"Time to stop vilifying one million Australians" - SIFA on The Project

The Oceans We Know Won’t Survive Climate Change Sea-level rise will become unmanageable, and life will flee the world’s tropical oceans, if carbon pollution keeps rising, a new report from the UN climate panel says.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/09/ipcc-sea-level-rise-report/598765/

UN climate report predicts the end of Australia's beach culture.

https://www.9news.com.au/national/un-climate-report-global-warming-australia-sea-levels-rising-environment-news-world/09102e3f-a90f-4289-ab60-305f4b9e3a39

Corruption & Climate (Australian Style)

Thoughts For The Week By Ron Owen of Owen Guns. September 2019.

Thoughts For The Week.

Keep Your Powder Dry.

First of all let me put it on the record, I am not anti Chinese, I spent a lot of good times in China during the 1980s and early 1990s. As a student of military history I visited the Great Wall in several places, shot on their rifle ranges,visited military museums and the Terracotta Army in Xi’an. I have long standing friendships that I value with Chinese friends, my only problem with China is that their communist leadership and corrupt political system has taken a path of expansionism and will not turn back from it unless it has a cataclysmic change in leadership. Napoleon Bonaparte said “China is a sleeping giant. Let her sleep, for when she wakes she will shake the world.” and it will take the rest of the world to stop her from shaking the world to death. This week US President Donald Trump has welcomed Prime Minister Scott Morrison to the White House for a historic state visit. Asked whether he was only concerned about trade with China or if he saw the country as a strategic threat, he said: “Obviously China is a threat to the world in a sense because they are building their military faster than anybody and frankly they are using US money.”

China Increasing War Budget.

Scott Morrison, will be having a quiet word with President Trump seeking ‘quid pro quo’ assurances that if Australia joins the USA coalition against Iran, that when the chips are down with China that America will take over China to save Australia. The answer will of course be in the affirmative, but when the chips are down and a US President Trump or worse Biden, or worse Warren has to make a choice of going nuclear to save Australia knowing that China’s nuclear missiles will certainly take out Seattle, Hawaii, San Francisco and Los Angles killing a 100 million Americans to save 20 million Australians. That sacrifice scenario becomes even less likely as even if China and North Korea were wiped out, what would remain of the USA, theoretically the East Coast would not be able to withstand an attack from Russia, so even if Russia did not feel disposed to get involved it would be the last remaining World Power which would then dominate Europe and the World.

Weapons that could be used in the Pacific wipeout war. Notice Australia did not get a mention.

So saving Australia from China by America is highly unlikely, even though America is following the same formula to create a war, as President Franklin D. Roosevelt did prior to World War Two. At that time similar to China today, Japans Naval power was beginning to dwarf the USAs Pacific Fleet, Japan needed raw materials and living space from China, President F.D. Roosevelt knew that if Japan succeeded in conquering all of China then it would be an unstoppable super power so he imposed a oil and fuel ban on Japan unless it withdrew from China. Faced with having a few months supply left Japan decided to try to sink the US Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbour and struck south to capture the Burmah Oil and Seria Field ,Borneo Oil, ( Brunei) and the living space, food and resources rich continent of Australia.

Due to Japan not succeeding to win the Battle of the Coral Sea, and suffering huge losses in Burma and the Kokoda Trail Australia remained a large base on the southern flank of Japan which America was able to re-enforce. So if Japan had struck South attacked Australia first, and not attacked the USA at Pearl Harbour, and not tried to take India through Siam, the USA would have stayed isolationist with the Monroe Doctrine and Japan with all its force concentrated in the South would have won Australia.

The Spratley Islands, Chinese Bases are really close to the Brunei oilfields.

Once it consolidated Australia’s resources they could chose who to attack next. We can be assured that present day China will see the move of President Trump to keep applying tariffs denying China from the worlds largest market, like “Déjà Vu”. They well know that manufactured exports are their only profit makers, every other aspect of their economy makes huge losses, housing, food production, (they now have to import food again) Fuel,(oil, gas and coal have to be imported) without their exports, without foreign exchange to pay for imports, without their resources (food, and fuel) the future finishes in bankruptcy and starvation. They are being forced into making a decision, either to withdraw contract, returning to their past position, or to attack and like Germany in WW2 gain Lebensraum (‘living space’) in order to survive.. We can only hope that Scott Morrison is aware of this and is chewing Mr Trumps ear asking him to leave a way out. Even if he gets a promise, I am doubtful if it will ever be honoured as Trump needs to close the Chinese exports off so the United States can re-build its industry, give jobs to the voters to gain re-election.

