This is the Voice of Freedom. This is the Voice of Freedom. This is the Voice of Freedom. This is my daddy's station. I'm Pooh, classic radio like you always wished it could be. 101.1 FM, eager. 101.1 FM is owned and operated by the Independent Foundation Trust as a non-profit community service. 101.1 FM is owned and operated by the Independent Foundation Trust. 101.1 FM is owned and operated by the Independent Foundation Trust. 101.1 FM is owned and operated by the Independent Foundation Trust. 101.1 FM is owned and operated by the Independent Foundation Trust. 101.1 FM is owned and operated by the Independent Foundation Trust. You're listening to the Hour of the Time. I'm William Cooper. Ladies and gentlemen, the United States Supreme Court handed down two landmark decisions today. One, it struck down a major portion of the Bradyville and said that the federal government cannot require local officials to enforce federal law. This came out of a lawsuit brought by Sheriff Mack of Stafford, Arizona. And another sheriff, I believe, and another sheriff, I believe up in either Montana or Wyoming. I forget which, but it's one of those two states. Who challenged the constitutionality of forcing sheriffs, or local officials of any kind for that matter, to perform background checks on people who wanted to purchase a handgun that they had their own job to do. And not only that, they did not work for the federal government. Now, this has far-reaching consequences, ladies and gentlemen, because how many local officials in your town, or in your county, or in your state, are attempting to enforce federal law, or are enforcing federal law? Well, ladies and gentlemen, you see this does not just apply to the Bradyville. Well, the Supreme Court specifically stated that the government cannot require local officials to enforce federal law. Period. End of subject. So the next time you go to purchase a handgun and they try to make you fill out something so the sheriff can do a background check, tell them to take a hike, Ike. It's all over with. The Supreme Court just said, uh-uh, you can't do that. You're in violation of the Constitution. You're in violation of the law. And the second one was the act that they had passed, the Communications Decency Act, as a matter of fact, that they had passed to regulate speech on the Internet and computer bulletin boards and e-mail and all of those things. The Supreme Court threw the whole thing out. Said it was too vague. Said that they were trying to regulate or restrict free speech. And cannot be done. Cannot be done. The whole thing was tossed out. So it's just like I've always told you, ladies and gentlemen, if you have the guts to take it all the way to the Supreme Court, most of the time the Supreme Court will enforce the Constitution. Every once in a while they won't. But most of the time they do. And will. And have. And, uh, you know, every once in a while there's a little wild card they throw in there. But this just goes to show you that, uh, once again, I was right about that. And, uh, it's great for states' rights because folks, that ruling on the Bradyville goes a lot farther than what you think. A lot farther than what you think. How many of your employers are trying to enforce the income tax law? The law that never was. The law that really isn't. How many of them are trying to force you? How many of them are acting as agents for the Internal Revenue Service? Well, that ruling this morning by the Supreme Court just struck all that down. Local officials, employers, state government, county government, city government, cannot, cannot, cannot, be asked by the federal government to enforce federal law. So, that's a major, major, major victory for freedom in this country, folks. And, uh, I think there's going to be some more of that. I think people are beginning to look around and see the stupidity, the ridiculousness of some of these things. And, uh, they're going to backfire. Don't go away. I'll be right back after this short pause and continue, continue with another broadcast based upon, and I forgot to say this yesterday, I said it was from an article entitled A Nation of Cowards by Jeffrey R. Snyder, which appeared in the public interest in the fall of 1993, which is a quarterly, quarterly, quarterly, get my tongue untied from my iTunes there, a quarterly journal of opinion published by National Affairs, Incorporated, Washington, D.C. What I meant to say is yesterday's broadcast and today's broadcast are based upon the article A Nation of Cowards by Jeffrey R. Snyder. In other words, it's a mixture of the article that he wrote and my own research and what I believe is all mixed together, folks. It's not just this article. And, uh, in fact, if I had to break it up, I'd have to say it's about 50-50. So, if you get this article A Nation of Cowards and you read it and compare it with yesterday's broadcast and today's broadcast, it's not going to be the same, ladies and gentlemen. Don't expect it to be. This, uh, this article stimulated me to do these broadcasts based upon what he wrote in this article and what I also am interjecting into this discussion. Okay? So don't go away. I shall return after this brief