All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 18, 1998 - Bill Cooper
55:39
Right to Keep & Bear Arms #5 (4 min. missing)
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
In my stuff, you call dollars for two pennies.
They lend it back to us at full face value.
They charge you interest.
You get the dick.
They get the interest.
They get the gold.
You get the job.
Democ is a new order of business.
A new world order will be issued.
Excuse me.
I see higher reality.
Excuse me.
This is a dream of my head.
It was a big idea.
I knew you were an order of your own.
You've got to be kidding me.
It's not over.
I'm a guy, I'm a sheriff, it's not all that I've got I've got a clean respect
You will not see in 1994 I'm white, I'm bold, I'm young
I've got a clean respect, I've got a war, I've got a clean reputation
It's all about the gun The FCFR controls the CIA, the FBI, the APF...
They don't give a damn about the POW and the MIA.
Hillary, Hillary, Hitler, Marx, and Mao.
They want a new world order.
They want it all.
And they want it now.
This Illuminati imports the dope.
They create the chaos.
String us up, Charlie.
They created AIDS.
It's a designer disease.
They bring you down.
They want to hold your hands.
They want to vaccinate your child and give him the mark.
They want to illuminate you and keep you in the dark.
They want you to pay for it with plastic.
Surrender your soul.
They want you under their thumb.
I think they're in control.
Make what is called.
I knew you were on order.
What?
A new world order.
A new world order.
And you got the idea.
Move along.
You can't control the idea.
It's not really an idea.
It's not really an incarceration.
It's that new world order.
I say it again.
A new world order.
And people all the time.
A new world order.
And they hit me hard.
A new world order.
A new world order.
And I'm going to get it all.
And there's a big idea.
A new world order.
And there's a big idea.
A new world order.
Yes folks, that's what they want.
That's what they were.
you A New World Order, but what is?
What is a New World Order?
Well, we're not going to get into that tonight, but we've covered it extensively in the past.
We're going to cover it again sometime in the near future.
The hour of the time is for your continuing education into those subjects that are not taught in our schools anymore.
Because they've been taken over by the Marxist-Socialist National Education Association.
Our colleges are in the grip of Marxist professors who hold tenure.
It's a wonder that our children have any brains at all when they get through with the system that is in place at this time.
You want to know what's going wrong with this country?
Just go in your bathroom, close the door so that nobody can see the tears streaming down your face, and you'll find it staring at you from your own mirror.
It's each and every one of us, ladies and gentlemen, that has allowed all of these things to happen.
Tonight, we're going to find out what the Framers intended.
A linguistic analysis of the right to bear arms by Stephen P. Halbrook.
In 1775, General Gage ordered that all private arms in Boston be deposited with the magistrates, supposedly to be stored temporarily and eventually returned to the owners.
Those citizens, naive enough to comply with the General's edict, turned in 1,778 muskets,
634 pistols, 973 bayonets, and 38 blunderbusses.
As the Declaration of Causes of Taking Up Arms passed by the Continental Congress stated, quote, they accordingly delivered up their arms but in open violation of honor.
The governor ordered the arms deposited as aforesaid to be seized by a body of soldiers, end quote.
One newspaper published a poem entitled, Tom Gage's Proclamation, and it goes like this, folks.
That whosoever keeps gun or pistol, I'll spoil the motion of his sistle.
But every one that will lay down his hanger bright and musket brown, shall not be beat, nor bruised, nor banged, much less for past offenses hanged.
But on surrendering his Toledo, go to and fro unhurt as we do.
Meanwhile, let all and everyone who loves his life forsake his gun.
In a recent article, Professor Don Cates, one of these Marxist professors, acknowledged that the Second Amendment right of the people to keep and bear arms protects an individual right to keep arms in the home for self-defense.
He contends, however, that the amendment serves to guarantee the right to carry them outside the home only in the course of militia service.
And, of course, he believes that the militia is the National Guard.
In that article and in this dialogue, Professor Cates argues that the following arms may be completely banned from private ownership.
Saturday night specials.
Gangster weapons, whatever those are.
brass knuckles, switchblade knives and short-barreled shotguns, purely offensive military weapons,
and the urban possession of rifles, shotguns and highly penetrating handgun bullets.
Lastly, Professor Cates contends that permissive licensing and registration for gun ownership
is constitutional.
