and hatred of our government. He is not alone.
But he and the others are wrong and in a position to know it. Jesus was not a patriot. The
Christianity Jesus preached was a preparation for an afterlife. "In my Father's house
are many mansions......I go to prepare a place for you", (John 14:2). That place was
in Heaven, not here.
He also said, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's..." (Mark 12:17).
Caesar was a Roman and his soldiers were enemy occupiers of Judea. So Jesus, far from
resisting, was preaching submission to the enemy. Nothing here was worth fighting for -
Heaven was the goal. To Pontius Pilate He said, "My Kingdom is not of this world: if
My Kingdom was of this world, then would My servants fight, that I should not be delivered
to the Jews..." (John 18:36). So again Jesus denies His kingdom is here and He did
not want His servants to fight, even in His defense.
Some might quote Jesus saying, before going to the garden where He was captured,
"...he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one" (Luke 22:36).
Whoever wrote that made it up. Jesus would not have said it. Matthew's version of the
capture is typical of Jesus' attitude toward violence. "And behold, one of them which
were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the
high priest's, and smote off his ear. Then said Jesus unto him, 'Put up again thy sword
into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword'" (Matt.
26:51-52).
Jesus then ties down his pacifist philosophy in Matthew 5:38-48. "Ye hath heard that
it
hath been said, an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth; but I say unto you, that ye
resist not evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other
also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy
cloak also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. Give to him
that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away. Ye have heard
that it hath been said, thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto
you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray
for them that despitefully use you, and persecute you; that ye may be the children of your
Father which is in Heaven: for He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and
sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what
reward have ye? Do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only,
what do ye more than others do? Do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect,
even as your Father which is in Heaven is perfect".
Of course, the kill-for-Christ-crowd, who encourage their followers to arm against the
Jews, Feds and the U.N. would counter with Matthew 10:34-36, "Think not that I am
come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a
man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the
daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law".
I have never heard that quoted in church without the explanation that this was just His
way of saying that His message would result in strife, but that it wasn't His literal
purpose. Even so, I believe the writer just let his emotions run away with him.
The early Christians allowed themselves to be slaughtered in the hope that they would
awaken in Heaven. It was indeed their belief that Christianity was a preparation for an
afterlife. The conspiracy mongers have perverted Christianity just to get money from
people too lazy to read the New Testament for themselves. So one can be a Christian and
one can be a patriot. But one cannot be a Christian "patriot".
I admit, I'm not so strong when it comes to not resisting evil. I resist it wherever I
find it. That's why I've written this article. The conspiracy mongers are evil. They take
advantage of the anxious and the confused and sell them useless and false information. But
what's worse, they fill them with hatred and inspire them to arm against their own
government and people. Their only motive is profit and to this end they're willing to
undermine what little stability our faltering system still has.
I would not go so far as to say that they wanted the bombing of the Federal Building in
Oklahoma City or the derailing of the train in Arizona. But their constant agitation of
the emotionally unstable among their "patriots" justifies in unsound minds the
most horrible deeds of vengeance. "Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather
give place unto wrath: for it is written, vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink; for in so doing
thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with
good" Romans 12:19-21.
Now to the Jews. Without the Jews there would be no "Conspiracy". They're the
bottom line and in back of its every element. According to some conspiracy mongers, the
Jewish plot to take over the world began with the Babylonian captivity, lasting between
598 and 538 BC. Most of the Jews left to rebuild Jerusalem but a few stayed to adopt the
Babylonian religion and begin plotting. But there's no historical evidence of any attempt
to gain power in Babylon. Besides, Babylon fell, not having been taken over by Jews and
nothing in the Bible indicates the survival or influence of Babylonian Jews.
The returned Jews rebuilt Jerusalem and settled into a life of squalor, strife and idle
boasting until the Roman occupation. They had little time for plots except on an
inter-tribal basis and certainly neither the influence nor the force to impose any plots
on outsiders.
After Titus destroyed Jerusalem in 70 AD the surviving Jews dispersed, mainly to Rome.
Many of them wound up as lion meat in the arenas. They later spread throughout Europe and
during the Middle Ages (Dark Ages), millions were slaughtered, especially during the
Crusades. Hardly the fate of a people in control to any degree. So far, no Jews had any
influence on world events or even the power to benefit their fellow Jews.
During the Middle Ages, Jews were not allowed to own land or join guilds. Most of them
were locked up in their ghettos during the night. They were limited to money-lending and
doctoring. This was their opportunity. The best of them did work their way into the upper
classes. Here they had an opportunity to favor those who favored them and destroy those
who wished them harm.
But did they do this, even for their own survival? No. Instead, they healed those who
called them "Christ Killers" and loaned money to those who later killed them to
keep from paying, as often happened.
During the last couple of centuries the Rothchilds were known to have financed both sides
of any conflict, including WW I. It's rumored that they even financed Hitler! Again, why
didn't they only finance those who favored them?
