Dana Gabriel's articles

From http://stoplying.ca/news/07/dec/121707_disarming_of_the_population.php

Disarming of the Population and the Tyranny of Gun Control


Dana GabrielStop LyingTuesday December 18, 2007


There is a war on our freedoms and this includes the right to bear arms. Over the years there has been a mass indoctrination to the evils of guns, which has resulted in the systematic psychological disarmament of the American people. With less armed law-abiding citizens and more gun-free zones, the result has been more helpless victims. It has also demonstrated that we cannot rely on government to protect us from criminals. Most crime we are facing will not be solved by further gun control legislation. Furthermore tyrants like Stalin, Hitler, and Mao all sought to disarm their own citizens in order to control them and ensure their own power. Many genocide victims were deprived of the necessary means to adequately defend themselves. A clear violation of the Second Amendment took place after Hurricane Katrina, when authorities engaged in gun confiscation. In many cases, it was these same guns that kept many individuals, families, and property safe from criminals and thugs when there was no police presence. This has set the precedent for future gun grabbing in times of crisis. There is also a new program in Boston that would allow police with parental permission to search their children's rooms for guns without a search warrant. There has been legislation introduced that would ban U.S. veterans who have experienced even mild forms of Post-Traumatic Stress from ever owning a firearm. The Second Amendment is about upholding the Founding Fathers vision of a free society, and the disarming of the population is a path to tyranny. History serves as the best example, and we all need to stop being naive and thinking that it can't happen here.
There are calls for stricter gun control laws after almost every mass shooting. Taking firearms out of the hands of law-abiding citizens won't prevent such tragedies; it makes us less safe. Gun control laws do little to prevent criminals from acquiring guns, and they simply ignore any gun-free zones which in turn makes them victim disbarment zones. In many cases it was a gun that prevented a situation from further escalating. We can't rely on the police to save us as they usually show up after a crime has been perpetrated. It is our responsibility to protect ourselves and our families. Criminals fear an armed citizenry, and it is not surprising that crime tends to rise in an environment where people have lost their ability to properly defend themselves.
On the heels of a mass shooting that took place in a mall in Omaha Nebraska, there were two recent shootings in Colorado which took place some 12 hours and 70 miles apart by the same shooter. It began at a Youth Mission office and ended in Colorado Springs at the New Life Church. The gunman opened fire in the parking lot, and was later shot several times and brought down by an armed security guard. Although he later shot himself in the head, this is a good example of guns saving lives. The attacker had a backpack which contained as much as 1,000 rounds of ammunition, and the heroic actions of an armed security guard prevented anymore bloodshed. Also recently, Washington Redskin's football player, Sean Taylor became yet another victim of gun control and disarmament. Although his probation had ended, he was unable to own a gun because he had plea bargained. Someone broke into his house, and he tried to defend himself and his family with a machete. He was shot and later died. A population that is disarmed is defenseless and is more easily enslaved.
(Article continues below)
Only an armed civilian population can properly defend themselves and resist a tyrannical government. When the Nazis seized power in Germany in 1933, they immediately began massive search and seizures of firearms to further neutralize their political opponents. The Gestapo later established a system of central registration of persons obtaining firearms. Hitler's gun control and disarming of the population almost completely guaranteed that firearms were in the possession of Nazi supporters and sympathizers and made any kind of armed resistance inside Germany next to impossible. Hitler said, “The most foolish mistake we would possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquers who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.” The Second Amendment protects the gun rights of individuals and is about preventing tyranny. Gun control and the disarming of the population threatens a nation's very survival. It should come as no surprise that the United Nations, which is essentially the mechanism for world government, wishes to gut the Second Amendment and institute a global gun ban that would include the private ownership of firearms.
The threat to the Second Amendment is also coming internationally as the United Nations has a goal of disarmament. They have actively campaigned for worldwide gun control, and have declared that civilian ownership of guns is a major cause of violence around the world. The reality is that the UN has failed miserably in preventing crimes against humanity, and has further facilitated in the disarming of populations, leaving them defenseless. Many who advocate gun control want every gun in the world to be under UN control. This includes rifles, shot guns, and hand guns. Past UN conferences and forums have proposed a ban on possession of handguns by anyone other than a government official and strategies to reduce the number of handguns in private hands. Others initiatives include a worldwide licensing of firearms registered and administrated by the UN and mandating a maximum one gun per person. They also wish to develop and implement an effective disarmament, dembilization, and reintegration program. The United Nations remains a threat to the Second Amendment , our sovereignty, and security and international laws, and treaties further jeopardize our freedoms. Only after the American people have been disarmed can world governance truly be achieved.