Well, folks, did the framers of the Second Amendment, as well as those of the Fourteenth,
intend constitutional protection of the right to bear arms to encompass the private carrying
of arms for self-defense?
Thank you.
And what arms are protected under that guarantee?
May licenses and registration be required for exercise of a constitutional right per se?
The following analysis seeks to resolve or at least clarify these questions.
Did the Framers intend the Second Amendment to encompass a right to carry guns for self-protection?
Professor Lawrence Kress, who speaks for himself when he claims that we know little about the Second Amendment's reception in the States, has recently argued that the Founding Fathers would have been shocked by the idea that citizens could bear firearms for self-defense.
Professor Cates bases his similar argument that there is no right to bear arms outside of militia service on an unpublished thesis of a law student.
Yet, Kress and Cates are well aware that the first state declaration of rights to use the term bear arms was that of Pennsylvania in 1776.
That the people have a right to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state."
That to bear arms means simply to carry them was clear in a game bill drafted by Thomas Jefferson and proposed by James Madison, draftsman of the Second Amendment in the Virginia Legislature.
The bill would have fined those who hunted deer out of season, and if within a year The hunter shall bear a gun out of his enclosed ground,
unless whilst performing military duty he shall be in violation of his recognizance.
The game violator would have to go back to court for "...every such bearing of a gun..." to be again bound to
his good behavior.
Thus, in the minds of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, to bear a gun meant to carry
it about in one's hands or on one's person, as for instance a deer hunter would do.
you Bearing arms is not associated with military duty only, for the language addresses the bearing of a gun by any person when not performing military duty.
Further, while the bill would have restricted the carrying of scatter guns and other long guns for hunting, It would not have prohibited carrying pistols for self-defense.
At that time, quote, one species of firearms, the pistol, was never called a gun, end quote.
Previous gang legislation had imposed a possible maximum penalty of twenty lashes on a violator's back.
Madison's proposed legislation was intended to make the law more Jefferson, on the other hand, strongly relied on the penal reform theories of Caesar Becerria, whose essay on crimes and punishment was partly responsible for the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
In America of the Revolutionary period, Becerria's little book was more influential than any other single book.
Just months before writing the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson kept a commonplace book where he copied his favorite passages from legal writers.
This book may well be considered as the source book and repertory of Jefferson's ideas on Among the passages Jefferson copied word for word was Beccaria's denunciation of laws which forbid di portare le armi, which may be translated as to bear, carry, or wear arms.
That portion of Beccaria which Jefferson copied in Italian, writing false ideas of utility in the margin, was worded in the standard English translation of the time as follows.
Thomas Jefferson wrote in the margin, False Ideas of Utility.
A principal source of errors and injustice are false ideas of utility.
For example, that legislator has false ideas of utility who considers particular more than
general convenience, who had rather command of the sentiments of mankind than excite them,
and dares say to reason, Be thou a slave, who would sacrifice a thousand real advantages
to the fear of an imaginary or trifling inconvenience, who would deprive men of the use of fire for
fear of being burnt, and of water for fear of being burned.
for fear of being drowned, and who knows of no means of preventing evil but by destroying it?
The laws of this nature are those which forbid to wear arms, disarming those only who are not disposed to commit the crime which the law is meant to prevent.
Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity and the most important of the Code will respect the less considerable and arbitrary injunctions, the violation of which is so easy and of so little comparative importance?
Does not the execution of this law deprive the subject of that personal liberty, comparative and so dear to mankind and to the wise legislator?
And does it not subject the innocent to all the disagreeable circumstances that should only fall on the guilty?
It certainly makes the situation of the assaulted worse and of the assailants better, and rather
encourages than prevents murder, as it requires less courage to attack armed than unarmed
persons."
The wisdom of Beharia was the source of Jefferson's courage.
Proposed Virginia Constitution of 1776, which provided, quote, No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms, end quote.
An avid hunter and gun collector, Jefferson carried pocket pistols which may be seen today at Monticello, which was his home.
John Adams began his opening statement in the Boston Massacre Trial in 1770 with a quote from Beccaria.
And in the course of his speech he added that, quote, the inhabitants had a right to arm themselves at that time for their defense, end quote.
Adam's own view against disarming the people were certainly consistent with the following favorite passage from Baccaria which he copied in his diary, quote, Every act of authority of one man over another for which there is not an absolute necessity is tyrannical, end quote.
Adams upheld the right of, quote, arms in the hands of citizens to be used at individual discretion in private self-defense, end quote.