pause. Well, Dre, you could make it. Welcome to the new World in the Town! Never in human history has so few taken so much from so many as America's Illuminati and the warlords of Wall Street and Washington. In just eight years, these gangsters and international government gangsters took us from the greater predator nation to the larger detonation on Earth. Our standard of living has dropped like a rock for four out of every five Americans. They have foreclosed on our homes, our farms, our factories. They've exported your childhood and surrendered our arms. They want you. A new world order. A new world order. A new world order. A new world order. A new world order. A new world order. A new world order. A new world order. A new world order. A new world order. The Illuminati wants you to be a slave from birth to grave. The banks that own the Federal Reserve are private. They own it. It's neither Federal nor Reserve. The cashers make that key art funding money. The money stuff you call dollars for two pennies. They lend it back to us at full base value. Then charge you interest. You get the debt. They get the interest. They get the gold. You get the shop. The world is a new world order. A new world order. A new world order. Oh, yes, folks. What you're hearing is right. It is going to be Nazi. The Nazis were socialists. Hitler was a socialist, ladies and gentlemen. Just in case you didn't know that. It's the truth. Nazi means National Socialist German Workers' Party. Hitler socialized Germany. He wanted to socialize the whole world. He didn't quite make it, did he? That's the fact when people understood what was going on. They didn't know everything by any means, but they were a lot smarter than they appear to be today. I met a man the other day who had been listening to my broadcast, and when he found out that it was me that's doing the broadcast, he said, well, you know, gee, I'm not sure I subscribe to all of your beliefs. What beliefs don't you subscribe to? You know, I don't require that everybody subscribe to everything that I believe in or that I say. In fact, I admonish everyone on this broadcast always to listen to everyone, read everything, believe absolutely nothing, unless you can prove it in your own research. And I mean don't believe your mother, your school teacher, your college professor, your mayor, your president. I don't care who it is. This is the age of deception, ladies and gentlemen. So when somebody challenges something I say or anybody else says, I count that as a victory. I'm looking at someone who's not going to be easily fooled. And I had just introduced this person to my wife, who's Chinese, 100% Chinese, and to my children who are part Chinese, part Native American, part English, Scotch, and Irish. And I'm part Native American. And he said, well, I'm not sure I believe in your white supremacist teachings. I had to step back, ladies and gentlemen, and look at this man. Apparently, Americans have been so propagandized and so brainwashed that even though I just introduced him to my wife, who's 100% Chinese, this man's brain did not have the ability to compute the fact that I couldn't possibly be a white supremacist or a racist of any kind whatsoever at all. It did not compute with him. What computed with him is that I'm a Constitutionist. I believe, and it is true, that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. I believe in the founding principles and ideals that made this country the greatest in the nation up until recently. I believe in freedom. I believe in liberty. I believe in the importance of the individual and all of those things. I believe in limited government so that the government cannot become despotic and destroy the individual or enslave humanity or the population. And apparently, the propaganda of the government in teaching people that if you're a Christian, if you believe in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, if you believe in freedom and liberty, if you believe in patriotism, that you're a white supremacist, Nazi terrorist, and all kinds of other things, this person could not form an original thought in his own mind. And could not understand that the evidence was right before him that what he had been taught was a lie. So, anyway, that's just to prepare you a little bit and to warn you to open your mind. Don't believe everything that you hear, ladies and gentlemen. Not from me, not from your mother, especially not from the communist news networks or the press or Washington, D.C. Or any politician. They're the biggest pack of liars. And socialists, of course, that's their stopping trade. He's lost. Now, let me continue where we left off yesterday. And I left off, of course, talking about the tyranny of the elite, those who at least think that they are the elite. And maybe some of you will remember when columnist Carl Rowan, even though he'd been preaching gun control for a long time, used a gun to defend his home and was embarrassed about that. You may remember when Maryland Governor William Donald Schaefer sought legislation year after year to ban semi-automatic, quote, assault weapons, end quote. His only purpose, we are told by him, is to kill people. While he is at the