Hundreds of thousands of impoverished Jews immigrated to America from a Europe in which
they had no influence. They set up pawn shops, operated push carts, became tailors, etc.
and not until the movies did they have an opportunity to influence public opinion. They
didn't take advantage of that opportunity. If they had, they would've been in control
now. But they aren't
When I was a Bircher in 1964, I read each issue of American Opinion from cover to cover. I
read of all the plots being hatched by the Jews. One out of every three names of traitors
was Jewish. Never once did the articles say "Jew". But the names labeled them as
the arch-enemies of our nation.
Years went by and those named went their way. They were minor and unimportant. In most
cases they were just there. The enemy made no gains and nothing happened. Looking back, we
know that. But at the time, the Birchers certainly made the Jews seem sinister. The Jews
are also said to be in control of the U.N. In 1956 Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal and
forbade the Israelis from using it. The Israelis, French and British attacked and took the
canal. The U.N., with only the weight of world opinion, forced the return of the canal to
Egypt. In the Israeli's last war with Egypt, the Israelis were driving toward Cairo. They
could have taken Egypt. Again, the U.N. forced them to withdraw. If the Jews want to take
over the world and if they control the U.N., how come they haven't been able to take over
the Middle East, which they could have done militarily?
They don't even control Israel. The Palestinians, primitive Moslems, are outbreeding them
and swamping their system. Why don't they just boot them out into the rest of the Middle
East and consolidate their territory? They could and they should. But instead, they're
even giving back important defensive perimeters. This got the head Hebe, Yitzak Rabin
assassinated by one of their own.
If there ever was a Jewish plot to take over the world, the Jews are the clumsiest
plotters imaginable. But the truth of the matter is that there is not and never has been
such a plot.
Just another example: Senator Arlen Spector, a Jew, had to drop out of the race for
nomination for the presidency for lack of funds. Why didn't the Rothchilds buy him into
office? Here's yet another opportunity lost for the Jews to put one of their own into the
greatest position of world power.
Gun control and eventual confiscation is a huge part of the "Conspiracy". It's
hugeness is matched only by its phoniness. There's hardly any gun control and no official
threat or danger of confiscation. The gun scare is simply a gun-selling scam promoted by
the NRA and the conspiracy mongers. The conspiracy mongers want to frighten and demoralize
"patriots". The NRA, which is nothing but a lobby for the gun trade, wants to
scare people into buying more guns.
In 1968, when Senator Thomas Dodd passed the most restrictive anti-gun legislation since
the banning of the Tommy Gun and the silencer in the '30's, there were 40 million guns
owned by American civilians. Today, only 27 years later, there are over 220 million guns
owned by American civilians. Yet, Dodd's bill was supposed to lead to confiscation back
then, according to the Birchers. It's a poor tyranny that can't do what the conspiracy
mongers threaten.
There are too many guns out there. With 70 million gun owners, who will buy the gun
overstock? They're a drug on the market. Every gun show displays such a stock of guns one
would wonder who could buy them all.
A few years ago there was a drive by the gun trade to sell guns to women. It worked and
helped for a while but it wasn't enough. Then the NRA stepped up the confiscation scare,
outdoing even the conspiracy mongers.
If I believed in gun confiscation, I wouldn't buy any. I don't see the logic in buying
something that's going to be taken away. But I think the idea is to scare the customer
into burying his guns and buying more and then digging up the buried guns after the new
guns have been confiscated. It is rather stupid, but it works with stupid people.
Twenty years ago the Saturday Night Special was banned. That's any cheap, concealable
pistol. That was supposed to lead to confiscation back then. They're still all over the
place, just as cheap and concealable. So that ban didn't amount to much.
Then came the Brady Bill. Before Brady, one could sign a form saying he wasn't a criminal,
a nut or a dope addict and take the gun right away. Now the form is sent to the police for
checking. So if you want to murder someone and you have no bad record you just have to
wait a week or ten days to shoot your victim. This is no threat to gun ownership by the
law-abiding.
The biggest flap recently was the ban on assault-type weapons. That would have been a good
ban if it had been practical. The assault, or rapid-fire weapon, is inaccurate, expensive,
wasteful of ammo and gives the user a false sense of confidence. While you are spraying
and praying, your opponent, using a standard rifle, will pick you off. Better to settle
for a standard rifle and learn to shoot.
Even so, the ban only has to do with manufacturing and importing. You can still buy them
while available and your ownership isn't threatened.
I'm sure you've seen gun dealers interviewed on TV concerning such scares and what
happens. The dealers all boast of their increased sales following every such rumor of
control or confiscation. They love it and you're the loser.
The latest gun-selling scam is the Militia market. Organize a flock of turkeys to fight
the Jews, Feds and the U.N. and sell them guns, ammo, camos and Boy Scout equipment. All
those weekend warriors buying guns and equipment makes gun dealers rich and keeps the
conspiracy mongers in business, justifying such a waste of money and time. A great market
but no more than a market.