Bearing arms for personal protection was an unquestioned right in the minds of the Founding Fathers.
Before the Revolution, James Iredell Who would be prominent in the struggle to ratify the Constitution, and later, a Justice of the United States Supreme Court, wrote his mother, quote, Be not afraid of the pistols you have sent me.
They may be necessary implements of self-defense, though I dare say I shall never have occasion to use them.
It is a satisfaction to have the means of security at hand.
If we are in no danger, as I never expect to be, Confide in my prudence and self-regard for a proper use of them, and you need have no apprehension."
In 1775, North Carolina's delegation to the Continental Congress, all of whom became prominent state or federal leaders, resolved, "...it is the right of every English subject to be prepared with weapons for his defense."
William Henry Drayton, A prominent revolutionary leader and Chief Justice of the South Carolina Supreme Court, quote, always had about his person a dirk and a pair of pocket pistols for the defense of his life, end quote.
And a dirk, for those of you who may not know, is a knife.
A very formidable knife, I might add, with a long, thin, very sharp blade, just right for sticking between a pair of ribs.
and just long enough to penetrate the heart.
Up in Vermont, Ethan Allen and his friends, quote, never walked out without at least a case of pistols, end quote.
Lodging with a Quaker on one occasion, Ethan's brother Ira recalled, quote, We took our pistols out of our holsters and carried them in with us.
He looked at the pistols, saying, What doth thee do with these things?'
He was answered, Nothing, amongst our friends, but we were Green Mountain
boys, and meant to protect our persons and property."
Just ten days after James Madison proposed the Bill of Rights to Congress in 1789, Tinch
Cox, a prominent Federalist and lifelong correspondent of Jefferson and Madison, wrote that what
became the Second Amendment would confirm the people, quote, in their right to keep
and bear their private arms, end quote.
you.
James Madison endorsed the widely published article in which these words appear.
Cox's writings provide unmistakable evidence that 18th century Americans defined muskets, rifles, and pistols as, quote, arms, end quote.
and that they endorse an individual right to own and keep and use arms and, consequently, of self-defense and of the public militia power.
His own firearms are the second and better right hand of every freeman, held cocks.
In the 1830s, Madison wrote, A government resting on a minority is an aristocracy Not a republic, and could not be safe with a numerical and physical force against it without a standing army, an enslaved press, and a disarmed populace."
The Founding Fathers, in general, strongly endorsed the right to bear arms for self-defense.
They gave written expression to their views.
through the Second Amendment and personally exercised the right by owning and possessing arms.
The same linguistic usage of the terms, quote, bear, end quote, and, quote, arms, end quote, prevailed during the period of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was intended to incorporate the Second Amendment.
For instance, in 1865, Florida made it unlawful For any negro, mulatto, or other person of color to own, use, or keep in his possession or under his control any booty knife, dirt, sword, firearms, or ammunition of any kind unless he first obtain a license to do so from the judge of probate."
And what do you think his chances were of getting that license?
Violators faced a possible penalty of thirty-nine stripes with a whip The Commission that drafted this legislation opined that, quote, the privilege of bearing arms should be accorded only to such of the colored population as can be recommended for their orderly and peaceable character, end quote.
Members of the Reconstruction Congress State Constitutional Conventions of the time and mainstream white and even black newspapers cited protection of the right of freedom to bear arms to protect themselves and their families from infringement by sheriffs, militias, and the Ku Klux Klan as a major object of the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Acts, including what is now 42 United States Codes, Section 1983,
While the Reconstruction Congress interpreted the Second Amendment, buttressed by the Fourteenth, as protecting the rights of freedmen and even former Confederates to keep and bear private arms, it abolished the Southern state militia organizations, denying a Second Amendment-protected right of states to organize militias.
Although the real issue In the Morton Grove, Illinois, handgun ban, America's first, involved the right to keep rather than to bear arms.
The brief of Handgun Control Incorporated claimed, quote, the language of the Second Amendment suggests that its purpose is limited to protecting organized and effective state militias.
The terms arms and bear arms have always been associated with organized military activity.
The chief authority cited by Handgun Control Incorporated for this proposition is Noah Webster's famous 1828 Dictionary.
Anyone who looks up Webster's definition of there will be startled to find the very opposite of what Handgun Control Incorporated claims.
It says, quote, To bear as a mark of authority, or distinction, as to bear a sword, a badge, a name, to bear arms in a coat, end quote.