same time escorted by state police, armed with large capacity 9mm semi-automatic assault rifles and pistols. You see, this is not just simple hypocrisy, ladies and gentlemen. It is the workings of that habit of mind possessed by all those who believe that they are superior beings who have taken upon themselves the terrible burden of civilizing the ignorant masses of cattle and sheep who they claim masquerade as people and who understand, like our Congress, that laws are for other people, not for them. It is an elitist attitude. It is a Nazi attitude. It is what forms Nazis. These liberals who believe that they are elites believe that they are the philosopher kings just like I've been teaching you for years. You've heard that before. They believe that the people simply cannot be trusted. That the people, that's you folks, are incapable of just and fair self-government. That left to your own devices, your society will be racist, sexist, homophobic, and inequitable. And these liberals who believe that they are above everybody else, that they are the elite, they think they're the only ones with truly mature minds who truly know how to fix things. And they're going to help us live the good and just life, ladies and gentlemen, even if they have to lie to us and force us to do it. And they detest anyone who stands in their way. They hate my guts with a passion that you could not even conceive of until you see when they come face to face with me. It is absolutely unbelievable the behavior that they exhibit in the low level to which they sink in their absolute vociferous detestation of the hour of the time and the conservative and real American principles and ideals. You see, the private ownership of firearms is a total rebuke to their utopian zeal. To own firearms is to affirm that freedom and liberty are not gifts from the state. It is to reserve final judgment about whether the state is encroaching on freedom and liberty. To stand ready to defend that freedom with more than mere words, with bullets, if you must, and to stand outside the state's totalitarian reach with the only thing, the only thing that can give you power. Mao Zedong said, and I quote, All power emanates from the barrel of a gun. And he who has no gun has no power, end quote. Well, he may be a communist, but you see, he knows what's what in the world. What he said was absolutely true. And the first thing that he did, this people's leader, when he obtained power in China, was to take away the guns of the people. These socialists, elitists, distrust of the people underlying the gun control movement is illustrated beautifully in, ladies and gentlemen, in HCI's campaign against a new concealed carry law in Florida. Prior to 1987, the Florida law permitting the issuance of concealed carry permits was administered at the county level. The law was vague, and as a result was subject to conflicting interpretation and political manipulation. Permits were issued principally to security personnel and the privileged few with political connections. Permits were valid only within the county of issuance. In 1987, however, Florida enacted a uniform concealed carry law, which mandates that county authorities issue a permit to anyone who satisfies certain objective criteria. The law, ladies and gentlemen, requires that a permit be issued to any applicant who is a resident, at least 21 years of age, has no criminal record, no record of alcohol or drug abuse, no history of mental illness, and provides evidence of having satisfactorily completed a firearm safety course offered by the National Rifle Association or any other competent instructor. The applicant must provide a set of fingerprints, after which the authorities make a background check. The permit must be issued or denied within 90 days, is valid throughout the state, and must be renewed every three years, which provides authorities a regular means of re-evaluating whether the permit holders still qualify. Now, passage of this legislation was vehemently opposed by Handgun Control Incorporated and the media. The law, they said, would lead to citizens shooting each other over everyday disputes involving finger benders, impolite behavior, and other slights to their dignity. Terms like Florida, the gun shine state, and Dodge City East were coined to suggest that the state of Florida and those seeking passage of the law were encouraging individuals to act as judge, jury, and executioner in a death-wish society. No HCI campaign, ladies and gentlemen, more clearly demonstrates the elitist beliefs underlying the campaign to eradicate gun ownership. Given the qualifications required of permit holders, HCI and the media can only believe that common law-abiding citizens are seething cauldrons of homicidal rage, ready to kill to avenge any slight to their dignity, eager to seek out and summarily execute the lawless. Only lack of immediate access to a gun restrains them and prevents the blood from flowing in the streets. These people, ladies and gentlemen, are so mentally and morally deficient that they would mistake a permit to carry a weapon in self-defense as a state-sanctioned license to kill at will. Now, did their dire predictions come true? Did