MK3 BLOG

Recent findings reveal that the FBI's claim that only 3.7 percent of active shooters are stopped by law-abiding gun owners is entirely false.

The FBI failed to properly record instances where law-abiding citizens stopped violent shooters, leading to false reports that "good guys with guns" have no effect on stopping violent criminals, according to the Crime Prevention Research Center.

The FBI's data, which claimed that only 14 of 374 active shooters were stopped by armed citizens between 2014 and 2024, undercounted shootings by a staggering 561 incidents. When those excluded cases are applied to the dataset, it reveals more than 202 instances where law-abiding gun owners stopped an active shooter.

This updated dataset takes the FBI's original statistic—which claims only 3.7 percent of active shooters were stopped by armed citizens—and raises the real number to 36 percent. If "gun-free zones," a misguided policy that assumes criminals will obey a metal sign, are excluded from the data, over 52 percent of active shooters are stopped by law-abiding gun owners.

Cooking the Books or Just Plain Old Incompetence?

The large disparity between the Crime Prevention Research Center's data and the FBI's statistics raises major concerns, as accurate information is essential for shaping policy and providing a true picture of gun ownership in America.

After all, gun control remains a central issue in many political races, and the policies implemented directly affect the Second Amendment rights of everyday Americans.

"The cascading effect is incredibly deleterious," said former U.S. Justice Department official Theo Wold. "When the Bureau gets it so systematically wrong, it shapes the entire national debate."

So why is there such a large disparity?

Alongside the 561 omitted incidents and the inclusion of "gun free" zones, the report found the FBI mislabeled numerous events, and in many cases, simply listed civilians as "security guards." 

For example, the FBI had classified the 2019 church shooting in White Settlement, Texas—where a parishioner shot and killed the gunman—as an incident where the shooter was apprehended by a security guard.

The Crime Prevention Research Center further noted that the FBI excluded some cases it labels "domestic disputes" or "retaliation murders" from its data about civilians stopping active shooters. The group also found that armed bystanders who thwarted attacks were not counted if the suspect fled the scene.

Shaping the Narrative with Bad Data

A simple Google search about active shooters being stopped by law-abiding gun owners brings up numerous studies claiming to “debunk” the idea that honest citizens can play a role in protecting society—but the real data shows they are completely wrong.

These studies, funded by "progressive" donorsand promoted by gun control groups, also ignore evidence showing that gun control has little to no effect on criminals. Instead, it creates an environment that restricts responsible citizens while giving violent criminals an easier playing field.

In recent years, the Left has weaponized fear about firearms to mobilize concerned voters. Regardless of the real data, it is imperative that they control the narrative while they push towards total disarmament—or as they tell everyone "gun violence' prevention.

Alongside "progressive" studies, mainstream media outlets continue to label the "good guy" as an uncommon occurrence.

Headlines show this framing: 

• "Rare in US for an active shooter to be stopped by bystander" (Associated Press); 
• "Rampage in Indiana a rare instance of armed civilian ending mass shooting" (Washington Post); 
• and "After Indiana mall shooting, one hero but no lasting solution to gun violence" (New York Times).

Only You Can Prevent Active Shooters

Policies such as "gun-free zones" assign blame to the firearm itself rather than the individual responsible for pulling the trigger. These policies create defenseless environments, allowing large groups of citizens to gather without any means of protection—and voters know this.

According to a 2022 Trafalgar Group poll, 42 percent of voters said that armed citizens were the best defense against mass shootings, while only 25 percent said it was local police. 

The Crime Prevention Research Center study confirms that such areas are prime targets for active shooters. Recall that excluding "gun-free zones" from the data raises successful defensive action by gun owners from 36 percent to 52 percent.

Other forms of gun control—such as purchasing restrictions, background checks, and magazine capacity limits—also place a heavier burden on law-abiding gun owners, as the FBI’s own data confirms that criminals do not obtain firearms legally.

A 2019 FBI study showed that only seven percent of crimes committed with a firearm involved legally purchased guns. Half of all offenders had stolen the firearm, while 43 percent had purchased it from underground or black-market vendors.

The results of gun control leave law-abiding citizens open to senseless violence, but they also turn our schools into major targets. Allowing teachers to carry firearms adds a layer of rapid protection that children deserve. 

The FBI reports that most active threat events—including mass shootings—are over within five minutes. Yet it takes law enforcement betweenfive and 10 minutes (at best) to respond to a shooting. 

The situation is even more dire for rural schoolsthat could be left stranded for over 20 minutes waiting for police response. 

Honorable, well-trained, law-abiding teachers can effectively fill that gap and save countless lives—but it's important that Americans know the true statistics if protective policies are going to be implemented.

Holding the FBI Accountable

The FBI should be a trusted source of information, but time and time again the data it presents to the public fails to reflect the reality of what is truly happening in the United States.

In 2024, Restoration News conducted a deep dive into crime across the country and found that the FBI had severely underreported the surging crime wave—even making it appear as though crime was trending downward. States like California, Georgia, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Virginiasaw major increases in murder, violent assault, and human trafficking between 2019 and 2023—but the FBI said all was well.

