The U.S. Supreme Court is reviewing a gun confiscation law that has far-reaching implications, as I will discuss in detail below.

WUFYS readers already know that Jews are the strongest proponents of gun confiscation, since Jews want to deprive the Goyim of defensive weapons, as they did during the Jewish conquest of Russia in 1917.

Gun control is not about guns. It’s about control. Nor is it about restriction; it’s about prohibition. When guns are outlawed, only Jews and their agents will have guns. Therefore when incidents occur such as the massacre at Columbine High School (committed by Jews on 20 April 1999) the Jews always call for nationwide gun confiscation.

Jews control the biggest gun-grabbing coalitions, such as the Americans for Democratic Action, co-founded by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.; the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, Executive Director Joshua Horwitz; the League of Women Voters, a feminist group; and Americans for Gun Safety Foundation headed by Andrew McKelvey, who is financed by the American Jewish Committee. McKelvey was formerly on the board of directors of Handgun Control Inc., which is now called the “Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence,” and which is headed by Paul Helmke, a radical gun-grabbing Zionist Jew.

The American Jewish Committee boasts that it passed more major gun-grabbing laws in the USA than any other organization. Their "triumphs" include the federal Gun Control Act of 1968, the federal Assault Weapon Control Act of 1989, and the Brady Handgun Prevention Act of 1993.

The Jewish gun-grab has affected most of the USA, but it has been the most complete in two cities where Jews have absolute power: New York and Washington DC.

On 26 June 1976, Zionist groups got Washington DC’s city government to pass the strictest gun control laws in the United States. Today, handguns cannot be registered in Washington DC, and those registered before the 1976 ban cannot be carried from one room to another without a license. Any firearm in a home must be kept unloaded and either locked or disassembled.

Of course these laws have no effect on crime (Washington DC has one of the five-highest murders rates of major American cities) – but confiscation laws are not meant to stop crime. They are meant to remove Goy defense. All dictators and supremacists use gun control laws to render people helpless for enslavement or extermination. In the past, the Ku Klux Klan advocated gun confiscation for blacks.

Naturally Jews don’t protest when guns are used to guard rich people and their money. Sniper rifles and submachine guns guard Bush, plus members of Congress. Bank guards carry pistols and shotguns.

Also, gun confiscation laws make Jews even richer, since citizens are forced to pay zio-gangsters for “protection.”

If you examine presidential candidates, you’ll find that the more they want to please Jews, the more they tend to favor gun confiscation. Here’s a rough breakdown of the candidates’ views. Giuliani is a stong champion of the gun-grab. Ron Paul opposes gun control. In June 2007 he wrote an article warning that gun control has been taken to international levels through the UN.

NOTE...

You might find the gun debate boring, but the real issue here is not guns. It’s about individual rights versus collective rights.

The Goyim favor individual rights.

Jews own the government, and thus favor government rights.

Regarding guns, nine federal appeals courts in the USA have upheld the Jewish claim that government rights supercede individual rights -- but in May 2007 a Washington DC appellate court violated this tyrannical pattern, as I will discuss below. Therefore the U.S. Supreme court will decide the matter. If the Court does not rule in favor of Jews, it could cause a “tipping point” in government power. This frightens Jews, because a ruling that favors individual Goy-rights could ultimately spread to laws that outlaw "hate crimes, "holocaust denial," and so on. The free speech of individuals might once again be protected.

Erwin Chemerinsky (Jewish professor at Duke Law School) recognizes this threat to Jewish control. He claims that the District of Columbia's handgun laws are proper, even under an "individual rights" interpretation of the Second Amendment.

CONTINUING…

In 1976, Jews pushed through a ban on guns in Washington DC (in violation of the U.S. Constitution) because Washington DC is a state-within-a-state, just as Vatican City is an independent nation inside Italy, and the “Crown of England” is a sovereign state inside London (ruled by Jews of the central bank).

Washington DC’s special status has enabled it to survive all attempts to overturn the city’s gun confiscation laws. Moreover, the city’s population is mostly black, and no one becomes mayor unless he bows to Jews. On 2 January 2006, the Jews installed Adrian M. Fenty as mayor of Washington DC.

Late in 2006, six residents of Washington DC filed a lawsuit against Washington DC’s gun confiscation laws.

Opposing the six residents were Jews who operated through their puppet mayor Fenty. A district court dismissed the lawsuit, ruling in favor of Jews and government rights over citizens’ rights.

The six Washington residents appealed to the federal district court of appeals for Washington DC, and won. On 9 March 2007 the appellate court overturned the lower (district) court by a vote of 2-to-1, and ruled that portions of Washington DC’s gun confiscation laws are unconstitutional. (The one justice who dissented was Karen L. Henderson, who ruled last week that Guantanamo victims are not “persons,” and are therefore not entitled to rights under U.S. law.)