any of this happen in the state of Florida? Well, despite the fact that Miami and Dade County have severe problems with the drug trade, the homicide rate fell in Florida following enactment of this law as it did in Oregon following enactment of similar legislation there. There are, in addition, ladies and gentlemen, several documented cases of new permit holders successfully using their weapons to defend themselves. And information from the Florida Department of State shows that from the beginning of the program in 1987 through June 1993, 160,823 permits have been issued and only about 530, or about .33% of the applicants have been denied a permit for failure to satisfy the criteria. That's one-third of 1%. Failure to satisfy the criteria indicating that the law is benefiting those whom it was intended to benefit, and that is, the law-abiding citizen. Only 16 permits, folks, less than 1 one-hundredth of 1%, have been revoked due to the post-issuance commission of a crime involving a firearm. The Florida legislation has been used as a model for legislation adopted by Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and Mississippi. There are, in addition, seven other states, Maine, North, and South Dakota, Utah, Washington, West Virginia, and with the exception of cities with a population in excess of one million, Pennsylvania, which provide that concealed carry permits must be issued to law-abiding citizens who satisfy various objective criteria. Finally, no permit is required at all in Vermont. So, altogether, then, there are 13 states in which law-abiding citizens who wish to carry arms to defend themselves may do so. While no one appears to have compiled the statistics from all of these jurisdictions, there is certainly an ample database for those seeking the truth about the trustworthiness of law-abiding citizens who carry firearms. There's other evidence which also suggests that armed citizens are very responsible in using guns to defend themselves. Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck, using surveys and other data, has determined that armed citizens defend their lives or property with firearms against criminals approximately one million times a year. One million times a year. And if those citizens did not have a firearm, there would have one been, there would have been one million more violent crimes committed and how many of those millions would have been murdered, raped, beaten severely? How many? Nobody really knows. All we know is that according to Kleck, using surveys and all these other data, citizens defend their lives or property with firearms against criminals approximately one million times a year. shh, shh, keep that a secret. Don't tell the gun control people. They'll go out of their mind. In 98% of these instances, the citizen merely brandishes the weapon or fires a warning shot. And that's enough to stop the crime from happening. Only in 2% of the cases do citizens actually shoot their assailants. Don't tell those gun control people. shh, keep it a secret. Men defending themselves, according to Kleck, with their firearms, armed citizens kill 2,000 to 3,000 criminals each year. Listen carefully to me, ladies and gentlemen. In defending themselves with their firearms, armed citizens kill 2,000 to 3,000 criminals each year, three times the number killed by the police. Because there are so few police, so many citizens and so many criminals. A nationwide study by Cates, the constitutional lawyer and criminologist, found that only 2% of civilian shootings involved an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal. The error rate for the police, however, was 11% over five times as high. You know why? Because the police themselves have an elitist attitude. The citizens do not. It is simply not possible, ladies and gentlemen, to square the numbers that I just gave you and the experience of Florida with the notion that honest law-abiding gun owners are borderline psychopaths itching for an excuse to shoot someone. vigilantes eager to seek out and summarily execute the lawless are incompetent fools incapable of determining when it is proper to use lethal force in defense of their lives. Nor upon reflection should these results seem surprising. Rape, robbery, and attempted murder are not typical actions rife with ambiguity or subtlety requiring special powers of observation and great book learning to discern. Oh, no! When a man pulls a knife on a woman and says, you're coming with me, her judgment that a crime is being committed is not likely to be in error. There is little chance that she is going to shoot the wrong person. It is the police because they are rarely at the scene of the crime when it occurs who are more likely to find themselves in circumstances where guilt and innocence are not so clear cut and in which the probability for mistakes is higher. classical republican philosophy has long recognized the critical relationship between personal liberty and the possession of arms by a people ready and willing to use them. Political theorists as dissimilar as Niccolo Machiavelli, Sir Thomas Moore, James Harrington, Algernon Sidney, John Locke and Jean Jacques Rousseau all shared the view that the