Gun control and the disarming of law-abiding citizens should never be a solution to reducing crime and serves as a recipe for tyranny. Criminals rarely obtain firearms legally, and gun-free zones act as safe havens for criminals and crazies alike, making us all less safe and potential victims. There is a push for tougher gun control in Europe that would include a centralized firearm registration program as opposed to one controlled by individual European Union nations. History has demonstrated that the biggest advocates of gun control and limiting self-defense are those wishing to further empower the state. The training and tactics of police departments have changed, and in the process their traditional role of serving and protecting has been largely abandoned. We need to become more self sufficient and rely less on government, and this includes our own personnel safety. In many respects we are already in a police state. We have almost lost our freedom to challenge the government, and one of the final stages will be the disarming of the American people. It is a fact that the state is the leading cause of unnatural death. An armed citizenry remains an obstacle and a threat to the New World Order's agenda and its power monopoly. We need to restore and protect the Second Amendment and support gun rights. This is not a privilege, and the right to bear arms not only protects citizens and their property, but acts as a deterrent to government tyranny.

______________________


From http://stoplying.ca/articles/07/nov/111907_dana_internet_UNder_attack.php


Internet UNder Attack
by Dana Gabriel
The United Nations control freaks seek to micro-manage all aspects of our lives, and this includes the Internet. Many have used the Internet as an instrument of truth to counter the spin, lies, and disinformation spewed by the mainstream media. That is not to say that everyone in the alternative media can be trusted, and furthermore, the Internet is also being used to spread government propaganda. The mainstream media and government are so intertwined, and often the media simply parrots and toes the line. In many cases, the Internet gives the other side of the story with different points of view which encourage critical thinking on important issues of the day, where as the corporate media caters to the dumb-downed public. More and more people are moving to the web for their source of news and entertainment, and in the process are abandoning television and newspapers altogether. Even with all its imperfections, the Internet is truly one of the last havens of free speech and offers an alternative to the corporate-controlled media. Attacks are coming from all directions, and there is a desire by some to shut down the Internet under its current format, and curb, control, and further restrict its access.

The Internet has become a vast worldwide infrastructure which more and more people rely on in their everyday lives. It is a free market of ideas and creativity, and has accelerated our capacity to share information. In the process it has challenged the mainstream media's monopoly on news gathering and has lead to unpopular legislation being defeated that might not have been otherwise. That is not to say that you should believe or trust everything you read on the Internet, but there are many creditable and well-researched sites and archived news information. The Internet has become a force in politics, and no where is that more apparent than Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul's campaign. It has been used to rally grassroots support and volunteers, and raise substantial amounts of money. There is also a lot of fear-mongering surrounding the net as many are warning that it is struggling to survive under the strain of technical limitations. There has been much speculation that Internet 2, which is used by universities working side by side with government and industry, could replace the current format. The Internet of today poses a threat to any illegitimate government, and the stage is being set to hand over its control to the United Nations.
The UN wishes to end U.S. control of the Internet, and at the same time silence many who oppose its agenda of world governance. At the 2006 World Summit on the Information Society, the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) was created as a permanent standing body. The Internet of today is run by a non-governmental organization, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), which has the task of managing the assignment of domain names and IP addresses. They do not decide who can and cannot access the Internet, and there is a genuine fear that shifting ICANN control over to the UN could facilitate censorship of the web. The IGF recently met in Brazil, and is being used by the UN to achieve control of the Internet in an effort to standardize legislation and fund their world government through a series of global taxes. The UN has talked about keeping the world safe from SPAM, cyber crime, terrorists, increasing Internet access to the third-world, and instituting a global e-mail taxation system. A ban on taxing the Internet in the U.S. recently received a seven year extension. Some are warning that UN control could lead to a slower and more expensive Internet. Any challenges and problems that face the Internet cannot be solved by the UN or any another global entity. That is not to say that the Internet is perfect the way it is now, but I would take the status quo over UN control. By controlling the Internet, the UN could severely restrict information, silence free speech, and quell dissent. China's massive censorship of the web is the UN model. The Heritage Foundation said of UN control of the net, “it would give meddlesome governments the opportunity to censor and regulate the medium until its usefulness as a vehicle for freedom of expression and international competition is crippled.” An Internet governed and managed by the UN would represent a serious threat to our freedom, sovereignty, economy, and security.