And that's why you can never take anyone's word for anything, ladies and gentlemen, because Handgun Control Incorporated just flat simply lied.
Although Handgun Control Incorporated also referred to Webster's definition of, quote, This again fails to imply an exclusively military usage.
Webster said, weapons of offense are armor for defense and protection of the body, consistent with the meaning of bare arms as carrying or wearing weapons on the person or inside one's clothing.
Webster defines pistol as a small firearm or the smallest firearm used.
small pistols are carried in the pocket."
As to who has the right to bear arms, Webster defined, quote, the people, end quote, as,
quote, the commonality as distinct from men of rank, end quote.
Webster, ladies and gentlemen, was certainly in a position to know.
What the Second Amendment phrases bear arms meant.
A prominent Federalist, he wrote the first major pamphlet in support of the Constitution when it was proposed in 1787, in which he stated, quote, Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe.
The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed.
When the Morton Grove case was still before the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, unassailable evidence was presented that the respective framers of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments intended the individual's right to keep arms, including pistols, to be protected from infringement by the federal, state, and local governments.
The intent of the framers was so overwhelmingly contrary to the court's opinion upholding the gun ban that the court held that intent to be, quote, irrelevant, end quote, when throughout the history of the law, intent has been held by almost every court except for this one to be everything in the law.
In contrast, The Supreme Court has stated repeatedly that the Constitution's provisions must be interpreted according to the intent of the framers.
So, what arms are protected?
As the Oregon Supreme Court recently opined in the state constitutions adopted between 1776 and 1802, The term arms, as used by the drafters of the constitutions, probably was intended to include those weapons used by settlers for both personal and military defense.
The term arms was not limited to firearms, but included several hand-carried weapons commonly used for defense."
Under the Second Amendment, All commonly possessed arms, which an individual could keep and bear, would be constitutionally protected.
Both then and now, these arms include firearms, edged weapons, and blunt instruments.
The most clearly protected firearm is the rifle, the use of which for self-defense, even in urban areas, is protected by the Second Amendment, quote, guarantee of the right of the individual to bear arms, end quote.
The modern descendant of the musket, the rifle is the classic militia firearm.
The shotgun is also protected by the Second Amendment.
The short-barreled shotgun is the descendant of the blunderbuss, a classic home defense arm, in contrast with the long-barreled hunting shotgun known traditionally as the fowling piece.
Well, it may not be within judicial notice that the short-barreled shotgun is a militia arm protected by the Second Amendment.
such an arm has been factually determined to fall within a state constitution protecting
the right of citizens to, quote, keep and bear arms for their common defense, end quote.
The arm most commonly possessed for self-defense is the pistol, due to its ease of storage,
carriage, and of course, accessibility.
Thank you.
Quote, Pistol, ex vi termini, is probably included within the word arms, and the right to bear such arms cannot be infringed.
End quote.
Its short barrel makes it difficult for an assailant to grab.
and its size, weight, and simple mechanism makes its use viable for women, the elderly, and the handicapped.
Smaller pistols have particular utility for smaller people.
The smallest handgun designed by Smith & Wesson was such a small revolver that it was nicknamed the Lady Smith, since it seemed to be more suitable for a woman's small hand."
And folks, being a large man with a large hand, I can tell you that that would be the conclusion that I would also reach, having held, examined, and inspected the Smith & Wesson Ladysmith Revolver.
It's a well-made, very good weapon, and I highly recommend it for those with hands small enough to be able to The relatively high cost of rifles as compared to pistols suggests that a ban on ownership or possession of low caliber handguns would effectively negate any right of the poor to bear firearms for their self-defense.
And that, of course, is the real intent of the so-called Saturday Night Special ban, or the ban on so-called, quote, cheap, end quote, pistols.
There has been little scholarship concerning whether certain edged weapons and blunt instruments are arms in a constitutional sense.
The knife is one of mankind's oldest tools and weapons.
Pocket knives were in use when the Second Amendment was adopted.
It is questionable whether switchblade knives, with the modern convenience of a spring-assisted blade, may be banned any more than could modern firearms which no longer rely on a flintlock mechanism.
The staff and the club, mankind's oldest defensive weapons, are clearly constitutionally protected.
Since arms under the Second Amendment are those which an individual is capable of bearing, artillery pieces, tanks, nuclear devices, and other heavy ordinances are not constitutionally protected.