possession of arms is vital for resisting tyranny and that to be disarmed by one's government is tantamount to being enslaved by it. If you look throughout history and especially if you look at the research done by the Jews for the preservation of firearms ownership, all people in the history of the world who have ever been disarmed have shortly thereafter either been enslaved or destroyed. only with the consent of the governed. As case has shown, the Second Amendment is as much a product of this political philosophy as it is of the American experience in the Revolutionary War. Yet our conservative elite has abandoned this aspect of Republican theory because they're not really Republican conservatives at all. Although they recognize and embrace gun owners as allies in other arenas, their battle for gun rights is desultory, almost nonexistent anymore. So the problem here is not status, utopianism, although goodness knows, ladies and gentlemen, liberals are not alone in the confidence they have in the state's ability to solve society's problems. Rather, the problem seems to lie in certain cultural traits shared by our so-called conservative and liberal elites. And if you follow them, wherever they go, you'll find that they always end up belonging to the same club. Folks, one such trait of these people is an abounding faith in the power of the word. The failure of our so-called conservative elite to defend the Second Amendment stems in great measure from an overestimation of the power of the rights set forth in the First Amendment and a general undervaluation of action implicit in calls for the repeal of the Second Amendment is the assumption that our First Amendment rights are sufficient to preserve our liberty. Now, if that were so, all a prisoner would have to do to get out of jail was start professing his innocence loudly and frequently and often to everyone. And pretty soon everyone would believe it and his First Amendment right to freedom of speech would get him out of prison, wouldn't it? No, it doesn't work that way. Never will. It's not true. It is, in fact, a lie. It is, in fact, a lie. You see, they believe that liberty can be preserved as long as men freely speak their minds, that there is no tyranny or abuse that can survive being exposed in the press, and that the truth need only be disclosed for the culturates to be shamed. The people will act, and the truth shall set us and keep us free. Bullloading! Ask the branch Davidians. Ask Vicki Weaver and her son. All murdered by government. Murdered! And many more. History, ladies and gentlemen, is not kind to this belief, tending rather to support the view of Hobbes, Machiavelli, and other Republican theorists, that only people willing and able to defend themselves can preserve their liberties. Only people who believe so strongly in principles and ideals that they are willing to die in defense of those principles and ideals. Only those people can preserve their liberties. You see, if something is not important enough to you that you are willing to risk injury in its defense or even death, you will not long have it. While it may be tempting and comforting for you to believe that the existence of mass electronic communication has forever altered the balance of power between the state and its subjects, the belief has certainly not been tested by time, and what little history there is in this age of mass communication is not encouraging. For we can see the manner in which the press is controlled. They're controlled to the point that we no longer trust them, we no longer believe them. They have lost all credibility. In fact, we routinely refer to them as the communist news networks. And isn't it funny that the man we call Ted Turncoat, who married Hanoi Jane Fonda, the avowed communist, has his network named CNN, which just fits the term communist news network. Isn't it funny how things just sort of turn out the way they're supposed to without anybody really thinking about it? The camera, the radio, the press, are mere tools, and like guns, can be used for good or ill. It can be used against us and are all the time. What do you think spurred the move for low-power FM radio broadcasting across this country? Why do you think the World Wide Freedom Radio Network became a reality? Hitler was a socialist, but he was a masterful orator. He was also a liberal elite. He was not right-wing. He used radio to very good effect. It is well known to have pioneered and exploited the propaganda opportunities afforded by him. And then, of course, there were the brown shirts who knew very well how to quell dissent among intellectuals. people. In addition to being enamored of the power of words, our so-called conservative elite shares with liberals the notion that an armed society is just not civilized or progressive, that massive gun ownership is somehow a blot on our civilization. This association, folks, of personal disarmament with civilized behavior is one of the greatest unexamined beliefs of our time. History says it's wrong. History says if you give up your weapons, you will soon either be enslaved or eliminated. That's what history says, and I believe in history. Should you read English literature, if