Web Research Links for the Week of 7/1/24

Fair Use Notice: This site may contain some copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of vital issues which already exist in the public domain. – Note: These links are posted at the top of the page as the week progresses. Links from previous weeks can be found under the “Current Quicklinx” button.


The ATF Has Resumed Openly Murdering Americans – by Frank Lee – https://www.activistpost.com/2024/07/the-atf-has-resumed-openly-murdering-americans.html –  “Many people who know anything about the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE, or ATF for short) will know they started off as a “harmless” tax collecting agency that eventually turned into a law enforcement agency in its own right. In other words, they evolved from a bunch of glorified robbers with mechanical calculators and spreadsheets into a gang of violent thugs with guns and badges. This transformation became obvious to the world in the famous Ruby Ridge (1992) and Waco (1993) incidents, both having had heavy ATF involvement and with the latter event culminating in an open massacre of the Branch Davidians that included women and children…  Later as they had cooled their trigger fingers, the ATF’s side gig of deliberately allowing guns to flow into Mexico for “tracking purposes” was exposed in the Fast and Furious scandal after two of these guns turned up near the scene of the killing of Brian Terry, a border patrol officer, in 2010 (a whole of lot of good this “tracking” did)…  In more recent years, ATF’s favorite pastime has been to send several car-loads worth of thugs LARPing with full tactical gear to raid and intimidate American licensed gun dealers for supposed infractions of federal firearms laws and confiscate their property. Jim Skelton had his business raided in 2021 after a federal entrapping weasel lied on the federal background check forms and successfully purchased several firearms (a whole lot of good this “background check” did). Russell Fincher was raided at his home in 2023, one of the reasons being that he sold firearms without a Federal Firearms License (FFL), even though he had one. He was yelled at, threatened, and ultimately intimidated into giving up his license…  However, lately, the ATF must have been having the blues and reminiscing about the good ol’ days when they could get some solid trigger time on some innocent Americans instead of just yelling at them and stealing their stuff because just a couple of months ago they raided the home of Bryan Malinowski and shot and killed him…  Malinowski, executive director of the Clinton National Airport in Little Rock, was an avid gun collector and would frequent gun shows to buy and sell firearms with other private individuals, which is completely legal and does not require an FFL. His frequent buying and selling of guns prompted the ATF to consider him as “engaging in the business of selling firearms” and therefore violating a federal law by not having an FFL (what the actual threshold is, nobody knows). They thus obtained a search warrant and proceeded to serve it in the most dangerous way possible…  Even though they knew his workplace, work schedule, and phone number, they showed up at Malinowski’s house completely unannounced over an hour before sunrise, covered up the doorbell camera, cut their electricity, and then loudly banged on his door before breaking it down while Malinowski and his wife were asleep. The ATF deliberately created a situation in which any reasonable person would assume his home is being invaded by a gang of violent thugs (which was true in this case, but with the caveat that they had badges) and would be legally and morally justified in taking appropriate self-defense measures by shooting the intruders, which Malinowski did. One ATF agent was hit, but the gang (of which there were roughly ten carloads) returned fire, hitting Malinowski in the head. Naturally, they confiscated a bunch of his property afterward…  Just recently a Congressional hearing was held regarding the ATF raid, in which members of Congress engaged in the usual partisan theatrics for our amusement in front of some cameras. One Stacy Plaskett (D-VI) took the opportunity to rant about Donald Trump and mass shootings (totally relevant to the ATF raid). Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) argued that the ATF was being over-zealous with its recent increased rate of revocations of FFLs (as if some “ideal” amount of zealousness exists in enforcing a ridiculous and pointless licensing scheme)…  Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY) expressed his anger that they were “criticizing the ATF because they retaliated with deadly force” after someone shot an ATF agent (who at the time was a violent intruder). Rep. Debbie Schultz (D-FL), remarked that there are “far too many loopholes” when buying a gun (like when entrapping weasels lie on federal background check forms) and then later said, “isn’t it true that clerical errors can often be serious problems that cause guns to fall into a criminal’s hands?” (like when the ATF itself let a bunch of guns fall into criminals’ hands in Mexico)…  Later in a separate hearing with ATF Director Steven Dettelbach, Jordan put Dettelbach’s feet to the proverbial (special effects) fire by questioning him about the policy of federal officers while executing search warrants to have body cameras on, which were distinctly missing in the Malinowski incident. Dettelbach replied that because the policy had a “phased implementation,” only about a third of all ATF agents had them (The policy was only over 20 months old at the time; give them a break!). Of course, when the ATF issues its various arbitrary and capricious rulings, such as the infamous bump-stockpistol-brace, and frame-definition rules, we common plebs must obviously comply immediately or face the prospect of federal charges, while the ATF itself can take its sweet time to implement something as novel and intricate as body cameras! How convenient it must be to be the enforcer of one’s own rules…  In the end, I think the ATF is unlikely to face any consequences of note for breaking into an innocent American’s house and murdering him. It is noteworthy that the Malinowski raid, which was premised on the excuse that he was considered an unlicensed gun dealer, took place roughly two months before a new rule was to go into effect (it has been stayed as of this writing). This rule “clarifies” who is to be considered as “engaging in the business” as a gun dealer. However, in typical government fashion, the only thing that is really clarified is the fact that the ATF intends to further confuse the public and exercise increasingly arbitrary power to terrorize and prosecute American gun owners. There is really only one remedy. Abolish the ATF.”