Nor are other dangerous and unusual weapons such as grenades, bombs, bazookas, and other devices which, while capable of being carried by hand, have never been commonly possessed for self-defense.
However, the whole question becomes moot when you consider that if the militia is ever called
up to enforce the laws of the Union or execute the laws of the
Union, which is the exact wording, then they would, of course, use whatever came
under their control.
Blunt and edged instruments and firearms are capable of being used against a violent assailant
in such a manner as not to endanger the innocent.
In contrast, explosive devices may be incapable of pinpointing an aggressor, thus harming the innocent as well as the guilty.
Anyone who's ever fought in wars I have knows that that's absolutely true.
Are registration and licensing infringement?
Well, the answer might surprise you.
No one would seriously argue that citizens must register with the police or obtain a license in order to exercise freely their political or religious beliefs.
Requiring citizens to register or obtain a permit if they object to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons and homes would clearly infringe their rights.
Except where there is limited space in public forums which requires fair allocation, authorities cannot require persons giving speeches and assembling to obtain permission to do so.
Nor may the anonymous keeping and bearing of arms by law-abiding citizens, without more constitutionally, be the subject of registration and licensing.
To be sure, armed marches in a city Like other assemblies in public places, may be the subject of a license requirement.
When the possibility of tyranny exists, however, the people cannot be denied their rights of, quote, associating, arming, and fighting in defense of their liberties, end quote, but that is exactly the time when such a tyranny would attempt to regulate such activities.
So the people have to be willing to do what is right, not what is dictated to them by an authority which could cause them harm.
In a true republic, the people may arm and associate without anyone's permission, although violent criminals, children, and of course those of unsound mind may be deprived of firearms Enforcement of such a prohibition would not be materially aided by requiring ordinary citizens to register or obtain licenses for their firearms.
Throughout history, ladies and gentlemen, firearms registration classically has been required as a prelude to confiscation.
The English Bill of Rights provision that subjects may have arms for their defense was passed in direct response to a registration confiscation scheme.
The anonymous keeping of firearms acts as a deterrent to governmental oppression, whether by a racist local sheriff or a coup-minded military junta.
Creation of yet another victimless crime, that of exercising a constitutional right without first registering with the government, can only promote a burgeoning police state to enforce it while convicting the innocent.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is what's going on right now.
A requirement That one may not exercise the right to bear or carry arms, either openly or concealed, without a license is also constitutionally defective.
Until the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, licenses to carry arms were required only for slaves and blacks, while free men could carry arms openly but not concealed.
Today, some states require a permit only for carrying concealed weapons, while others require a permit for bearing arms either openly or concealed.
The arbitrary denial of licenses and permits in many states and localities would be alleviated
to some extent by granting the aggrieved party automatic review and a right to receive attorney's
fees.
The conclusion, ladies and gentlemen, is that the framers of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments
intended to guarantee an individual right to carry firearms and other common hand-carried
arms.
It is inconceivable that they would have tolerated the suggestion that a free person has no right to bear arms without the permission of a state authority, much less the federal government, or that a person could be imprisoned for doing so.
As the Founding Fathers realized, And that's the end of that paper.
There are an awful lot of things that the common, everyday, ordinary man and woman just simply do not know—things that Our great-grandfathers and great-grandmothers knew from the time they were little children.
We have been dumbed down, ladies and gentlemen, and it has been an intentional act of people who want to create total control over every single person from the time of their birth until the time of their death.
who want to do away with all nation-states and establish a one-world totalitarian socialist world government.
Now, folks, I have no qualms with doing away with nation-states as long as our fundamental Creator-endowed rights are protected, as long as it is the will of the state to dissolve itself What I would rather see is that all the nations of the world come under our Constitution and become states of the United States of America.
But somebody from South Africa might want every nation in the world to come under their type of government.
And while they spout these words, New World Order, World Government, New World Economy, The Family of Nations, all of these buzzwords for the New emerging world government.
No one, and I mean this, ladies and gentlemen, no one has ever sat down and told the people of the world just exactly what all of this means and proved it by documenting it in the law and on paper.
When you do go to find out what it means in the law and on paper, you find out that it is not anything that anybody thinks it's going to be.
It's going to be extremely oppressive and tyrannical.
There will be no rights whatsoever.
There will be no right to own property.
No one will be allowed to possess, own, or carry a firearm of any kind.