you are one of the few people who still read in this world, read in the world, and understand, folks, a person who can read but does not read is no better off than someone who cannot read at all. In fact, I defy you to tell me the difference. But should you be one of the people who still do read, and should you read English literature from the 16th through 19th centuries, you will discover numerous references to the fact that a gentleman, a man, especially when out at night or traveling, armed himself with a sword or a pistol against the chance of encountering a highwayman or other such predator. Now, this does not appear to have shocked the ladies accompanying him. In fact, it made them feel very secure. True, it is true for the most part, there were no police in those days, but we've already addressed the notion, ladies and gentlemen, that the presence of the police absolves people of the responsibility to look after their safety, and in any event, the existence of the police cannot be said to have reduced crime to negligible levels. It is by no means obvious why it is civilized to permit oneself to fall easy prey to criminal violence and to permit criminals to continue unobstructed in their evil ways. While it may be that a society in which crime is so rare that no one ever needs to carry a weapon is civilized, a society that stigmatizes the carrying of weapons by the law-abiding because it distrusts its citizens more than it fears rapists, robbers, and murderers certainly cannot claim this distinction. Perhaps the notion that defending oneself with lethal force is not civilized arises from the view that violence is always wrong, or the view that each human being is of such intrinsic worth that it is wrong to kill anyone under any circumstances, even to defend your life against being destroyed or eliminated by someone else. The necessary implication of these propositions, however, is that life is not worth defending, not worth defending, and that is far from being civilized. The beliefs that counter violence and killing are always wrong, or an invitation to the spread of barbarism. In fact, such beliefs announce loudly and clearly that those who do not respect the lives and property of others will rule over those who do. So, in truth, one who believes it wrong to arm himself against criminal violence shows contempt of God's gift of life, or in modern parlance does not properly value himself, does not live up to his responsibilities to his family and community, and proclaims himself mentally and morally deficient because he does not trust himself to behave responsibly. In truth, a state that deprives its law-abiding citizens of the means to effectively defend themselves is not civilized, but barbarous, becoming an accomplice of murderers, rapists, and thugs, and revealing its totalitarian nature by its tacit admission that the disorganized, random havoc created by criminals is far less a threat than our men and women who believe themselves free and independent and act accordingly. So while gun control proponents and other advocates of a kinder, gentler society incessantly decry our armed society, in truth, we do not live in an armed society. Folks, we live in a society in which violent criminals and agents of the state habitually carry weapons, and in which many law-abiding citizens own firearms but do not go about armed. Department of Justice statistics indicate that 87% of all violent crimes occur outside the home. Essentially, although tens of millions own firearms, we are an unarmed society. And that's the truth. clearly, the police and the courts are not providing a significant break on criminal activity. While liberals call for more poverty education and drug treatment programs, conservatives take a more direct tack. George Will advocates a massive increase in the number of police and a shift toward community-based policing. people. Meanwhile, the National Rifle Association and many so-called conservative leaders call for laws that would require violent criminals serve at least 85% of their sentences and would place repeat offenders permanently behind the bars. Ladies and gentlemen, our society suffers greatly from the beliefs that only official action is legitimate and that the state is the source of our earthly salvation. both liberal and conservative prescriptions for violent crime suffer from the not-in-my-job description school of thought regarding the responsibilities of the law-abiding citizen and from an overestimation of the ability of the state to provide society's moral moorings. As long as law-abiding citizens assume no personal responsibility for combating crime, liberal and conservative programs will fail to contain it. Judging, judging by the numerous articles about concealed carry in gun magazines, the growing number of products advertised for such purpose, and the increase, the increase in the number of concealed carry applications in states with mandatory issuance laws, more and more people, including growing numbers of women, are carrying firearms for self-defense, and the statistics, ladies and gentlemen, indicate that an awful lot of them are liberals. Now, since there are still many states in which the issuance