Klaus Schwab tells globalist-elitist followers they must ‘force’ humanity into a world ruled by AI and other dehumanizing technologies – Schwab’s blunt language shows globalists are no longer hiding their agenda, if only people would listen and take them seriously. But they know most are zombies no longer able to think for themselves – by Leo Hohmann – https://leohohmann.substack.com/p/klaus-schwab-tells-globalist-elitist – “World Economic Forum founder and director Klaus Schwab, speaking at the WEF’s recently concluded summer meeting in China, has informed his elitist followers that ushering in the globalist agenda will require humanity to be “forced” into a “collaboration” with the unelected organization. And the time for forced collaboration has now arrivedSchwab made the declaration during his opening remarks at the WEF’s Annual Meeting of the New Champions, also known as the “Summer Davos,” in Dalian, China… He praised China for its economic policies, which are seen by the globalists as the model of top-down centralized planning in a high-tech surveillance state run through smart cities, smart EVs, smart homes, smart appliances, smart meters, and AI, digital IDs and CBDCs, all of which hold one thing in common — they come with on-off switches not under the control of the end user, which is we the people. In their ideal world, we live as slaves at the privilege of our masters. We get out of line, they can cut off our electric power, our electric car, our electronic digital money, everything… Schwab told the elitist participants gathered in China that they must “force” humanity into a “collaboration” with the unelected WEF. This is why Schwab told his globalist comrades at a previous meeting over two years ago to expect an “angrier world.” When you force people to live in ways that controvert their best interests, it tends to make them angry! They know their policies related to a green economy, perpetual wars and severe restrictions on food production will be extremely unpopular and cause civil wars on top of the world war they already have planned… Schwab stated: “To drive future economic growth we must embrace innovation and force the collaboration across sectors, regions, nations, and cultures to create a more peaceful, inclusive, sustainable, and resilient future. At this critical juncture the active participation of all stakeholders is essential to ensure a sustainable development path.” – Of course the biggest stakeholders of all, those paying taxes to fund governments, have no seat at the table in Schwab’s elitist meetings. And that’s by design. We are seen by these globalist predators as useless eaters, part of a herd that needs to be culled in order to preserve global resources for themselves. Speaking like a true Malthusian, Schwab said “we must force humanity into collaboration” with the WEF schemes to depopulate the planet under the guise of climate change.Watch the video clip where Schwab touts the so-called “Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies” such as artificial intelligence. This is why they don’t need as many of us on the planet as in the past. AI will perform most of the tasks for the elites. They don’t need as many human slaves… Later in his speech, Schwab returned to the topic of the Fourth Industrial Revolution while doubling down on the theme of this year’s meeting, stating that there are “limits to growth.” In globalist-speak, “limits to growth” is code for “activate depopulation agenda.”.. Limits to Growth is the title of a key globalist tome published by the Club of Rome in 1972. One of the co-authors, Dennis Meadows, said six years ago in an interview that the world’s population must be reduced from the current 8 billion down to 1 or 2 billion. Meadows said he hopes this massive depopulation could be done in a “peaceful way.”.. Notice, Meadows says he would like to see a “smart dictatorship” brought upon the earth. This is the global technocracy in which people’s lives are ruled by scientists, engineers and other “experts.” Politicians, if they even exist under this vision, will be figureheads only. We already see that happening. Does anyone think Joe Biden is actually in charge of anything? – And yet, this is the man we are told we elected to represent us in 2020. Anyone who believes Biden is making his own decisions, or has made any important decisions from day one, is fundamentally gullible and deceived. He is a Manchurian candidate and has been from day one, and because he has become senile to the point where his globalist handlers are no longer able to hide it, they are ready to replace him with a new puppet. The new puppet will look prettier and speak smoother, but he/she will no more be in charge of his or her actions as president than Biden has been.”BREAKING: Supreme Court Greenlights Biden Admin. to Direct Social Media Censorship – by John Leake -6-3 majority rule in Murthy v. Missouri that neither the states nor other respondents had standing under Article III, reversing the Fifth Circuit decision –
https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/breaking-supreme-court-greenlights – “
This is a breaking story that will require followup with full legal analysis, but for now, the following is what we can say about the decision… Until recently, most American citizens assumed that the Executive Branch was barred by the First Amendment from directing (by means of telephone calls and e-mails) social media companies to censor speech. The First Amendment reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances… If Congress is prohibited from making a law that prohibits free speech, why is the Executive Branch authorized to infringe free speech by directing social media executives to do so in what is now the largest public forum in the Republic? – In Murthy v. Missouri (originally filed as Missouri v. Biden) Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the majority, stating: To establish standing, the plaintiffs must demonstrate a substantial risk that, in the near future, they will suffer an injury that is traceable to a government defendant and redressable by the injunction they seek. Because no plaintiff has carried that burden, none has standing to seek a preliminary injunction… It’s strange for me to think that I, who hold a Master’s degree in political philosophy, have walked around for the last thirty years thinking that our civilization regards free speech as a self-evident good. Our Founding Fathers arrived at this conclusion from their study of history, from which it was evident to them that the harm of infringing free speech has been shown time and again to outweigh any theoretical harm that could occasionally arise from unbridled free speech. Thus, I find it astonishing that the respondents in Murthy v. Missouri are required to present concrete evidence of a specific harm suffered as a result of the Executive directing social media companies to censor their speech… I thought it was understood that—in so far as “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” are held to be “inalienable rights”—citizens are self-evidently harmed by having their speech infringed by directives from the Executive branch… Justice Samuel Alito wrote the dissent, joined by Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch. Alito wrote that the case “is one of the most important free speech cases to reach this Court in years.” He stated that the respondents had brought enough evidence to suggest the government’s actions were unconstitutional, but that “the Court, however, shirks that duty and thus permits the successful campaign of coercion in this case to stand as an attractive model for future officials who want to control what the people say, hear, and think. That is regrettable.” – In light of this regrettable decision, it appears to be game on for social media censorship.”
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *