Mind Control, Not Gun Control

Jack Mullen
Activist Post

Newspeak was a term coined by George Orwell, which he said was created to “provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits” of the ruling elite and further “to make all other modes of thought impossible.“

Subcategories of newspeak included carefully crafted words created entirely and specifically for the purpose of a political agenda. According to Orwell, category ‘B’ words “consisted of words which had been deliberately constructed for political purposes.” These ‘B words’ often contain slogan like compound words creating snappy, happy conscious mind impressions while, at the same time, creating a subconscious mind impression containing contradiction; presenting the mind with a crisis of thought leading to confusion and anesthetization of critical thought. Critical thought being necessary to pull apart a tangled mess of contradictory messages and meanings.

One such phrase coined as a slogan-word is ‘gun control’. Gun control is a simple expression designed to ‘disarm’ critical thinking skills. ‘Gun control’ is phrase slogan-word which doesn’t map to a single definition, but rather maps to an endless parade of meanings, defocusing the conscious mind and tiring the unconscious mind.

Gun-control literally has a dozen or more meanings centering on the word control, as in controlling the potential gun owner in such as way as to prevent gun ownership.  A few of the meanings of gun-control are :

Gun Registration – Collecting information on firearms and owners while tacitly re-defining ownership to mean ‘registered owner’;  registration is now part of the definition of ownership.

Gun Licensing - Gun registration, plus accepting the idea that in order to ‘legally’ own (with registration) a gun, you must also accept the fact that it is illegal to own a gun unless it is licensed.  Licensing temporarily grants immunity from the punishments of owning a gun illegally; however, the immunity is short lived and may be renewed only after a fee is paid to the government for the license. This fee and criterion, of course, are subject to change.

Enumerating the list of meanings for gun-control would surely put the reader to sleep, but for purposes of this article, I’ll mention a few others. Gun control can also mean or include as part of the meaning: conceal carry ‘permits’,  background checks, ‘safe storage’ requirements, limits on the number of guns that can be ‘owned’, controls on ammunition and on and on.

The point being that gun-control actually prevents – permanently, by your own permission – the right to ever OWN a gun. Ownership as defined in Blacks Law Dictionary, first edition, as:

The complete dominion, title, or proprietary right in a thing or claim. The ownership of a thing is the right of one or more persons to possess and use it to the exclusion of others.

Using this definition of ownership you see that it is not possible to “own” a gun if one tacitly or formally agrees to any sort of ‘gun control’ because gun ‘ownership’ is predicated on terms and agreements (contracts) that give rise to third party claims on your property.

Using language to control human thought is not a new idea as it has been done and perfected for thousands of years. Equally perfected over the same period are skills of recognizing attempts of deceivers and psychopaths to control and otherwise enslave thoughts. ‘Armed’ with skills and knowledge of mind control (two words each referring to their own unmodified definitions) people can take back their power and liberty.

Examples of mind controllers are those that present arguments using false presumptions about context. For example when CNN’s Piers Morgan asked breitbart.com’s Ben Shapiro (01/10/2013) :

Why does any civilian in  America NEED an AR-15?

Shapiro, doing a great job of moving Morgan back on subject and detangling Morgan’s attempt to associate the NRA with posited evils done by ‘assault rifles,’ another newspeak term, failed to stop Piers from pretending that in America people are ‘allowed’ freedoms consistent with some unnamed panel or body of do-gooders that can, when required, decide something or some action is not in our best interest.

In other words, Morgan was implying the United States of America operates as a political democracy and by answering questions framed in this type of pseudo-context, Americans are tacitly agreeing this nation of independent States with Republican governments are actually democracies.

Democracy derives its meaning from the Greek word demos, meaning crowd; crowd rule, or in modern terms, mob rule. True democracy is a favorite form of government for thugs and tyrants wishing to control and enslave, because the ‘crowd’ is so easily manipulated, bribed, frightened and otherwise herded. In a true democracy it would be correct to ask “Why does anyone NEED an AR-15?” because all rights are in a flux of consensus; a fluid state of constant change, depending on how the crowd will ‘vote ‘ at any given time.  Therefore, in a true democracy the nameless, non-responsible crowd can decide you do not NEED any particular thing you might want to have.  In a true democracy there can be no ownership because rights, including property rights, are subject to vote. The vote naturally can take place in real time yielding the purest form of mob rule – the liquid flux of consensus.

Although only marginally better, a Republican form of government relies on process, due process defined and protected in a document, the supreme law of the land, called a Constitution. The states each have constitutions and as part of an agreement among the states there exists a Supreme Constitution limiting the actions of the Federal Government and ensuring the state governments are Republican.  The constitutions of the various states and the Federal government recognize citizens of the states as sovereign, and the governments have only limited powers and authority to represent the Citizen in a strictly limited capacity. In a Constitutional Republic property rights exist as limitations on governments right to take property; again a due process is required before property can be appropriated.

All of these constitutions expressly provide their respective governments with limited enumerated powers and they also expressly delegate all other rights to the people. Formally, certain rights are singled out for the expressed purpose of highlighting their importance; among those singled out is the right to keep and bear arms.  This right and others cannot be infringed or abrogated by any law lessor than the Supreme Law of the Constitution. In fact, the Supreme Court enshrined this idea in the case of Marbury vs Madison in 1803. The notable unanimous decision of the case was conclusion that “Laws repugnant to the Constitution are void”. The meaning of void from Black’s Law Dictionaryis:

Null; ineffectual; nugatory; having no legal force or binding effect; unable, in law, to support the purpose for which it was intended.

Therefore, restricting gun ownership through gun control is in violation of the second amendment to the Constitution and is therefore an unconstitutional law which “has no legal force or binding effect”.

Before moving on to the real reason the government and their masters are trying to disarm Americans, I want to point out mind control is real and the concepts put forward by Eric Blair, the real name of George Orwell, were written as a warning and also to offer knowledge as how to identify mind control and avoid being deceived and harmed by the effects of this tactic.

Newspeak in terms of gun ownership include mind controlling phrases such as ‘reasonable gun control’ , ‘sensible gun control’, ‘intelligent gun control’, ‘reasonable restrictions on guns’. These phrases and others are used as tools to disarm the mind and to place the thinker into a trance like state of tacit agreement. For example the word reasonable is something we have all come to understand to mean something the opposite of which is unreasonable.  Black’s Law Dictionarydefines reasonable:

Agreeable to reason; just; proper. Ordinary or usual.

Black’sdefines ‘reasonable act’ :

Such as may fairly, justly and reasonably be required of a party.

So, by hearing and assimilating the phrase ‘reasonable restrictions on guns’ or ‘reasonable gun control’ the mind is being controlled by the use of the modifier reasonable; reasonable means just, proper, ordinary and usual. By tacitly assuming that gun control is reasonable we have accepted a catalog of definitions for gun control and we have effectively agreed to give up the right to own guns – period.

The disarmers also do the same trick when they associate a word such as assault with the word rifle. We all know assault is bad and Black’sconfirms our thinking by defining assault:

An unlawful attempt or offer, on the part of one man, with force or violence, to inflict a bodily hurt upon another

Here again we have newspeak and mind control. By placing the word assault in front of rifle, the disarmers have attempted to associate ‘an attempt or offer, on the part of one man with force or violence, to inflict a bodily hurt upon another’ with an inanimate object called a rifle.

A rifle cannot inflict bodily hurt upon another by itself. It CANNOT.  A rifle is a rifle, a tool, an implement; it cannot be attributed with properties of a man.

Remember, if the intent were to explain something about the type of rifle, we would have been able to discern that by the modifier. Perhaps automatic rifle, that works, or single shot rifle, or semi automatic rifle, all of these words are valid, but not assault rifle. After all, any rifle used by a man to harm another man would constitute a man assaulting another. So in this case you can see the intent is to deceive and use mind control to make the word rifle have properties that it just cannot have.

If the government would deceive you by offering the newspeak word ‘assault rifle’ in their disarming explanation, would your trust them to disarm you, should you?

Why Governments Disarm Citizens

History shows without exception that governments are corruptible and over time become tyrannical. Americans must accept this as truth or they will never have freedom and liberty.  History also provides examples of peoples disarmed by their governments.

Gun control was implemented for ‘reasonable’ purposes in :

  • Ottoman Turkey, 1915-1917, results : 1.5 million Armenians murdered
  • Soviet Union, 1929-1945,  results : 20+ million civilians murdered * the number has recently been updated to include up to 60 million
  • Nazi Germany 1933-1945, results: 20 million civilians murdered
  • Nationalist China, 1927-1949, results: 10 million civilians murdered
  • Red China, 1949-1976, results: 35 – 60 million civilians murdered
  • Guatemala 1960-1981, results 200,000 civilians murdered
  • Uganda 1971-1979, results: 300,000 civilians murdered
  • Cambodia 1975-1979, results: 2 million civilians murdered
  • Rwanda 1994 , results 800,000 Tutsi people murdered
*source, “Death by Gun Control” see below

In each of these cases, and there are others, the governments only asked for ‘reasonable and sensible’ restrictions on guns including:

  • Gun permits
  • Government list of owners
  • Ban on sales and ownership of certain weapons
  • Registration
  • Licensing
  • Bans on sharp tools
  • Photo ID with fingerprints
Surely these are just reasonable restrictions; after which the unreasonable genocide of targeted citizens who were rounded up and brutally murdered.

This is why governments and their handlers (governments are pawns to exceptional wealth and power operating above and outside government and government law) want gun control. They lust for total control while reserving to themselves the power of life and death.

The cases above are those that have disarmed their people and quickly gotten to the business of extermination. There are nations in the world that have been disarmed that are still awaiting extermination. These nations include the United Kingdom, most of Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico and most of the third world nations.  Although the governments have not yet prosecuted outright genocide against targeted citizens, these countries have the highest violent crime rates.

Mexico is a nation that was systematically disarmed by building gun control into their Constitution’s protection of the right to self defense. Article 10 of the Mexican Constitution severely restricts the types of guns regular citizens are allowed to own. The law explicitly states that any guns allocated or designated as for use by the military cannot be owned by the citizen. The law also permits the government to stipulate conditions, requirements and places in which gun possession is allowed. Gun ownership is further inconvenienced by requiring citizens to get a background check and also PERMISSION from the defense ministry.

There are many who think Mexico’s gun control is reasonable and sensible, even in light of the fact that gun violence against citizens is among the highest in the world. The government of Mexico is corrupt. The local police are corrupt, the military is corrupt and the murder rate and violent crime is testimony to this truth.

Mexicans are prevented from protecting themselves from the police, the ministry of defense, and drug gang warfare raging out of control along the Mexican US border.

Deaths attributable to violence caused by drug gangs in Mexico during the period 2006 through Dec. 2010 is over 37,000 people.

Imagine you are an older Mexican living alone or with a spouse and totally disarmed against the violence that is just an everyday part of living in Mexico. Guns are equalizers and they compensate for age.

The overall murder rate in Mexico in 2011 was 24 out 100,000 compared to 4.2 out 100,000 in the USA.

The sad thing for Mexicans and dumbed downed Americans is that the Mexican murder rate is caused by the same government trying to collect our guns right now. The hostile and usurper United States De-facto FEDERAL government and its corrupt War on Drugs are responsible for the high murder rate in Mexico, a disarmed country, and they are now attempting to disarm Americans.

If you can think at all, you have to understand simple ideas like this – if you cannot hope to defend yourself against your government, or your military, or you local police, you can never hope to be anything but a potential slave.

In economics there is an axiom that says it is not competition in a free market that improves the product, improves satisfaction of service and optimizes solutions to problems solved by commerce — it is THE THREAT of competition that makes possible the benefits of a free market.

This is an important idea and something that you have to wrap your head around if you ever hope to be safe and free. The threat of being equipped to stand up against your tyrannical government, local street gang, corrupt police force keeps these powers in check.

FACT: Humans have never existed in a world where there is no evil; a world without psychopaths with a penchant for pedophilia, or psychopaths with generational wealth giving them powers of bribery and blackmail to corrupt the government and change the laws. This is has never ever happened and it never will.

But — humans have lived in peace and safety and happiness in times when self responsibility elevated the people into that state of being.  Government tyranny feeds and exists only because people willingly and consistently transfer responsibility for their own lives and their family over to nameless, unaccountable strangers that offer reasonable.

The best example of a nameless, unaccountable stranger is the President of the United States, Barrack Obama. Obama’s records are sealed. We have no access to his school records, medical records, passport records or even birth records. Even Obama’s social security number is phony, belonging to long-dead Connecticut citizen.  Asking me and other Americans to register weapons while requiring identification and extensive background checks, yet not even requiring the President of the United States to prove his state of birth or explain his fraudulent social security number is INSANE.

Americans clamoring for gun control are apparently not aware that crime is falling because gun ownership is rising. The American homicide rate is at a 50-year low while gun sales have been soaring ever since Obama was elected President.

Disarm Americans and the crime rate will rise in line with Mexico or the city of Chicago.

Guns are not the only form of protection, but tyranny will attempt to take them all. Even now the tyrants in the UK are preparing to make certain knives illegal. Governments have outlawed swords and knives and sharp tools and martial arts training and on and on. Without exception the more disarmed a people become, without even a possible THREAT to their controllers, the higher the crime rate and the more brutal government-sponsored violence will become – whether it be via taxes or providing your wife on your wedding night to the thugs in charge.

To pretend that the United States government is not fully and irreparably corrupted is to deny your reality and comparable to living with your head in hole.

The crimes committed by the usurper Federal Government in league with Wall Street and global bankers are so great that these criminals are now becoming afraid. These crimes are being exposed and Americans are still armed — therefore the THREAT of retaliation, incarceration, including trials and hangings is causing these criminals to seek more protection.

Americans have a dilemma that has to be faced NOW. If we allow the government to implement illegal and unconstitutional gun restrictions (having no legal force or binding effect) we will have opened the door to worldwide genocide.

The American Protection of the World.

No I am not talking about our military under the control of a foreign usurper government terrorizing the world, I’m talking about what happens to the world when America gives up its guns and falls. Many people ask how the Brits and Australians and New Zealanders were disarmed but have not (yet) experienced any Soviet-style ‘red terror’ mass murders. My answer is: it’s coming.

While the people of America are still armed it is very difficult for the psychopathic ruling elite to openly implement their population downsizing with outright door-to-door murder, as practiced in Russia after 1917, because Americans might just WAKE UP and realize that what goes around comes around. In fact, I believe it is the continued right (natural right to self defense) to keep and bear arms in America, the over 300 million guns and ammunition now held by Americans, that’s keeping the world temporarily safe from global outright door-to-door genocide/murder. It is the THREAT that Americans might actually WAKE UP and take back their government and perhaps defend other nations from psychopaths that keeps that plan in check.

But I further believe it is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY THAT AMERICA BE DISARMED if the global elite (Rockefellers, Rothschilds and others) are to continue their mission of destruction, downsizing and enslavement of the world population in pursuit of their megalomaniacal dream of a New World Order.

Here a few parting thoughts. First, if you do not believe people running America are the same people that facilitated, funded, supported and protected Hitler, Stalin and Mao, please take the time to read a few books. I can recommend several right away.

1] Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution: The Remarkable True Story of the American Capitalists Who Financed the Russian Communists,  by Antony Sutton

2] Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, by Antony Sutton

Limited Edition
1 Troy Ounce Silver Medallion
You should also learn about the Federal Reserve scam and how it was crafted to loan money that never existed while receiving always increasing interest payments first in gold, until the gold was gone, and then through stolen purchasing power of the American dollar.

The Federal Reserve scam has looted the wealth of the American people. It has harnessed the work and energy of the population to built a world wide enslavement grid. It has taken the fruits of American labor and the benefits thereof and transferred this wealth to those that would see us disarmed and destitute on property we do not own while we beg for food and shelter.

3] The Federal Reserve Conspiracy [Paperback], by Antony Sutton

Next, it is possible to have a peaceful revolution that could end this nightmare in just a short period of time.

Those of us who can think and that are not fully beholden to the usurper Federal Government can do the following to create a sudden change in our power versus our enslavers’ power.

  • Stop watching television (this will starve the propaganda machine).
  • Stop watching, or attending all national sports games (same as above, but will also allow more time for thinking and planning, sports can wait).
  • Stop using credit and credit cards now (get out of the controlled CREDIT Rating racket and live within means — while starving banks of interest on money that never existed to start with).
  • Withdraw all liquid assets from the banks and convert them to assets that are non-trackable and have no counterparty risk, such as silver and gold. (hurry silver is in short supply).
  • Notify the national Congress that you will not comply with being disarmed.
  • Notify your state governments that you will move to a state that offers protection from gun confiscation unless they enact such legislation now.
  • Call your local sheriff and explain to him his responsibility to defend the Constitution and that includes arresting anyone attempting to disarm his county citizens. Provide him a copy of Richard Mack’s County Sheriff book.
  • Don’t argue the negatives of gun control. Gun control is Newspeak meaning disarming to take our power to be free and alive.  No restrictions on guns, period.
  • Learn about false flag terror, including school shootings.
  • Prepare for trouble.
  • Get food, water, and supplies for 6 months.
  • Prepare to move if needed (a state that defends gun rights).
  • Plan for gun confiscation by rehearsing and planning your response.
  • Notify family in military about Oath Keepers and explain their oath to the Constitution means no gun confiscation.
  • Get to know your state representatives. Call them. Start the process of education.
  • Learn a martial art.
  • Take on a war frame of mind.
  • Pray, meditate and seek out like-minded people for comfort and support.
References:
“Death by Gun Control:The Human Cost of Victim Disarmament”, Aaron Zelman and Richard W. Stevens, Mazel Freedom Press, Inc (January 1, 2001), ISBN:0964230461
“Death by Government”,  R.J.Rummel,Transaction Publishers (January 1, 1997),ISBN:1560009276
“Mass Control: Engineering Human Consciousness” Jim Keith,Adventures Unlimited Pr (August 2003), ISBN:1931882215
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/08/20/mexico-murders-hit-271-in-2011/
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/20/US-Homicide-Rates-are-at-a-50-Year-Low
https://gonzotown.wordpress.com/2011/08/05/obama-how-he-got-that-connecticut-social-security-number/
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm

Jack Mullen has been a businessman for more than 25 years, owning 3 radio stations, several technology based companies and a resource development company

Want More Stuff Like This? Subscribe To Receive Our Daily Email.

7 Responses to "Mind Control, Not Gun Control"

  1. sorgfelt (@sorgfelt)  January 20, 2013 at 1:59 pm

    You can keep your guns, but I am a spiritual being and do not want to live the illusion that I can live by killing others, so I will not have any guns in my house.

    The Second Amendment is NOT an article of a Holy Document. It can be repealed. In particular, the history of that amendment was that the “well regulated militia” were militias organized by rich white men with slaves with the purpose of preventing insurrection of their slaves. In any case, in the sentence which comprises the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms clause is dependent on the preceding “well regulated militia” clause.

