The Black Vault

by **gangstalking** » Sat May 09, 2009 5:20 pm

In the democracy, they came first for the Extremists, but I did not say anything because I was not an extremist.

Then they came for the conspiracy theorists and the denialists, but I did not say anything because I was not a conspiracy theorist or a denialist.

Then they came for a the Targeted Individuals, but again I did not say anything because I was not a Targeted Individual.

Then they came for the outspoken and the some of the Christians, but I did not say anything then either, because I was not outspoken or a Christian.

Then they came for me, and by this time there was no one left to speak.

~GmB

The poem is written by a Targeted Individual, it's a rework of the original Martin Niemoller poem, and it's written with the hope of waking up this current generation before it is once again too late.

by **gangstalking** » Sat May 09, 2009 5:23 pm

Here is the original.

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;

And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;

And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;

And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."

Martin Niemoller

by **gangstalking** » Sat May 09, 2009 5:26 pm

Who thinks this could happen again,or who sees this happening again?

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php? ... geId=97491

HOMELAND INSECURITY
Next step? No guns allowed for right-wing 'extremists'
Bill empowers attorney general to forbid firearms for those 'suspected dangerous'
Posted: May 09, 2009
12:10 am Eastern

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y.

A new gun law being considered in Congress, if aligned with Department of Homeland Security memos labeling everyday Americans as potential "threats," could potentially deny firearms to pro-lifers, gun-rights advocates, tax protesters, animal rights activists, and a host of others – any already on the expansive DHS watch list for potential "extremism."

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., has sponsored H.R. 2159, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009, which permits the attorney general to deny transfer of a firearm to any "known or suspected dangerous terrorist." The bill requires only that the potential firearm transferee is "appropriately suspected" of preparing for a terrorist act and that the attorney general "has a reasonable belief" that the gun might be used in connection with terrorism.

Gun rights advocates, however, object to the bill's language, arguing that it enables the federal government to suspend a person's Second Amendment rights without any trial or legal proof and only upon suspicion of being "dangerous."

by **mael** » Sun May 10, 2009 1:12 pm

The people coming for the guns should be given the bullets.

If the government agents which receive bullets are prevented from trying to grab people's guns then those giving the orders will have to come for them.

They would likely receive extra bullets from the weapons the government agents who received bullets had at their disposal to enable them to rob people of their means to self-defence.

Homeland Security!

Run by an evil-looking Russian Jew. Unbelievable, isn't it. Unfortunately it is true.

by **Wing-Zero** » Sun May 10, 2009 2:10 pm

mael wrote:The people coming for the guns should be given the bullets.

Thats all they'll get from me.

The day they break for our guns is the day that I believe the rest of you weirdos that they actually ARE out to get us.

I've got my formal apology all written and ready too.

by **mael** » Mon May 11, 2009 4:40 am

Well hopefully I'm wrong and no one's going to come for your guns.

But it doesn't look like I'm wrong.

If you are waiting until that time when they may be on the other side of your door then aren't you cutting it a bit fine?

It's being done in increments now. Ban people suspected of being members of militias from owning guns, ban people on the no-fly list from owning guns, Ban smokers (or whatever) from owning guns and gradually you see the numbers of gun owners is getting smaller and smaller.

Ban gun ownership within a certain distance of ... skules for example. Make a psychological test a prerequisite of owning a firearm ... gradually they are unobtainable to law-abiding people.

Can you not see it is happening and that they are taking your guns, but that it is happening slowly.

How about they come to ''check'' your guns? Is that OK? They want to check the guns are in a locked box and the ammunition is somewhere else also locked-up? Where is a good place to draw the line?

I'm sure you are getting uncomfortable. Especially with the progeny of terrorists from Israel (Raum Emanuell) and the previously mentioned Bolshevic leader of HS successfully eroding Americans' freedoms. See who really runs the show?

by **Wing-Zero** » Mon May 11, 2009 2:08 pm

mael wrote:If you are waiting until that time when they may be on the other side of your door then aren't you cutting it a bit fine?

That would be the only time that I would have 100% certainty, and I refuse to do anything until the facts come up and beat me into surrender.

It's being done in increments now. Ban people suspected of being members of militias from owning guns, ban people on the no-fly list from owning guns, Ban smokers (or whatever) from owning guns and gradually you see the numbers of gun owners is getting smaller and smaller.

Haven't seen it yet, nor have I read about it. So it gets the benefit of the doubt.

Ban gun ownership within a certain distance of ... skules for example. Make a psychological test a prerequisite of owning a firearm ... gradually they are unobtainable to law-abiding people.

And once they're unobtainable through lawful means, you'll be right and I'll be an idiot for letting it happen.

But I won't be the idiot that did nothing to fix it.

How about they come to ''check'' your guns? Is that OK? They want to check the guns are in a locked box and the ammunition is somewhere else also locked-up? Where is a good place to draw the line?

The line is drawn there. If they want to look at my guns, either I use the law, however fleeting it may be, to get rid of them.

Or, the alternative, I get rid of them and then figure out how to get rid of the extra weight I'd be left with.

I'm sure you are getting uncomfortable. Especially with the progeny of terrorists from Israel (Raum Emanuell) and the previously mentioned Bolshevic leader of HS successfully eroding Americans' freedoms. See who really runs the show?

Like I said, I don't share your distrust towards the Jews, but yes. I'm very uncomfortable. I don't WANT to be the guy who has to go out and fix it. I want to sit here and have friendly banter between all you lovely jack-offs.

But facts are facts, and I refuse to be the coward who just laid down and accepted the destruction of my country.

by **Tairaa** » Mon May 11, 2009 4:46 pm

Wing-Zero wrote:
mael wrote:The people coming for the guns should be given the bullets.

Thats all they'll get from me.

The day they break for our guns is the day that I believe the rest of you weirdos that they actually ARE out to get us.

I've got my formal apology all written and ready too.

The Black Vault

Dedicated to all those who would keep silent.

Dedicated to all those who would keep silent.

Share On:

Re: Dedicated to all those who would keep silent.

Re: Dedicated to all those who would keep silent.

Re: Dedicated to all those who would keep silent.

Re: Dedicated to all those who would keep silent.

Re: Dedicated to all those who would keep silent.

Re: Dedicated to all those who would keep silent.

Re: Dedicated to all those who would keep silent.

The Social Network Buzz

Who is online