In my August Bulletin “Thoughts of the Week” to summarise I explained Australia lack of an adequate defence force, our lack of Defence Industries, the scenario of China building an Island base at Long Island, (Chesterfield Islands) and then moving on to Lord Howe Island. The inability and lack of interest for any other nation to move them. (As with the South China Sea Spratley Islands, the USA has not stepped in to throw China off the Islands that the Philippines claims as its territory) The probability that China dominating all of Australia’s sea and air ways would blockade, preventing the importation of fuel, or manufacturing materials, in less then 25 days diesel fuel and petrol would run out, food would not be delivered to the shops, Australia the land of plenty would starve. Australian politicians would surrender, do a deal and fly to the South of France. The Australian population being superfluous to the Chinese requirements would die out.

The only consolation would be the thought that Australia’s left wing unionists, media and greenies would finally find out the reality of Communism, as they would be the first to have their body parts and organs sold off. The Muslim Shari law clerics would soon follow them. The skilled workers who produced things would survive a little longer.

This Bulletin goes out to a mail list with 10,000 subscribers about 20 or 30 complimented me on my efforts to awaken Australia to pending disaster, the rest either did not read my article and just looked at the adverts, or read it and did not accept it. They may think that it is a one sided debate, maybe, but here are a few words from the Chinese perspective.

It is hard to find the Chinese perspective as the Chinese governments suppresses the truth and keeps an unyielding grip of silence on its citizens within and without the nations borders. I was in Beijing at the beginning of June 1989 and then returned a week after the Tiananmen Square Massacre.

I was staying at the Beijing Hotel which was in East Tiananmen, it was amazing to see a million peaceful people at one time in the square. I returned home and within a week there were tank tracks and huge burn marks on the square as though flame throwers had incinerated them. I was shocked how a country could treat its own citizens and amazed at how quickly it was hushed up.

This stranglehold means that, even today, relatively little information is available about the Tiananmen Square massacre. However, British ambassador to China, Sir Alan Donald wrote a secret diplomatic cable around 24 hours after the massacre, which the British Government only declassified in 2017. The cable reveals stunning information previously unknown to most of the world, and most likely, China itself.

According to Donald, at least 10,000 people were killed. One of the Chinese army units was apparently so vicious that the former ambassador described them as “primitives” in his document. The cable provides a hitherto unprecedented look at what really occurred that night and day. Donald’s cable has since found a new home in the U.K. National Archives. The former ambassador was an eye witness to most of it from the rooftop of the Embassy but explained that the details of his report stemmed from personal conversations from a “good friend” in China’s State Council, the government’s cabinet, who spoke to Donald in confidence.

Donald said his source “has previously proved reliable and was careful to separate fact from speculation and rumor,” making his recounting of the events of June 3 and June 4 highly credible.

Donald’s cable to London described the “atrocities” against several thousand pro-democracy protesters as being undertaken by the 27th Army of Shanxi Province. He called this truculent group of soldiers “60 % illiterate” and “primitives.”

According to Donald and his trusted source, however, the local Beijing troops that entered Tiananmen Square prior to the 27th Army were unarmed. The people gave them flowers and expected them to stay and protest with them. This was an initial attempt to disperse the massive group of protesters without violence, as most were students, unarmed, and non-violent.

Unfortunately, this approach rapidly came to an end.
“The 27 Army APCs (armored personnel carriers) opened fire on the crowd before running over them,” Donald wrote in his cable. “APCs ran over troops and civilians at 65kph (40 miles per hour).” He explained that even though the CCP had provided protestors with a warning, even this small amount of leeway was underhanded, a lie, and viciously broken.”