In fact, in every region of the world, you see nation states will just disappear and they will become regions.
Within these regions they may have things that resemble counties but will not have the power of counties, there will be a police force and it will be just the minimal force using the minimal arms in order to be able to maintain order in their particular jurisdiction.
The only army or military force left in the world will be the United Nations Peacekeeping Force.
Eventually, when there are no more nations, the name of that organization will change to something else.
I don't know why.
Earth Government, maybe?
And these peacekeeping forces will have the most terrible, destructive arms that you can imagine, and whenever they are needed, They will use absolutely overwhelming force and will be extremely cruel in the application of that force as a lesson to anyone else who might attempt to go against the world's order.
This is all on paper.
It's all provable.
It's all in the law already.
I read today in the Round Valley paper where somebody wrote an article objecting to the fact that the United States Put troops in some foreign country because the United Nations dictated it, claiming that they had violated their oath of allegiance to the Constitution, not realizing that under the interpretation of Article 6 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has ruled years and years ago that the United Nations Charters supersedes the Constitution.
And whenever any judge is sitting in judgment of anything, He must have two copies of the Supreme Law on his bench.
One is a copy of the United Nations Charter and one is a copy of the Constitution for the United States of America.
Where the Constitution infringes or contradicts the United Nations Charter, the United Nations Charter is to rule.
You didn't know that, did you?
You didn't know that we have entered into many treaties that have literally had the effect of throwing the Constitution into the trash can.
And that's why some of the things that happen, happen, ladies and gentlemen.
They just haven't had the guts to tell you the truth about it yet.
And I don't believe they ever will.
It will just be a gradual movement.
Until one day you wake up and discover what's happened and wonder exactly how it happened.
Because you just give up a little bit at a time.
Just a little bit more.
Next year it'll be just a little bit more.
And you don't notice all these little bits until they become big pieces and then it's too late.
You can't get it back.
Once your rights are gone, you're not going to get them back without extensive bloodshed.
I can guarantee you that.
I'm a Constitutionist.
I know what our government is.
It is the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the lawful constitutional amendments there, too.
That's the government.
It's not Washington, D.C.
It's not Bill Clinton.
In your states, it is the Constitution of your state.
It's not your local city supervisor.
It's not your mayor.
It's not the local sheriff.
It's the Constitution of your state.
And when any of these people go against that Constitution, they are committing an unlawful act.
They are, in fact, outlaws when they do those things.
The same on a national scale.
The Constitution for the United States of America takes precedent over everything else.
Nothing can conflict with it.
The federal government is forbidden by the Constitution to do anything other than what it has been granted powers to do within that document, and cannot go beyond the limits placed in that document to bind and control it.
All of the powers rest with the states or with the people.
The powers that the states fail to claim, regulate, are the people's, ladies and gentlemen.
I find it extremely strange that people don't know this, but then I look back in my own
life and all the years that I was ignorant and stupid and trying to be involved in things
that didn't really matter, except to give me some kind of pleasure, which is what people
tend to be involved in most of the time.
you Whatever turns you on, bud?
Well, it should be whatever keeps you free, bud.
Because unless you can stay free, you ain't gonna be able to do whatever turns you on, bud!
Got that?
I hope so.
As a constitutionalist, strict constitutions, and knowing the meaning of the words written in the Constitution, and knowing that our founding fathers were geniuses with words, and possessing a copy of the 1828, Webster's Dictionary, which is the basis of the meaning of words in law.
And unless you have one, you'll never know the real meaning of any word in the law.
And you can get them.
They're reprinted.
You can also get a CD, in fact, for your computer that has the whole Webster's 1828 Dictionary.
I am always armed, wherever I go.
I don't care what the law says in that state.
Because the supreme law of the land is clear, and the intent of the Founding Fathers was clear.
But I can serve you notice right now, any police officer, law enforcement, federal, state, county, I don't care, that attempts to disarm me, is going to get exactly what he deserves.
And folks, I don't care if I die in the process, because that is the price of being free, is that you must be ready and willing At any time that you are called upon to do so, to die for the right to be free.
If we all had that attitude, we could never be stripped not even one little single bit of any of our freedoms.
Because those who would even give it a passing glance would be so terrified at the consequences
that they would never even try.
Some of you wouldn't understand that statement.
Bye.
Many of you will.
Someday, because of what I say like this, because I tell the truth on this broadcast and source and document it, they're going to come up here to my hill where I live to kill me.