of permits is discretionary, and in which law enforcement officials routinely deny applications, there are many people that have been put to the hard choice between protecting their lives or respecting the law. And if I'm put to that choice, I'll protect my life and the lives of my family members every time, the law will be damned. Some of these people have learned the hard way by being the victim of a crime, or by seeing a friend or loved one raped, robbed, or murdered. That violent crime can happen to anyone, anywhere, at any time, and that crime is not about sex or property, but life, liberty, and dignity. The laws, ladies and gentlemen, proscribing concealed carry of firearms by honest, law-abiding citizens breed nothing but disrespect for the law. As the Founding Fathers knew well, a government that does not trust its honest, law-abiding, tax-paying citizens with the means of self-defense is not itself worthy of trust. Not worthy of trust. Laws which disarm honest citizens proclaim that the government is the master, not the servant of the people. A federal law along the lines of the Florida statute overriding all contradictory state and local laws and acknowledging that the carrying of firearms by law-abiding citizens is a privilege and immunity of citizenship is needed to correct the outrageous conduct of state and local officials operating under discretionary licensing systems. And I go even farther than that, ladies and gentlemen. I say no law is needed for anyone to carry arms concealed or out in the open period. A militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, period, end of subject. It is the supreme law of the land. The militia is the whole of the people. I wonder what it is about the term shall not be infringed that these people do not understand. You already have the right. It is a right granted by the Creator, by God, to protect yourself. And if someone else has that same kind of weapon, then you need that same kind of weapon in case that person decides to use his or her weapon on you. And that goes for government as well as anyone else. That's what it's all about, ladies and gentlemen. That's really what it's all about. The Founding Fathers didn't give us the right to keep and bear arms, to go hunting. They recognized that the right to defend oneself is a Creator endowed right. granted by God to all living things. And you defend yourself with whatever means you can contrive against those who would enslave you, against those who would mug you, against those who would rape you, against those who would steal your property, against those who would enslave you, against governments governments, to become despotic, against invaders or insurrectionists. And, as far as the militia is concerned, in case those in government subvert the law, their job is to execute the laws of the Union and of the State and restore the constitutions to their supreme and lawful place as the law, the government. If you don't believe that, you read the writings of the Founding Fathers. They were very clear on what the militia is, what the purpose of the militia is, and when they wrote the Constitution, they recognized the militia as a pre-existing force of the people. And it might disturb most of you to know that according to the law of just about every state in this Union and of the federal government, all men listening to this broadcast between the ages of 17 and 45 are members of the militia where the they want to be or not. All men who have served in any of the armed forces of the United States of America who have been honorably discharged or have retired with honorable service or members of the militia until the age of 64 and they continue to be past that age if they are in good health and wish to volunteer longer. By law! Now how can anyone function as militiamen by law if they have no weapons and no ammunition? tell me that folks. You can't. You cannot. You cannot. What we certainly do not need is more gun control. Those who call for the repeal of the Second Amendment so that we can really begin controlling firearms betray a serious misunderstanding of the Bill of Rights or an outright aim to commit treason. The Bill of Rights does not grant rights to the people such that its repeal would legitimately confer upon government the powers otherwise proscribed. Folks, the Bill of Rights is the list of the fundamental unalienable rights endowed in man by his Creator that defined what it means to be a free and independent people, the rights which must exist to ensure that government governs only with the consent of the people. At one time this was even understood by the Supreme Court. Listen to this. In United States versus Cruikshank in 1876, the first case in which the court had an opportunity to interpret the Second Amendment, it stated that the right confirmed by the Second Amendment, quote, is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence, end quote. The repeal of the Second Amendment would no more render the outlawing of firearms legitimate than the repeal of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment would authorize the government to imprison and kill people at will. A government that abrogates any of the