“Students understood they were given one hour to leave square, but after five minutes APCs attacked,” Donald said. “The group of protesters remained steadfast, even in the face of annihilation. Shots rang out, innocents were struck, and people began to die. Nonetheless — there was power in numbers, and solidarity that allowed them to find courage, and thousands joined hands as bullets flew”.

“Students linked arms but were mown down,” wrote Donald. “APCs then ran over the bodies time and time again to make, quote ‘pie’ unquote, and remains collected by bulldozer.”

As if this wasn’t atrocious enough, the government’s criminal and brutal activity that day got even worse. With no regard for the families of these victims, not to mention their identities, what was left of them was disposed of, in an unspeakably callous manner.” Remains incinerated and then hosed down drains,” Donald wrote.

According to Donald, the violent attacks stemmed from a substantial portion of China’s State Council that was afraid of civil war breaking out. The nationwide tides seemed to be turning and those in power would certainly not benefit from a freer populous. Thus, clamping down forcefully on any kind of dissent was vital to their interests. On top of that, the recently declassified cable stated that the 27th Army was called into action that day specifically because of its disregard for anything but orders. The troops were “the most reliable and obedient,” Donald explained. “The 27 Army was ordered to spare no one,” he wrote. “Wounded girl students begged for their lives but were bayoneted. A three-year-old girl was injured, but her mother was shot as she went to her aid, as were six others.”

The diplomat’s sources also told him that “snipers shot many civilians on balconies, street sweepers etc for target practice.” The declassified document also claimed that this excessive force continued even after the first wave of killings were completed. “A 1,000 survivors were told they could escape but were then mown down by specially prepared MG (machine gun) positions,” wrote Donald. “Army ambulances who attempted to give aid were shot up, as was a Sino-Japanese hospital ambulance.”

“With medical crew dead, a wounded driver attempted to ram attackers but was blown to pieces by an anti-tank weapon. “Donald’s declassified cable even claimed that troops killed one of their own officers. ” A 27 Army officer was shot dead by his comrades, apparently because he faltered,” said Donald. “Troops explained they would be shot if they hadn’t shot the officer.”

Of course, Chinese state TV was painting an entirely different picture. Before the army was deployed to wipe out protestors, government television was repeatedly broadcasting the following claims:

“Tonight a serious counter-revolutionary rebellion took place. Thugs frenziedly attacked People’s Liberation Army troops, seizing weapons, erecting barricades, beating soldiers and officers in an attempt to overthrow the government of the People’s Republic of China.”

“For many days, the People’s Liberation Army has exercised restraint and now must resolutely counteract the rebellion. All those who refuse to listen to reason must take full responsibility for their actions and their consequences.”

The Chinese Red Cross estimated the death toll to be around 2,700 people on June 4, 1989. While this is far less conservative than the Chinese Governments preposterous count of 200-300, it’s far lower than Donald’s account, which ended with a stunning figure.

“Minimum estimate of civilian dead 10,000,” the final sentence of his cable read.

Sir Alan Donald’s now-declassified assessment of the Tiananmen Square massacre and the resulting death toll aligns completely with a confidential U.S. government file reported on in 2014. This document quoted a Chinese military source and said the CCP’s own internal figures estimated the body count to be 10,454 people. Chinese friends of mine at the time told me that over 10,000 were killed and over 10,000 were arrested and they worked for the Chinese Police (Jin Ang Corporation)

General Chi Haotian Defence Minister

Who was responsible for organising this massacre? I have asked and the only answers I have received have named General Chi Haotian as the director of the military’s enforcement of martial law in Beijing to suppress the protests in Tiananmen Square. As at the time he was Chief of Staff he instructed the commanding officers of the Beijing, Shenyang, and Jinan Military Districts to “finalize the name list of every group army division scheduled to advance into Beijing and their exact times of departure and arrival, as well as details regarding primary duties“, according to the “Daily Report” (Meiri yibao) from the Central Military Commission Office, dated 19 May 1989. This military buildup removed the local military force and introduced the external forces who took part in the Beijing massacre, which took place on 3rd and 4th June and led to his promotion to Minister of Defence until 2001.  His perspective on China’s future plans were specified in a his speech, text below

By Chief of General Staff and Vice -Chairman China’s Military Commission Comrade Chi Haotian, December, 2005 to top officers and generals. This is his Modus Operandi.

