Posted on 10/09/2015 9:05:47 AM PDT by nvcdl
Washing Post Hack mocks Ben Carson's for pointing out that the first thing the Nazi's did was taking Jews guns away in Germany.
This follows his jaw-dropping response to the Oregon mass shooting: “I would say, hey guys, everybody attack him. He may shoot me but he can’t get us all!”"
The Anti-Defamation League roundly condemned his remarks. (“The small number of personal firearms available to Germany’s Jews in 1938 could in no way have stopped the totalitarian power of the Nazi German state.”)
The key point here is that the Germans already KNEW where ALL of the guns were.
They were already REGISTERED!
Registration precedes CONFISCATION. EVERYgoddamnWHERE. Each and every single time. (New York city registered semi-autos in the ‘80s—GONE in the ‘90s) It’s NOT just them furriners.
Revisionist History 101. The reality is that the Nazis sure as hell disarmed everyone before carrying out their mission.
Japan didn’t attack the US on the coast by land because “behind every blade of grass is a gun”.
And the left thinks it’s better to be murdered.
Jebbifer Rubin, The WashCompost “conservtaive” columnist with today’s propaganda effort.
She’s under pressure to convince Americans that ¡Yeb! is the best choice to give up their country.
On November 11, 1938, the Regulations Against Jews' Possession of Weapons was promulgated by Minister of the Interior, Wilhelm Frick. This regulation effectively deprived all Jews living in those locations of the right to possess any form of weapons including truncheons, knives, or firearms and ammunition.[7] Some police forces used the pre-existing "trustworthiness" clause to disarm Jews on the basis "the Jewish population 'cannot be regarded as trustworthy'".[5]
Once again the leftist media machine is prove to be hysteric liars.
The liberal ASAJews of the ADL don’t get it.
#JewishLivesMatter
If I remember my history, Thomas J Dodd used his copy of the nazi weapons act as the basis for the 1968 gun control act.
A smarter man disagrees.
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”
For those interested in the citation for the Solzhenitsyn quote, it is from The Gulag Archipelago, Chapter 1 ("Arrest"). In my Harper & Row paperback edition, it is footnote 5 from that chapter.
My just college graduated niece was recently physically, not sexually, attacked on the BART in SF. Despite two solidly conservative parents, she voted for Obama twice, and certainly leans left (University of Utah, btw)
After blurting out the whole harrowing story to my sister, her next sentence was:
“Mom, how do I get a CCW permit?”
I really think there should be a college class called “Alternate History 101.” You and I and Ben Carson have the benefit of hindsight on this issue and the intelligence to make inferences from history. Others need to be taught the concept.
Pop quiz. Let’s say we could wish that all the Jews who found themselves in the showers and furnaces of Nazi Germany could be brought back to life, restored to 1938 with their memories intact, and were then asked if they wanted to register and/or relinquish their firearms to their “federal family.” Would they not immediately resist? No one on Earth could answer this otherwise if they admit what the stakes were.
The statement of the ADL makes me believe they are glad the Jews were disarmed. They probably believe it was a good idea the Jews had no weapons, or more people would have died including “good Germans” who would have had more difficulty rounding them up. This is echoed by uber liberals everywhere who often say they are glad victims of mass shootings are unarmed, lest more victims be shot by good guys in some kind of wild-west shootout. As if it is better only the bad guy has the gun!
Supporters of the 2A honor those victims by remembering them. We are forever living in the echo of holocaust and anyone who even suggests registration and confiscation should realize which side of the 1938 equation they represent. To pillory a man who plainly wishes the Jews had been able to fight tyranny with guns is to side with evil as far as I’m concerned. I’m just thankful our Founders had the foresight to build this protection into the system. Even so, I know too many people who would willingly toss it in the mistaken belief it would somehow lead to more safety and security. That is how far down the rat hole our educational system and our culture have taken us. That is why the stakes are fundamentally the same today as they were back then. No one knows what will happen next year, in a hundred years, or a 1000 years. It is safe to say future citizens will not be unarmed sheep though. That isn’t the DNA of this nation, even if people like Rubin have lost this gene.
“leave san francisco” should be the answer
Did they read this before they posted it? The number of guns was small for a reason.
Also, did they never hear of the Warsaw uprising? What the Jews did when they did get guns.
The defamation league seems not to possess evn a scintilla of common sense.
The Anti-Defamation League roundly condemned his remarks. (“The SMALL number of personal firearms available to Germany’s Jews in 1938 could in no way have stopped the totalitarian power of the Nazi German state.”)
Note: The SMALL number of personal firearms available to the Jews. If they had large numbers of firearms, the Nazi's would;ve had a very difficult time rounding them up.
Look at Communist countries around the world, unarmed citizens are sitting ducks for their vile form of corrupt government.
Have the schools stopped teaching history before 1945?
How long until “dear Leader” eliminates all history before 2008?
It’s already started with historical Civil War reminders...
“On November 11, 1938, the Regulations Against Jews’ Possession of Weapons was promulgated by Minister of the Interior, Wilhelm Frick. This regulation effectively deprived all Jews living in those locations of the right to possess any form of weapons including truncheons, knives, or firearms and ammunition.[7] Some police forces used the pre-existing “trustworthiness” clause to disarm Jews on the basis “the Jewish population ‘cannot be regarded as trustworthy’”
The hamartia of the Left is that they do not possess the ability to learn from history.
Have the schools stopped teaching history before 1945?
Yes, and after 1945.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.