Bill of Rights with or without majoritarian approval forever acts illegitimately, becomes tyrannical, and loses the moral right to govern. This, ladies and gentlemen, is the uncompromising understanding reflected in the warning that American gun owners will not go gently into that good utopian night. You can have my gun when you pry it from my gold dead hands. Some people say you can have my gun when you pry it from my cold dead fingers. Some people say you can have my gun, I'll be glad to turn it in, but I'll turn it in bullets first, one by one, and when they're all gone, then you can have my gun. While liberals take this statement as evidence of the retrograde violent nature of gun owners, we gun owners hope that liberals hold equally strong sentiments about their printing presses, word processors, and television cameras. You see, the republic depends upon fervent devotion to all of our fundamental rights. This constitutional republic depends upon it. No democracy will long ever have those fundamental rights. Remember V.I. Lenin, the founder of the Soviet Union, said, democracy is indispensable to socialism. This is a constitutional republic, and it is not just a right, but a duty of every American to own firearms. Good night, ladies and gentlemen. God bless each and every single one of you. Thank you. All of a sudden, in the middle of the night, there's a loud knock on your door. Hey, honey, something's not right. Throughout your arms. Let me have a mask. We're here from the government. We're here to help you. And I'm from the IRS, with a power to catch. Did you know to complain? Singles of fact. Get out of this house. Turn your guns. Give me your code. The federal pay will back up all you. That's the gunstack. That's it with your code. Hillary Chalala. Reno Janet Dyke. Reading the words of General Albert Pike. Demonic founder of the Ku Klux Klan. Engineer of the Masonic Master Plan Pipe said, Lucifer is God across this land And Clinton's saying, hit the mark, his right hand While we're all dancing to the drums of Upward Brite Clinton's preparing it for another new pack Pipe said, World Order out of chaos, depression, inflation Creates a panic that rapes the nation Crisis creation Incites black and white programs And mutation Don't make this, you're surrounded On the UN in white and brown The AKM, the men and blacks, are the one world of honor But it's not new Iron Mountain computer beasts and cattle mutilations Black projects, UFOs, and weird genetic combinations The Nazi doctors didn't die? Come on, get hip Let's get in here with the OSS Your operations favorite clip National ID? Debit card? Yeah Vaccination biochip, milk carton kits, genetic engineering What's the plan for you? What's the plan for you? And your own good? Sure And that's all Hitler's Robin Hood Or do we have to do it? The sonic mind manipulation Inciting riots, it's crisis creation Or do we have to do it? Or do we have to do it? Or do we have to do it? Biochip implantation Vaccinate your kid for UN identification Vaccinate your kid for UN identification This is a test for all of us So I have today just one simple request A comprehensive package of healthcare benefits That are always there And can never be taken away Atmosphere Social illusion Media hype Planned confusion Masonic religion It's a liar Gotcha praying For a Luciferian Messiah The Illuminati think that they're enlightened That they're to be the gods of the earth Born of incest from the sons of Satan And their sisters since a tiny bird Hidden agenda Kissinger, Nixon, Ford, and Bill While your kids out back smoking crack For some cheap thrill They've numbed us down and dumbed us down With fluoride, TB, drugs, NEA, and public schools They've taken your brightest and our best And made them public schools With managed media Brain bending lies and stealth The banksters stole their wealth Johnson, Bush, Carter, Reagan, Gore, and Dan They've all been pushing pipes But not a master plan This is The Voice of Freedom For the Freedom And a master See you at this The Voice of Freedom Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. right now at 1-800-295-2432. That's 1-800-295-2432. And ask how you can obtain the Economic Survival Pack number one. In it, you will find a one one-tenth ounce gold eagle, one British gold sovereign, one one-half roll of silver eagle dollars, and one roll of 90% silver dives, what are known as junk dives. Not junk at all. Real silver is not junk, folks. What you've got in your pocket now is junk, and all for the only ridiculously low price of $250. Call now 1-800-295-2432. That's 1-800-295-2432. Also, if you'd like to lower your long-distance phone rate, if you make a lot of long-distance calls, or even if you just make a few, we can lower your phone rate significantly, folks. So call or write. Remember, don't call for a week because we're not going to be here. Next week, the office will be closed all next week. There will be someone here at the facilities, but they will not be the people who can answer your questions. In fact, they've been instructed not to answer the phones. So write us a letter. Drop us a postcard. Tell us what your current rate is. And if we can help you. Thank you.