This was the first time a federal appeals court had ever upheld the U.S. Constitution regarding gun confiscation laws.

Jews were outraged. One of them, Paul Helmke (mentioned above) called the decision "judicial activism at its worst." He said this, "could lead to all current and proposed firearms laws being called into question!”

Linda Singer, the District of Columbia’s (Jewish) attorney general, said, “It’s truly a life-or-death question for us!”

Helmke alerted his fellow Zionists, who raised a nationwide alarm, and called in favors from their network of Goy-bitches, such as the Mayors Against Illegal Guns.

The six Washington DC residents who want to have loaded guns at home were helped by the American Civil Rights Union -- not to be confused with the (Jewish-controlled) American Civil Liberties Union. The ACRU refers to gun-grabbers as “self-appointed progressives” – or SAPS.

(Tangential side note: Many gun-grabbing SAPS are zionist operatives in “Christian” churches. “Christian” zionists are the most visible manifestation, but Jew-worship is pandemic across the USA. American preachers, like American politicians, cannot rise to the top unless they bow to Satan, i.e., Jews. If a church congregation opposes homosexuality -- or any other program that breaks up Goy solidarity -- church leaders declare a “war on terror.” That is, they get their congregations to chase phantom “communists,” or “Marxists,” or “liberals,” or “Islamo-fascists,” or just, “Satan.” This allows church leaders to control their sheep by making the sheep focus on chimeras, while the sheep worship Satanic Jews. It also allows Satan-worshipping church leaders to become filthy rich.)

So…on 9 March 2007, the appeals court overturned the lower court, and ruled that Washington DC laws violate the U.S. Constitution.

Instantly the Jews mobilized.

In order to get a case into the U.S. Supreme Court, one must file a writ of certiorari, which is a request for a review. The Supreme Court can accept or reject the writ. At least four of the nine Supreme Court justices must agree to accept it. Each year, about 7,500 writs of certiorari are filed with the U.S. Supreme Court, and about 98.7 percent are rejected without review. When a writ is accepted, the Supreme Court is said to “grant certiorari.”

On 4 September 2007, Washington DC mayor Fenty (Jewish puppet) filed a writ of certiorari to appeal the Washington appellate court’s ruling. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg (Jewish) accepted it out of the “writ pool,” and got three other justices to go along with her. This is done through deals. “I’ll accept your writ if you accept mine.”

Six days later, five of the residents in Washington DC who filed the original lawsuit cross-petitioned the Supreme Court to reinstate their legal claims against Washington DC’s laws.

On 20 November 2007 the Supreme Court formally granted certiorari (agreed to review the case).

This will be the first time the Supreme Court has decided a Second Amendment case since 1939.

This has become interesting, because the U.S. Solicitor General’s office filed an amicus curiae brief urging the Supreme Court to render a decision. Amicus curiae is Latin for “friend of the court.” An “amicus curiae “ brief is filed by an uninvolved third party that wants to sway a court’s opinion. It can be a legal opinion, or a “learned treatise.” The court can accept or reject it.

Last Friday (11 January 2008) the Jews filed their own amicus curiae brief to explain why the Goyim must not have guns. The Jews claim that the U.S. Constitution’s phrase, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” does not mean what it says. They say American society has changed since 1791 when the Constitution was adopted, and that “1791 language” (i.e., the Constitution) is outdated.

Their amicus curiae brief was signed by the American Jewish Committee, the ADL, the National Council of Jewish Women, the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, and two groups from the zionist network of Goy-bitches: the NAACP and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

The NRA says it will file its own amicus curiae brief. They say the Constitution does not confer or bestow rights. Instead, the Constitution guarantees rights as natural and God-given. They say the Constitution recognizes the right of self-preservation as a basic instinct of any organism.

Jews say that even if this is true, only government rights are protected, not citizen rights.

This case is also interesting because it turns Jewish advocacy back on itself. Among the six Washington DC residents who filed the original protest, one is a militant homosexual who says he was assaulted because of his homosexuality. Another is a feminist who lives in a high-crime area, and has been threatened by drug dealers. Another is a special police officer for the Federal Judicial Center. He protects the lives of various government officials during the day, but may not keep a loaded handgun at home to protect himself and his family.

The case emanates from the District of Columbia, where only federal law applies. It does not involve the overlaying question of whether the Second Amendment applies to a state by way of the 14th Amendment—a question that clouded an earlier case involving one city’s complete ban on handgun possession.

Most commentators think the Supreme Court will uphold the Jews, and will agree that government rights trump citizen rights. However the Court might go the other way. If that happens, the Supreme Court will probably tailor its decision narrowly to reach consensus. Nonetheless, this may cause a “tipping point” in the debate over individual versus government rights, as I noted above.

Jews hoped that the Virginia Tech shootings (16 April 2007) would bolster their campaign to destroy Goy self-defense, but the NRA advocated that teachers and others be armed to protect themselves. The NRA says an armed population is a polite population.

Jews say an armed population is unruly (i.e., resistant to control).

In March 2008, lawyers will go to the Supreme Court. Those that will argue for the Goy-gun-grab include Thomas Goldstein of the Akin Gump law firm, which claims to be working pro bono (no charge).

(I suspect they are financed by the AJC, ADL, etc.)

____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________
____________________________________________________

UNRELATED SIDE NOTE CONCERNING JEWS AND THE U.S. SUPREME COURT

Currently there are two Jews on the U.S. Supreme Court: Ruth Ginsberg and Stephen Breyer.

Here's a brief history of Jews in the U.S. Supreme Court...

In 1845 the notorious Judah Benjamin moved from the British West Indies to Louisiana. That same year, David Levy Yulee from Florida became the first Jew to become a U.S. Senator.

In 1852, Benjamin became the second Jew that was "elected" U.S. senator.

Several months later, President Millard Fillmore offered Benjamin a Supreme Court judgeship, but Benjamin had become a Rothschild agent, and was helping British bankers plan the U.S. Civil War in order to break up the USA’s growing financial power.

Benjamin turned down the Supreme Court seat so he could become the Confederacy’s Secretary of State and Attorney General, thus allowing Jewish bankers in England to control Confederate currency. Benjamin’s picture appeared on the Confederate two-dollar bill, giving rise to the saying, “phony as a two-dollar bill.”

When Jews decided to end the war, they collapsed the Confederate currency. Meanwhile British bankers stopped sending supplies to the South. Fifty-two years later, Jews did the same thing when they stopped sending money and supplies to Germany. World War I ended as suddenly as it began, and Jews became supreme in Europe.

President Lincoln wanted the U.S. government to control currency, so he was assassinated. Benjamin was hunted as a prime conspirator, but he fled to Florida and escaped to England before he was caught. British Jew-bankers refused all U.S. requests for extradition. In those days, England was the “Israel” that Jewish criminals escaped to.

The first President to appoint a Jew to the Supreme Court was Woodrow Wilson, who chose Louis D. Brandeis in 1916 – two years after the Jews installed their Federal Reserve. Wilson called Brandeis the greatest man he had ever known, which shows the extent of Wilson’s madness.

The next to appoint a Jew was President Herbert Hoover, who selected Benjamin Cardozo for the Supreme Court in 1932. Hoover was a Republican, and Cardozo was a Democrat who had supported candidate Al Smith against Hoover in 1928. However Jews wanted their man in the Supreme Court, and Hoover was forced to bow to them.

In 1939, Cadozo died, and Brandeis retired from the Supreme Court. President Roosevelt wanted more Jews like himself in the Court, so he chose Felix Frankfurter, giving rise to the American understanding that the Supreme Court has a “Jewish seat.” At least one Jew must be in the Court at all times.

Frankfurter had a stroke in 1962, so President Kennedy filled the “Jewish seat” with Arthur J. Goldberg.

In 1963, Kennedy was liquidated before he could take back control of U.S. currency. In 1965, President Johnson persuaded Goldberg to resign from the Supreme Court and become the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, so Goldberg could help pave the way for the savage U.S. invasion of Vietnam.

To replace Golberg and fill the "Jewish seat" with another Jew, Johnson chose his close personal friend Abe Fortas. Fortas became Chief Justice, but was later exposed. Investigators found that he illegally collected $20,000 per year from the Louis E. Wolfson's foundation, while Wolfson himself was serving a prison sentence for stock manipulation. In 1969, Fortas resigned in disgrace.

President Nixon appointed Harry Blackmun as a justice, plus Warren E. Burger as chief justice, thereby pausing a 53-year stretch in which at least one Jew was in the U.S. Supreme Court.

Burger may have been a crypto-Jew, since he married a Jewess named Elvira Stromberg, and opposed any notion of individual rights concerning firearms. However Burger also opposed militant homosexuality, so his crypto-status is uncertain.

President Ford planned to get Jews back in by appointing his Attorney General Edward Hirsch Levi, but Ford lost the White House when he pardoned Nixon. Levi, a Chicago zionist, was close friends with Leo Strauss, father of the zio-cons. Levi was also the first Jew ever to be named U.S. attorney general, and the first Jew to gain control of a non-Jewish university when he became president of the University of Chicago in 1968.

For the next 24 years, Jews tore their clothes, and wailed that a filthy Goy was occupying their seat in the Supreme Court.

Finally President Clinton apologized in 1993 by appointing Ruth Bader Ginsberg, and appointing Steven Breyer in 1994.

Ginsberg and Breyer are still there today.

The "Jewish seat" remains safely filled.

Posted in

• Gun control
• Supreme Court

Submitted by Abdul Alhazred on Mon, 2008-01-14 18:33.

• Abdul Alhazred's blog
• Login or register to post comments