@DunkingDan i've been aware of that for about a week, but just haven't shared it here. a few on my facebook feed have talked about it extensively.
i don't know what to make of it. it is a 'deploying position' and speaks of expectation of two deployments (maybe not one above but another iteration of it from elsewhere). there is a lot of speculation concerning it, too.
i fully expect push back on presenting this, and quite frankly i don't care... :
the UN has been attempting to remove the rights of private weapon ownership for years now- more than a decade. part of the Obama era plans were to use this to disarm American's, first by 'proving' UN Charter was a document superior to the Constitution- making any disagreements between it and the charter null.... and while the 'charter' is a living document to be altered and manipulated by not only OUR INTERNAL ENEMIES (Dems, open borders, Soros) but exterior enemies who would rather 'take' what they lust for instead of create their own.
make no mistake the UN wants the world disarmed. the lions share of the reason this continent is impossible to be militarily taken whole from outside agency is the sheer number of weapons in this nation, the massive volume of veterans, national guard, and good ol' boys who will happily defend their range. IF those 'armed' become criminals, and the UN (under charter) is 'invited' to attempt disarming, it would be the absolute mess the friggin' Dems WANT. and though all the bleeding hearts or those who feel they are reasonably 'centered', that is PRECISELY what those people, along with the open borders and certainly the oligarchs from all across the planet WANT... we're the third most populated nation on the planet behind China and India- who are almost completely disarmed (private citizens), and 'they' are at the mercy of their governments... making 'us' that way is the kingpin- pull it the rest of the world falls apart.
'they' could come after other 'rights' recognized by the constitution first, but... it would be SO much
easier if we couldn't resist them. so... they'll go after those 'next'. meanwhile, they have to divide the population into camps- some demanding disarming for reasons varying from 'murder rate' to '..because of the children JUST THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!', get the media behind it (easily done when it's owned by them) and then stack the courts. Trump winning (even though he's no friend of the 2A) put them back perhaps a generation on this 'movement'.
and for years i asked myself 'why'? "What is the end game"... and, it's pretty obvious and shouldn't have taken me so long to figure out... it's 'population control'.
if the hag would have won we would be at war with Russia i've little doubt, which served at least two purposes with her and hers, 1- cover her tracks and activities, 2- initiate opportunity to take a good chunk out of the population, more than likely entwining many countries into the foray..
laugh all you want, this is what i believe the 'game' is.
after guns are addressed, and i imagine once a law is established (destroying the 2A) it will just be a matter of time before penalties for infraction will be
severe- as in, as
severe as can be. next will be 1A and attack on non-compliant 'news'- Fox will be targeted as a for instance... speaking against government will carry a penalty (such as it does in China and Russia- and who are both attempting to make criminals out of anyone- any nationality- criticizing their positions publicly and specifically on the internet... thank you Obama for handing over control of the internet to the international community and which China is seizing right now). after 'speech' is crippled, the 4A and unlawful search, seizure, and 'trials' will be impacted- resulting in mass arrests for no good reason. on and on until people SCREAM for relief- and are willing to accept whatever 'rules' presented to ensure their 'security'- which will be solely at the leisure of the state.
dystopian image? yeah... and by my reckoning precisely what they are intending. 'they' can reduce the population by 1/3 in a decade before people are even aware of what's happening. by that time, it won't matter that it 'is' known as there will be no way to stop them... and where do they stop? what's the magic number and what will be the deciding factors? good questions..... compliance will obviously be one of the primary 'qualifications'...
now do i
really believe all that? well, i don't know. i know this though- without the ability to resist and 'make it easy for them' we'd have a chance... without that ability, we're at their mercy... and... i absolutely believe this: Safety and Public Health ain't got shit to do with the disarming of otherwise law abiding citizens- there is another reason. we can bicker about what that reason is, but no matter what it is---- if it was obvious we'd know, so why isn't it obvious? because 'they' don't want us to know what it is... as in, they're distracting using calls to emotional response which by nature tells me they don't trust simple logic, which means it's most likely nefarious in nature. the 'above' is a drastic and extreme 'story', but... plan for the worst and hope for the best? if there was 'trust' in this nation between citizens and government (who SHOULD be 'citizens working FOR citizens') maybe this entire subject could be discussed, but because 'they' play these games, we clutch our weapons with extreme pessimism for their intent.