“Comrades, I’m very excited today, because the large-scale online survey by sina.com that was done for us showed that our next generation is quite promising and our Party’s cause will be carried on. In answering the question, “Will you shoot at women, children and prisoners of war,” more than 80 per cent of the respondents answered in the affirmative, exceeding by far our expectations. Today I’d like to focus on why we asked sina.com to conduct this online survey among our people. My speech today is a sequel to my speech last time, during which I started with a discussion of the issue of the three islands (Taiwan, Diaoyu Islands) and the (Spratley Islands) and mentioned that 20 years of the idyllic theme of ‘peace and development’ had come to an end, and concluded that modernization under the saber is the only option for China’s next phase. I also mentioned we have a vital stake overseas. The central issue of this survey appears to be whether one should shoot at women, children and prisoners of war, but its real significance goes far beyond that. Ostensibly, our intention is mainly to figure out what the Chinese people’s attitude towards war is: If these future soldiers do not hesitate to kill even non combatants, they’ll naturally be doubly ready and ruthless in killing combatants. Therefore, the responses to the survey questions may reflect the general attitude people have towards war. We wanted to know: If China’s global development will necessitate massive deaths in enemy countries; will our people endorse that scenario? Will they be for or against it? The fact is, our ‘development’ refers to the great revitalization of the Chinese nation, which, of course, is not limited to the land we have now but also includes the whole world. As everybody knows, according to the views propagated by the Western scholars, humanity as a whole originated from one single mother in Africa. Therefore no race can claim racial superiority. However, according to the research conducted by most Chinese scholars, the Chinese are different from other races on earth. We did not originate in Africa. Instead, we originated independently in the land of China. Therefore, we can rightfully assert that we are the product of cultural roots of more than a million years, civilization and progress of more than ten thousand years, an ancient nation of five thousand years, and a single Chinese entity of two thousand years. This is the Chinese nation that calls itself ‘descendants of Yan and Huang.’ During our long history, our people have disseminated throughout the Americas and the regions along the Pacific Rim, and they became Indians in the Americas and the East Asian ethnic groups in the South Pacific. We all know that on account of our national superiority, during the thriving and prosperous Tang Dynasty our civilization was at the peak of the world. We were the centre of the world civilization, and no other civilization in the world was comparable to ours. Later on, because of our complacency, narrow- mindedness, and the self-enclosure of our own country, we were surpassed by Western civilization, and the centre of the world shifted to the West. In reviewing history, one may ask: Will the centre of the world civilization shift back to China? Actually, Comrade Liu Huaqing made similar points in early 1980’s Based on an historical analysis, he pointed out that the centre of world civilization is shifting. It shifted from the East to Western Europe and later to the United States; now it is shifting back to the East. Therefore, if we refer to the 19th Century as the British Century and the 20th century as the American Century, then the 21st Century will be the Chinese Century! (Wild applause fills the auditorium.) Our Chinese people are wiser than the Germans because, fundamentally, our race is superior to theirs. As a result, we have a longer history, more people, and larger land area. On this basis, our ancestors left us with the two most essential heritages, which are atheism and great unity. It was Confucius, the founder of our Chinese culture, who gave us these heritages. These two heritages determined that we have a stronger ability to survive than the West. That is why the Chinese race has been able to prosper for so long. We are destined ‘not to be buried by either heaven or earth’ no matter how severe the natural, man-made, and national disasters. This is our advantage. Take response to war as an example. The reason that the United States remains today is that it has never seen war on its mainland. Once its enemies aim at the mainland, the enemies would have already reached Washington before its congress finishes debating and authorizes the president to declare war. But for us, we don’t waste time on these trivial things. Maybe you have now come to understand why we recently decided to further promulgate atheism. If we let theology from the West into China and empty us from the inside, if we let all Chinese people listen to God and follow God, who will obediently listen to us and follow us? If the common people don’t believe Comrade Hu Jintao is a qualified leader, begin to question his authority, and want to monitor him, if the religious followers in our society question why we are leading God in churches, can our Party continue to rule China??

(Lebensraum (‘living space’) in order to survive.)