China has been leading the charge to further globalize Internet control, their technological capabilities have further enabled them to track and restrict access and they have exported such tools to other countries. Companies such as Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo are also accomplices in Chinese Internet censorship, and their involvement and complacency illustrates how this could be achieved anywhere. Recently, Yahoo settled a case with two Chinese journalists who were jailed for ten years as a result of information of their on line activities provided to Chinese authorities. Google is hypocritical as they state that Internet censorship is a threat to their business, yet censor their own website in China. Asia director of Human Rights Watch, Brad Adams said, “When companies like Yahoo, Microsoft, and Google decide to put profits from their Chinese operations over the free exchange of information, they are helping to kill that dream.” Many western computer companies are providing filtering equipment to the Communist Chinese government, and are aiding to suppress free speech and political activism, which is leading to the further control and management of information. In China, there are divisions inside the police department whose task is to delete any information they find harmful that could challenge the system and impede social stability. Chinese President HU Jintao said that Internet cultural units need to, “take on the responsibility of encouraging development of a system of core socialist values.” There is no room for dissenting voices, and thus access to many political websites has been blocked or is content-censored. Bloggers are being targeted, and any breaking news that has not been reported by the official government media is also blocked and censored. Thousands of Internet cafes have been closed, and there are even pop-ups that worn users not to access unapproved sites. Amnesty International campaign director Tim Hancock said, “The Chinese model of an Internet that allows economic growth but not free speech or privacy is growing in popularity, from a handful of countries five years ago to dozens of governments today who block sites and arrest bloggers.” There is an agenda by some to further tighten surveillance and restrict access to the Internet around the world.
Many other countries besides China are filtering Internet content in areas of politics, religion, and sex. Any effort to curb hate speech could constitute a ban on any speech the government disapproves of or fears. In late September, a bill was introduced in Australia's Parliament that would give the police the power to control which sites can and cannot be accessed. In Malaysia, there are new rules where by bloggers can be held without trial indefinitely. Many bloggers are being prosecuted using terrorism laws. Much of the control aimed at the Internet centers around terrorism, with the aim of preventing terrorists from using it as a tool to further achieve their goals. A definition of the terrorists could include anyone who criticizes the government. With the advent of the alternative and independent media, and bloggers alike, the days of media blackouts are a thing of the past. In many cases, they are breaking more stories than the mainstream media. For many, the Internet is the only true source of uncensored news and opinion. The battle for the Internet rages on with freedom of speech hanging in the balance. In his article, 'What The Chinese Style Internet Will Look Like,' PrisonPlanet.Com reporter Paul Joseph Watson said, “The new Internet will be nothing more than an electronic police state, merely acting as a tool for authorities to track down and incarcerate dissidents who dare question the government.”

The United Nations is undermining our sovereignty, independence, and security. They seek to control the environment as well as the oceans of the world through the Law of the Sea Treaty. The U.N. wishes to institute a global ban on guns, and the disarming of the population can only be seen as tyrannical. It is not surprising that they also wish to control the free-flow of information on the Internet as it has been used as a weapon in the info war and has sparked a mass awaking. Many are using the Internet as a resource tool that has lead to countless research and investigations that demand real answers. This is exactly why the global elite want the Internet controlled, much like it is in China. It would mean the end of free speech on the web, and any site that criticizes the government. The days of the Internet as we now know it are numbered.
--------------------------------------------