    I agree that governments need to be controlled, and in many cases, they have taken advantage of gun control to eliminate ethnic minorities. But, in some cases, I believe that you have your statistics wrong. In the recent cases where gun ownership has been banned without such an ethnic cleansing occurring, it is quite possible that the citizens themselves have opted for peace like I have and no such ethnic cleansing is likely to take place. In our case, “government” has far more firepower than any citizen could have, and guns will only get us killed in a confrontation.

    Reply
    • Kobus Otto  January 23, 2013 at 8:52 pm

      I think Sorgfeldt that your just being kept in the dark about the ethnic cleansing taking place around the world. Here in South Africa, we have had gun laws strengthened under the new so called democracy and as mentioned above, crime rates are soaring , violent crimes are increasing and genocide is already happening with the goverment staying mum and taking no action. See : http://www.thetruthaboutsouthafrica.com/p/white-genocide-in-south-africa.html. In fact, police are using live ammunition against striking workers.

  2. sorgfelt (@sorgfelt)  January 20, 2013 at 2:16 pm

    As an aside, I have some Mexican former in-laws, one of which I know has a pistol. He fired his pistol in the air one New Year’s Eve in celebration. In the paper the next day was an article about a man, who lived not far away, who was killed by a bullet coming out of the air and hitting his head. Not necessarily any connection, as it could have been any number of people doing the same thing. I also had a cousin who had a gun to protect himself. Someone tried to hijack his truck and my cousin tried to defend himself, but lost the gun fight and was killed. I had an anti-government coworker who was upset and got drunk one day and started threatening anyone who passed in front of his house. The police came, as they should, and my coworker got the drop on one of them and killed him. He was executed in the electric chair. By the way, my anti-government coworker frequently worked in the Pentagon. Do I know of any case where gun ownership has protected anyone’s civil liberties? No.

    Reply
  3. sorgfelt (@sorgfelt)  January 20, 2013 at 2:55 pm

    One of my high school friends liked to prowl around people’s backyards for excitement, not to steal anything. One night, a homeowner shot him in the back as he was jumping over a fence to get away. He was found dead a few houses away. Another case of the senselessness of gun ownership.

    Reply
  4. Tilbo Baggins  January 21, 2013 at 2:35 pm

    True Activist has long been a haven for free/critical thinkers, offering forward-thinking and proactive advice and information to the radicals of tomorrow, but your paranoia is becoming all the more pervasive in allowing Mr. Mullen’s uninformed fearmongering. He has selectively twisted his argument using tenuous (at best) connections, false interpretations and pseudo-scientific terminology, while failing to acknowledge the far more numerous instances of successful (and peaceful) gun control, such as Australia, Scandinavian countries and here in the UK.
    It appears to me that, on this particular topic at least, you’ve correctly identified the fact that your audience includes survivalist ‘militia’ crackpots amongst it’s more rational and hopeful readership, which is a shame, as I’m sure I’m not the only one feeling alienated by this ill-advised and incongruous change in tack in terms of your support.
    Mr. Mullen, please do explain how your 2nd amendment Arms will defend against tyrannical drones and tanks (whose limitation and regulation we can agree on at least…)?

    Reply
  5. faust  January 22, 2013 at 8:44 pm

    its odd we have so many brilliant authors that have wrote about this time period and still people turn their cheek due to their fears, making logical decisions based on logic is illogical, truth is this is not condening any type of use of guns its simply making people aware, some like yourselves, will never be aware because you chose no to be, we are allowing the government to take away our constitutional right, guns can never be banned, most guns used in criminal violence are not registered they are purchased on black markets, limiting our rights to guns only limits law abiding citizens…

    Reply
  6. Charlie Fitzpatrick  February 12, 2013 at 6:59 pm

    Sorgfelt….the Supreme Court has recently held that the right to bear arms phrase is specifically NOT dependent on the militia phrase. Read Heller and McDonald cases. Second, there are cases every day where someone saved their own or their families lives because they had a gun to confront a home invader, so it is wrong to say that there is no evidence of guns protecting civil rights (And, on a larger scale, guns in the hands of our soldiers have protected every right we have.

    Reply

Leave a Reply