The first pressing issue facing us is living space. This is the biggest focus of the revitalization of the Chinese race. In my last speech, I said that the fight over basic living resources (including land and ocean) is the source of the vast majority of wars in history. This may change in the information age, but not fundamentally. Our per capita resources are much less than those of Germany’s back then. In addition, economic development in the last twenty-plus years had a negative impact, and climates are rapidly changing for the worse. Our resources are in very short supply. The environment is severely polluted, especially that of soil, water, and air. Not only our ability to sustain and develop our race, but even its survival is gravely threatened, to a degree much greater than faced Germany back then.  Anybody who has been to Western countries knows that their living space is much better than ours. They have forests alongside the highways, while we hardly have any trees by our streets. Their sky is often blue with white clouds, while our sky is covered with a layer of dark haze. Their tap water is clean enough for drinking, while even our ground water is so polluted that it can’t be drunk without filtering. They have few people in the streets, and two or three people can occupy a small residential building; in contrast our streets are always crawling with people, and several people have to share one room. Many years ago, there was a book titled Yellow Catastrophes. It said that, due to our following the American style of consumption, our limited resources would no longer support the population and society would collapse once our population reaches 1.3 billion. Now our population has already exceeded this limit, and we are now relying on imports to sustain our nation. It’s not that we haven’t paid attention to this issue. The Ministry of Land Resources is specialized in this issue. But we must understand that the term ‘living space’ (lebenstraum) is too closely related to Nazi Germany. The reason we don’t want to discuss this too openly is to avoid the West’s association of us with Nazi Germany, which could in turn reinforce the view that China is a threat. Therefore, in our emphasis on He Xin’s new theory, ‘Human Rights are just living rights’ we only talk about ‘living’ but not ‘space’ so as to avoid using the term ‘living space.’ From the perspective of history, the reason that China is faced with the issue of living space is because Western countries have developed ahead of Eastern countries. Western countries established colonies all around the world, therefore giving themselves an advantage on the issue of living space. To solve this problem, we must lead the Chinese people outside of China, so that they can develop outside of China. Would the United States allow us to go out to gain new living space? First, if the United States is firm in blocking us, it is hard for us to do anything significant to Taiwan and some other countries! Second, even if we could snatch some land from Taiwan, Vietnam, India, or even Japan, how much more living space can we get? Very trivial! Only countries like the United States, Canada and Australia have the vast land to serve our need for mass colonization. Therefore, solving the ‘issue of America’ is the key to solving all other issues. First, this makes it possible for us to have many people migrate there and even establish another China under the same leadership of the CCP. America was originally discovered by the ancestors of the yellow race, but Columbus gave credit to the White race. We the descendants of the Chinese nation are ENTITLED to the possession of the land! It is historical destiny that China and United States will come into unavoidable confrontation on a narrow path and fight.

General Chi Haotian left with western visitor.

In the long run, the relationship of China and the United States is one of a life-and-death struggle. Of course, right now it is not the time to openly break up with them yet. Our reform and opening to the outside world still rely on their capital and technology. We still need America. Therefore, we must do everything we can to promote our relationship with America, learn from America in all aspects and use America as an example to reconstruct our country. Only by using special means to ‘clean up’ America will we be able to lead the Chinese people there. Only by using non-destructive weapons that can kill many people will we be able to reserve America for ourselves. There has been rapid development of modern biological technology, and new bio weapons have been invented one after another. Of course we have not been idle; in the past years we have seized the opportunity to master weapons of this kind. We are capable of achieving our purpose of ‘cleaning up’ America all of a sudden. When Comrade Xiaoping was still with us, the Party Central Committee had the perspicacity to make the right decision not to develop aircraft carrier groups and focused instead on developing lethal weapons that can eliminate mass populations of the enemy country. Biological weapons are unprecedented in their ruthlessness, but if the Americans do not die then the Chinese have to die. If the Chinese people are strapped to the present land, a total societal collapse is bound to take place. According to the computations of the author of Yellow Peril, more than half of the Chinese will die, and that figure would be more than 800 million people! Just after the liberation, our yellow land supported nearly 500 million people, while today the official figure of the population is more than 1.3 billion. This yellow land has reached the limit of its capacity. One day, who know how soon it will come, the great collapse will occur any time and more than half of the population will have to go. It is indeed brutal to kill one or two hundred million Americans. But that is the only path that will secure a Chinese century, a century in which the CCP leads the world. We, as revolutionary humanitarians, do not want deaths, But if history confronts us with a choice between deaths of Chinese and those of Americans, we’d have to pick the latter, as, for us, it is more important to safeguard the lives of the Chinese people and the life of our Party. The last problem I want to talk about is of firmly seizing the preparations for military battle. The central committee believes, as long as we resolve the United States problem at one blow, our domestic problems will all be readily solved. Therefore, our military battle preparation appears to aim at Taiwan, but in fact is aimed at the United States, and the preparation is far beyond the scope of attacking aircraft carriers or satellites. Marxism pointed out that violence is the midwife for the birth of the new society. Therefore war is the midwife for the birth of China’s century.”