MKitch3|Sept. 16,2025

Confronting Israel Is Important –  The Jewish State Is No Friend

The problem with America’s so-called “special relationship” with Israel is the terrible national security and foreign policy choices that are sustained by pervasive political and media corruption, so any honest attempt to examine one inevitably leads to the other.

Related: The Occupation of the American Mind

Most talking heads in the media avoid that dilemma by choosing to completely ignore the dark side of Israel.

Israel – not Russia – is the one foreign country that can interfere with impunity with the political processes in the United States yet it is immune from criticism.

It is also the single most significant threat to genuine national security as it and its powerful domestic lobby have been major advocates for the continuation of America’s interventionist warfare state.

The decision to go to war on false pretenses against Iraq, largely promoted by a cabal of prominent American Jews in the Pentagon and in the media, killed 4,424 Americans as well as hundreds of thousands Iraqis and will wind up costing the American taxpayer $7 trillion dollars when all the bills are paid.

And I can go on from there. According to the FBI, Israel runs the most aggressive spying operations against the U.S. among ostensibly “friendly” nations, frequently stealing our military technology for resale by its own arms merchants.

 Its notable successes in espionage have included the most devastating spy in U.S. history Jonathan Pollard, while it has also penetrated American communications systems and illegally obtained both the fuel and the triggers for its own secret nuclear weapons arsenal.

Israel cares little for American sovereignty. It’s prime ministers Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu have both boasted how they control the United States. In 2001, Israel was running a massive secret spying operation directed against Arabs in the U.S.

 Many in the intelligence and law enforcement communities suspect that it had considerable prior intelligence regarding the 9/11 plot but did not share it with Washington.

There was the spectacle of the “dancing Shlomos,” Israeli “movers” from a company in New Jersey who apparently had advanced knowledge of the terrorist attack and danced and celebrated as they watched the Twin Towers go down.

 Jewish power, both in terms of money and of access to people and mechanisms that really matter, is what allows Israel to act with impunity, making the United States both poorer and more insecure.

A well-funded massive lobbying effort involving hundreds of groups and thousands of individuals in the U.S. has worked to the detriment of actual American interests, in part by creating a permanent annual gift of billions of dollars to Israel for no other reason but that it is Israel and can get anything it wants from a servile Congress and White House without any objection from a controlled media.

 Israel has also obtained carte blanche political protection from the U.S. in fora like the United Nations, which is damaging to America’s reputation and its actual interests.

 This protection now extends to the basing of U.S. troops in Israel to serve as a tripwire, guaranteeing that Washington will become involved if Israel is ever attacked or even if Israel itself starts a war.

 And here on the home front Israel is doing damage that might be viewed as even more grave in Senator Ben Cardin’s attempt to destroy First Amendment rights by making any criticism of Israel illegal.

The non-violent Israel Boycott movement (BDS) has already been sanctioned in many states, the result of intensive and successful lobbying by the Israeli government and its powerful friends.

So if there is a real enemy of the United States in terms of the actual damage being inflicted by a foreign power, it is Israel.

In the recent Russiagate investigations it was revealed that it was Israel, not Russia, that sought favors from Michael Flynn and the incoming Trump Administration yet Special Counsel Robert Mueller has evidently not chosen to go down that road with his investigations, which should surprise no one.

At age 89, he has finally figured out that it is actually all about what a parasitic Israel wants without any regard for its American host, observing on “Democracy Now” that:

“Take, say, the huge issue of interference in our pristine elections. Did the Russians interfere in our elections? An issue of overwhelming concern in the media. I mean, in most of the world, that’s almost a joke.

First of all, if you’re interested in foreign interference in our elections, whatever the Russians may have done barely counts or weighs in the balance as compared with what another state does, openly, brazenly and with enormous support.

Israeli intervention in U.S. elections vastly overwhelms anything the Russians may have done…

I mean, even to the point where the prime minister of Israel, Netanyahu, goes directly to Congress, without even informing the president, and speaks to Congress, with overwhelming applause, to try to undermine the president’s policies – what happened with Obama and Netanyahu in 2015.”

Politicians are terrified of crossing the Jewish lobby by saying anything negative about Israel, which means that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu always gets a pass from the American government, even when he starves civilians and bombs hospitals and schools.

 Netanyahu uses snipers to shoot dead scores of unarmed demonstrators and the snipers themselves joke about their kills without a peep from Washington, which styles itself the “leader of the free world.”

Just recently, Israel has declared itself a Jewish State with all that implies.

To be sure, Israeli Christians and Muslims were already subject to a battery of laws and regulations that empowered Jews at their expense but now it is the guiding principle that Israel will be run for the benefit of Jews and Jews alone. And it still likes to call itself a “democracy.”

A recent television program illustrates just how far the subjugation of America’s elected leaders by Israel has gone. British comedian Sacha Baron Cohen is featured on a new show called “Who is America?” in which he uses disguises and aliases to engage politicians and other luminaries in unscripted interviews that reveal just how ignorant or mendacious they actually are.