From http://newworldordermustbestopped.com/featuredarticle.html

The Continued Assault on Our Health Freedoms By Dana Gabriel

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are once again trying to ban and regulate vitamins, minerals, nutritional supplements and some alternative therapies. This is not the first time they have attempted this, and they won't stop until they are successful. Already having regulatory control over lucrative pharmaceutical drugs, they would like nothing better then to control and dominate natural medicines as well. In essence, the real purpose of the FDA is to now protect and insure huge profits for Big Pharma. If that wasn't enough, they also want a share of the drug business. If passed, the Revitalization Act would create a new government run pharmaceutical company headed by officials of the FDA. This would give them the power to license pharmaceuticals and collect royalties. Talk about a conflict of interest.
The FDA wants control of the alternative health industry and the power to regulate what they consider treatment for diseases. Under the new Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM), guidelines enacted through document 2006D-0480 would give them complete control. Although they claim that nothing would really change, the goal is to micromanage natural medicines so that Big Pharma could profit from it. They can then choose to jack up the prices or eliminate some of the vitamins altogether. Either way, pharmaceutical companies win with inflated prices and limiting health options, so those who are ill or looking for alternatives would be forced into taking expensive drugs.

Imagine having to get a doctors prescription for vitamin C or raw sprouts and other natural cancer fighting foods and supplements being regulated as drugs. It sounds absurd, but the FDA wishes to classify any vitamin, herb or mineral that combats disease as a drug. The growing and selling of some common garden herbs could lead to drug arrests. They want to even classify hot stone therapy and hand held massager's as medical devices. These are but a few examples of the tyranny in store for us if we do not stop this madness. They want to put an end to natural, non-drug alternatives, and even prevent us from seeing a chiropractor, acupuncturist, massage therapist or anyone who isn't classified as a licensed medical doctor.

Now I'm not saying that all prescription drugs are bad, and some do serve a purpose, but where is the incentive to cure disease when there is more money to be made in allowing sick people to live with their conditions by taking these drugs? In many ways doctors are to blame, and some are seduced and influenced by Big Pharma to prescribe the latest drugs. It is all to easy to dispense drugs for health issues to control and maintain a problem then to get to the actual root cause of the ailment. The bottom line is that these drugs are being abused by those who prescribe them as well as by the patients who only to willingly gobble them up. God forbid we have a healthy population when there is huge profits to be made if people remain sick and hooked on these drugs.
There is little doubt that the FDA bends over backwards for Big Pharma, with the two working hand in hand. The FDA has knowingly released and approved some drugs that have not been properly tested. Although it is entrusted in keeping the public safe from harmful foods and drugs, in some cases they have done the opposite, putting millions at risk. Every year 300,000 Americans are killed by the very same medicines that are suppose to be helping them. One of these such drugs is Vioxx, which killed over 28,000 people, a few years back. The scary thing is that there is literally thousands of drugs available, some potentially dangerous. So what if people die, as long as huge profits are made. Then the drug can be pulled off the market, only to be replaced by another. What a racket. The FDA also has a long storied history of trying to withhold and even suppress some alternative medicines and cures.

In the early 1990's, some health food stores and treatment centers were raided by armed FDA agents. This lead to a public backlash and the implementation of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) to protect American consumer's right to purchase and use natural supplements. Since then the FDA has been hard at work, trying to bypass and destroy DSHEA. If the FDA is not successful, there is a sub group of the United Nations, the Codex Alimentarius Commission, which is busy harmonizing food and supplement rules between member nations. With power provided by the WTO, they are skirting around domestic laws. The FDA has also agreed to a trilateral deal with Mexico and Canada . Through the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America and this new Trilateral Cooperation Charter, public access to food supplements and vitamins could be regulated and limited.

The pharmaceutical industry is quite aware that some natural medicines and therapies are more effective then their own drugs. More and more people are searching for alternatives, and Big Pharma is losing some market share. With help from the FDA ,they wish to have a complete monopoly. By banning or heavily regulating vitamins, minerals and nutritional supplements, they would achieve this. They could dictate the price & availability, or simply do away with the entire industry altogether. The FDA has extended the deadline for public comment to May 29 on the new CAM guidelines. It is imperative that we speak out against the adoption of 2006D-0480 to preserve our health freedoms and save more lives.