China’s second aircraft carrier, 3 more to come in the current program.

Comrade Chi Haotian idea’s for limited war strategy is the fait accompli. Such an approach involves an attacker seizing territory before the defender and its patron can react sufficiently and then making sure that the counterattack needed to eject it would be so risky, costly, and aggressive that the United States would balk at mounting it, not least because its allies might see it as unjustified and refuse to support it. Such a war plan, if skillfully carried out in the Coral Sea, could checkmate the United States as it has already succeeded to out bluff the USA in the South China Sea.

So as most of our readers are firearm owners I would suggest we take a notice of Oliver Cromwell’s advice “Put your trust in God, my boys, and keep your powder dry” as one day soon we are all going to need everything we have.

There is no Spring without Winter, without Mistakes there is no Learning. There is no Life without Death, without Doubts there is no Faith. There is no Peace without War, without Fear there is no Courage. For without Mistakes, Doubts and Fears there are no pathways to Wisdom.
Ron Owen.
———–
Any Inquiries on any products phone 07 54824099 or 07 54825070 or email owenguns@spiderweb.com.au

The Australian government Considering the Construction of A Nuclear Power Plant?

Nuclear power in Australia to be examined by multi-party parliamentary inquiry

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-03/parliamentary-enquiry-to-examine-nuclear-power-in-australia/11380666

Nuclear power to be examined in Australia for the first time in ten years

https://www.news.com.au/national/politics/nuclear-power-to-be-examined-in-australia-for-the-first-time-in-ten-years/news-story/677581a1e37611f9ca9b32d8a0cbad3d

1. The nuclear industry still has no solution to the 'waste problem'.

2. The transport of this waste poses an unacceptable risk to people and the environment.

3. Plutonium is the most dangerous material in the world.

4. Nuclear waste is hazardous for tens of thousands of years. This clearly is unprecedented and poses a huge threat to our future generations.

5. Even if put into a geological repository, the waste might emerge and threaten future generations.

6. Nobody knows the true costs of waste management. The costs are so high that nuclear power can never be economic.

https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-wastes/radioactive-wastes-myths-and-realities.aspx

David Attenborough, Greta Thunberg and Jane Goodall want to talk to you ...

Why the creeping militarisation of our police has experts worried.

Why the creeping militarisation of our police has experts worried

Australian police are increasingly being "militarised".

Front-line officers in Queensland and Victoria, and specialist units across the country, are being trained in military-style tactics and thinking.

Lawyer and former Australian Defence Force officer John Sutton describes this "convergence" as slow and worrying.

"Typically, a close ideological and operational alliance between the police force and the military has always been associated with repressive regimes," he says.

"Australia has a very strong democracy and a very robust civic mindedness among its population.

"Nevertheless, these developments are certainly concerning."

So just how concerned should we be? And what's driving the shift?

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-20/creeping-militarisation-of-police-why-experts-are-concerned/11517266

Compromising On Gun Control. The Cake Story.

Why We Won't Compromise - The Cake Story

Maybe I'm the last one to know this story. My shooting buddy, Dan, couldn't believe I had never seen it. But, it's the perfect explanation to use when someone asks "Why won't you gun people at least compromise a little?"

When we originally posted this article, I said I didn’t know who had written it. Now I do. Credit goes to the Law Dog Files.  My apology to The Law Dog Files for not knowing, and my thanks for their contribution. You can see more at The Law Dog Files.