I had let my subscription to American Rifleman lapse because it had turned into just a
catalog promoting the purchase of expensive weapons. An NRA conspiracy monger called to
persuade me to resubscribe. He began his pitch with the tired old confiscation story and
how the NRA had prevented it so far, which they hadn't.
I told him I had read their articles on confiscation, got scared and sold my guns and
wasn't going to buy any more. I was kidding. But if enough people gave that response you'd
be surprised at how quick the confiscation myth would die. They would have to come up with
another scam to sell guns.
Anyway, after he had stopped spluttering he came on about how Hitler had confiscated the
guns in Germany when he took over. Hitler did no such thing. Nearly everyone in Germany
was armed. Hitler and his cronies were mostly ex-soldiers who weren't afraid of guns. All
the attempts to assassinate him were with bombs. Also, well over 90% of the Germans
thought he was the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Not even Stalin ever attempted to disarm the people. The KGB was pretty efficient against
counter-revolutionaries. I don't think there ever was an attempt on Stalin's life.
When the Chechnyans (Russian Moslem civilians) revolted, they had plenty of guns. One
could walk across the street stepping on the bodies of Russian soldiers. They're still
fighting.
In most countries outside the U.S., pistols are illegal. Even so, millions of the soldiers
of Germany, Russia, France, Britain, etc. took their pistols home after they were mustered
out and they or their families still have them. Pistols are simply no threat to any
government. To kill an official with a pistol means one has to get close enough to
guarantee being killed on the spot or spending the rest of his life in prison. Anyone that
dedicated will get a pistol regardless of any restrictions. So aside from a government's
concern for crime or about taxpayers killing other taxpayers, pistols are no problem.
Rifles could be used by revolutionaries but banning them would be impractical. Suppose you
were a dictator and put out the word that rifles were to be confiscated. Even the people
who went along with you would figure you had plans which would make them start shooting or
you'd not fear them. In that case, they might as well start shooting now. Best to leave it
alone.
Even so, every state in the U.S. collects millions yearly in hunting license fees. The
governors of the states wouldn't allow confiscation on that basis alone. Why guarantee
revolution in any case?
I've had a Federal Firearms License for six years and read all the literature. I've never
read even a hint of confiscation by the Feds. The threat doesn't exist. The only people
who threaten gun confiscation are the conspiracy mongers and those in the gun business.
"Remember the "Alamo" and "Remember Pearl Harbor" were rallying
cries by real patriots to other real patriots. "Remember Randy Weaver" and
"Remember Waco" are the cries for money from phonies and profiteers to
well-meaning but unthinking people seduced into the "patriot" racket.
Those who died at the Alamo and Pearl Harbor were men of honor and the pride of their
race. But Randy Weaver and David Koresh were vermin no decent person would associate with.
Even so, they've been immortalized as heroes and martyrs. Randy Weaver should be in prison
and David Koresh should have burned long before he had a chance to take others with him.
This is just another example of the desperation and clumsiness of the conspiracy mongers.
Not only do they choose the unlikeliest villains for their conspiracy propaganda, but when
they need positive examples they choose the unlikeliest heroes.
Randy Weaver joined with Richard Butler's Aryan Nations, a group of anti-government
radicals in Hayden Lake, Idaho. They encouraged his fear and hatred of our government.
Being a loser with no marketable skills, he sawed of the barrels of shotguns and sold them
to an ATF informant at Hayden Lake.
To say he was set up or entrapped is no excuse. If someone should ask me to saw off the
barrel of a shotgun for him I'd tell him to get a hacksaw and take five minutes to do it
himself. Weaver was simply stupid and greedy.
To saw off the barrel of a shotgun, and usually its butt, is a federal crime. No hunter
would use a sawed-off shotgun as its shot pattern would be too wide to hit anything at a
distance. It's only purpose is for concealment in a criminal act.
Weaver was turned in and arrested. He was released on bond, with his agreement to return
for trial. It doesn't matter if he misread the bond rules or if the date on it was
incorrect. When the Federal Marshals came to pick him up, he could have gone with them and
there would've been no shooting.
One thing you must bear in mind; a person is not only responsible for his actions, but
he's responsible for the consequences of those actions. Everything that happened at Ruby
Ridge was a direct result of Weaver's criminality, dishonesty and cowardice. And the Feds
were drawn into a situation they weren't trained to handle.
When I was a right-wing fanatic in the '60's, my younger brother was a deputy sheriff in
Los Angeles. He had occasionally worked with federal agents. I had been interviewed
several times by FBI agents and told him they were stupid, as they couldn't make any sense
out of what I talked to them about.
He explained that they weren't necessarily stupid. He said that such white-collar cops as
the FBI and ATF have to undergo a battery of psychological tests which show them to be
completely normal. So normal, in fact, that they can't relate to radicals of any sort.
They're good with people who commit crimes for profit but when it comes to religious or
political idealists they get confused. Radicals don't come out with their hands up and so
everything goes wrong from then on. So naturally, they didn't understand Weaver. But
neither do the "patriots", who see him as a victim of Federal abuse.
|