Oh, they will invent all kinds of charges to demonize me just like they have always done with anybody that they want to get rid of.
And most of the sheeple will believe that nonsense.
And there will be the biggest gun battle that you've ever seen in the history of the world on top of this hill.
And that's the truth.
And a lot of people are going to die, including me, in that gun battle.
But ladies and gentlemen, And here's something that many of you also will not understand.
I will be free.
I will be free.
Now you think about that for a while.
Think about it for a long time if you want to.
I will be free.
And all of those of you who are afraid of all of these people You're afraid of your own government in the United States of America?
You will never be free until you realize that the only way you can be free is to be prepared to die in defense of that freedom.
Sounds contradictory, I know.
Sounds absolutely crazy, I know that too.
But it's not.
It is exactly what the Founding Fathers intended, it is exactly what they believed, and it is exactly what they did in the creation of this country.
It's exactly what many hundreds of thousands of American men and women have done over the years since the creation of the United States of America in order that we, the posterity, Could even have a chance at freedom.
And here we are today, everybody sitting in their little home, shivering with fear that somebody's going to come and take their car away and their TV and their house.
Afraid to speak up.
Not even understanding most of what it is that I talk about on this radio broadcast.
Not understanding their own constitution.
But ready and willing to spout off about their constitutional rights every time they get a chance, and they don't even know what they are.
They don't even know that there are no constitutional rights, just constitutionally protected natural rights, which are creator-endowed.
People don't know these things anymore.
People are afraid of their own shadow.
They don't understand the concept of freedom, or the fact that they can't have it unless they're willing to die for it.
You see, that's what most of you don't understand.
If you're not willing to die to protect your rights, you cannot have those rights.
They don't exist for you.
Never will.
And as soon as your enemies discover that you're not ready and willing to die for that which is yours, given to you by the Creator of the universe, they will take them away from you, strip you of those rights.
Just as quickly and as surely and as real as the nose on your face.
Think about it.
.
And folks, don't believe me just because I'm saying all of this stuff.
You can believe me when I tell you what I believe and what I will do in defense of my rights.
But don't believe blindly that everything that I'm telling you is right.
As always, listen to everyone, read everything, believe absolutely nothing unless you can prove it in your own research.
I give you the sources, I give you the documentation, it's up to you to go check it out.
It's like the old horse, though.
You can lead the horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
And you can show slaves the path to freedom, but you can't make them take it.
Good night, ladies and gentlemen, and God bless each and every single one of you.
All of a sudden, in the middle of the night, there's a loud knock on your door.
Hey, honey.
Something's not right.
You're all trapped.
Please don't fall fast asleep.
We're here for you.
We're here to help you.
And I'm from the IRS, with the power of this house.
If you've got a complaint, Get out of this house.
Surrender at once.
Give me your gold.
You better hurry if you want to trouble me.
That's the best I'll ever get with your gold.
Hillary Kala, Reno Janet Dyke, reading the words of General Albert Pike, the money founder
of the Ku Klux Klan, engineer of the Masonic Master Plan.
Pike spins, Lucifer is gone across this land.
And Quentin Strange hits the mark, if you're right hand.
While we're all dancing to the drums of uproar's life, Clinton's preparing us for another huge tax crisis.
Order out of chaos, depression, inflation, create the panic and raise the nation.
Don't miss this!
You're surrounded!
What are you in?
In white and blue?
The ATF permitted black of the One World Order!
But it's not new!
The A.P.S. Amendment Black of the One World Order.
But it's not new.
Iron Mountain, Computer Beasts, and Tattle Mutilations.
White Projects, UFOs, and we're just any combination.
The Nazi doctors didn't die.
Come on, you're hip.
They came here with the OSS through Operation Savers.
National ID, debit card?
Yeah.
Vaccination files, gift mail carton kits, and they didn't even know you.
Clinton says her health plans for you and your own good.
This is a test for all of us.
The sonic mind manipulation, invite riots, is a crisis creation.
Bioship implantation, vaccinate your kids, are you in?
I need the AHA.
This is a test for all of us.
So I have today just one simple request.
A comprehensive package of healthcare benefits that are always there.
101.1 FM Eager is owned and operated by the Independence Foundation Trust.
It is a charitable family trust that was contracted together, because everything has to be done under right of contract, by the Cooper family, to give back to the community and to the nation that which we have so abundantly received.
▲
Export Selection