The Cake
Let's say I have this cake. It is a very nice cake, with "GUN RIGHTS" written across the top in lovely floral icing. I received it from the 2nd amendment.

Along you come and say, "Give me that cake."

I say, "No, it's my cake."

You say, "Let's compromise. Give me half." I respond by asking what I get out of this compromise, and you reply that I get to keep half of my cake.

Okay, we compromise. Let us call this compromise The National Firearms Act of 1934.

There I am with my half of the cake, and you walk back up and say, "Give me that cake."

I say, "No, it's my cake."

You say, "Let's compromise." What do I get out of this compromise? Why, I get to keep half of what's left of the cake I already own?

So, we have your compromise -- let us call this one the Gun Control Act of 1968 -- and I'm left holding what is now just a quarter of my cake.

And I'm sitting in the corner with my quarter piece of cake, and here you come again. You want my cake. Again.

You say, "Let's compromise once more." What do I get out of this compromise? I get to keep one-eighth of what's left of the cake I already own?

So, we have your compromise -- let us call this one the Machine gun ban of 1986 -- and I'm left holding what is now just an eighth of my cake.

I sit back in the corner with just my eighth of cake that I once owned outright and completely, I glance up and here you come once more.

You say nothing and just grab my cake; This time you take several bites -- we'll call this compromise the Clinton Executive Orders -- and I'm left with about a tenth of what has always been MY CAKE and you've got nine-tenths of it.

Then we compromised with the Lautenberg Act (nibble, nibble), the HUD/Smith and Wesson agreement (nibble, nibble), the Brady Law (NOM NOM NOM), the School Safety and Law Enforcement Improvement Act (sweet tap-dancing Freyja, my finger!)

I'm left holding crumbs of what was once a large and satisfying cake, and you're standing there with most of MY CAKE, making anime eyes and whining about being "reasonable", and wondering "why we won't compromise". ~ Tom

Tom Gresham
Author, outdoorsman, gun rights activist, and firearms enthusiast for more than five decades, Tom Gresham hosts Tom Gresham's Gun Talk, the first nationally-syndicated radio show about guns and the shooting sports, and is also the producer and co-host of the Guns & Gear, GunVenture and First Person Defender television series.

https://nationalshooting.org.au/blog/f/no-compromise-the-pro-gun-article-that-takes-the-cake

https://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/?m=1

Are You Serious About Stabilising Climate Change?

How Feminist Leadership Can Pave the Way to Climate Justice

How Feminist Leadership Can Pave the Way to Climate Justice: As we approach the Global Climate Strike on Friday, 20 September 2019, IWDA makes the case for feminist leadership as a means of effective action against climate change.

Overview: Weather, Global Warming and Climate Change

Overview: Weather, Global Warming and Climate Change: “Climate change” and “global warming” are often used interchangeably but have distinct meanings. Similarly, the terms 'weather' and 'climate' are sometimes confused, though they refer to events with broadly different spatial- and timescales.

Honest Government Ad | Climate Emergency & School Strikes

Honest Government Ad | Aussie Arms Industry

Honest Government Ad | Julian Assange

Honest Government Ad | My Police State!

Honest Government Ad | Djab Wurrung Trees

Honest Government Ad | We're F**ked

Honest Government Ad | Anti Encryption Law

Green Loo GT System

URGENT!!! Every Background Check Supporter MUST SEE THIS!!

Have your say: Tell federal inquiry that nuclear is a dangerous distraction.

https://www.acf.org.au/nuclear_free_submission?utm_campaign=1909_nuclearfederalinquiry2&utm_medium=email&utm_source=auscon#action

Fukushima Uncensored - Documentary [HD]

5 Worst Nuclear Power Plant Accidents and Disasters in History

The Australian government want to install more nuclear power plants!!!

Putting farmers on the world map

Falling From Grace - The Decline of the US

Falling From Grace - The Decline of the US: The twentieth century was the American century and the US went from victory to victory, expanding its power. But the decline began in the 1960s, when the US started to pursue unwinnable wars, began the destruction of its currency and began to expand its government into an all-powerful body.

Doug Casey's International Man