 Several recent episodes remind one of a February 2013 Saturday Night Live skit on the impending confirmation of Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense. A Senator asks Hagel. “It is vital to Israel’s security for you to go on national television and perform oral sex on a donkey… Would you do THAT for Israel?”

A “yes” answer was, of course, expected from Hagel. The skit was never aired after objections from the usual suspects.

Baron Cohen, who confronted several GOP notables in the guise of Colonel Erran Morad, an Israeli security specialist, provided a number of clues that his interview was a sham but none of the victims were smart enough to pick up on them.

Cohen, wearing an Israeli military uniform and calling himself a colonel, clearly displayed sergeant’s stripes. Hinting that he might actually be a Mossad agent, Cohen also sported a T-shirt on which the Hebrew text was printed backwards and he claimed that the Israeli spy agency’s motto was “if you want to win, show some skin.”

Cohen set up Dick Cheney by complimenting him on being the “the king of terrorist killers” before commenting that “my neighbor in Tel Aviv is in jail for murder, or, as we call it, enhanced tickling.”

Morad went on to tell Cheney that he once waterboarded his wife to check for infidelity and then convinced the former Vice President to sign a “waterboarding kit” that “already had” the signatures of Benjamin Netanyahu, Ariel Sharon and Demi Lovato.

Another more spectacular sketch included a Georgia state senator Jason Spencer who was convinced to shout out the n-word as part of an alleged video being made to fight terrorism.

After Cohen told Spencer that it was necessary to incite fear in homophobic jihadists, Spencer dropped his pants and underwear, before backing up with his exposed rear end while shouting “USA!” and “America!”

Spencer also spoke with a phony Asian accent while simulating using a selfie-stick to secretly insert a camera phone inside a Muslim woman’s burqa.

In another series of encounters, Cohen as Morad managed to convince current and ex-Republican members of Congress – to include former Senate majority leader Trent Lott – to endorse a fictional Israeli program to arm grade school children for self-defense.

Cohen’s footage included a former Illinois congressman and talk radio host named Joe Walsh saying: “The intensive three-week ‘Kinderguardian’ course introduces specially selected children from 12 to 4 years old to pistols, rifles, semiautomatics and a rudimentary knowledge of mortars. In less than a month – less than a month – a first-grader can become a first grenade-er.”

Both controversial Alabama judge Roy Moore and Walsh were fooled into meeting Cohen to attend a non-existent pro-Israel conference to accept an award for “significant contributions to the state of Israel.”

Representative Dana Rohrabacher, meanwhile, also was interviewed and he commented that, “Maybe having young people trained and understand how to defend themselves and their school might actually make us safer here.”

And Congressman Joe Wilson observed that “A 3-year-old cannot defend itself from an assault rifle by throwing a ‘Hello Kitty’ pencil case at it.”

Cohen’s performance is instructive. A man shows up in Israeli uniform, claims to be a terrorism expert or even a Mossad agent, and he gains access to powerful Americans who are willing to do anything he says.

How Cohen did it says a lot about the reflexive and completely uncritical support for Israel that many American politicians – particularly Republicans – now embrace.

This, in a nutshell, is the damage that Israel and its Lobby have done to the United States.

 Israel is always right for many policymakers and even palpably phony Jews like Colonel Morad are instantly perceived as smarter than the rest of us so we’d better do what they say.

That kind of thinking has brought us Iraq, Libya, Syria and the possibility of something far worse with Iran.

 Israel routinely interferes in American politics and corrupts our institutions without any cost to itself and that is why I write and speak frequently regarding the danger to our Republic that it poses.

 It is past time to change the essentially phony narrative. Israel is nothing but trouble. It has the right to defend itself and protect its interests but that should not involve the United States.

One can only hope that eventually a majority of my fellow American citizens will also figure things out.

It might take a while, but the ruthless way Israel openly operates with no concern for anyone but itself provides a measure of optimism that that day is surely coming.

MK3|Sept 14,2025

Every few months, it happens.

Your feed floods with hashtags, slogans, and profile-picture filters. Corporations suddenly have something to say. Politicians scramble to issue statements. Your friends quietly judge you if you don’t join in.

And like clockwork, we’re all asked the same question: Are you for it, or against it?

That’s The Current Thing.

Every few months, the world demands you care about something. A hashtag. A war. A protest. A slogan. Silence isn’t neutral — it’s suspicious.

What Exactly Is The Current Thing?

The Current Thing isn’t just the latest headline. It’s a loyalty test.

It’s the issue that hijacks the conversation, forces people into binary camps, and turns politics into a game of allegiance.

Here’s the recipe:

• A trigger event — a war, a pandemic, a viral video, a protest.

• Media framing — simplified into “good guys vs. bad guys.”

• Symbols and slogans — hashtags, flags, emojis, profile filters.

• Social pressure — silence suddenly equals complicity.

• Institutional bandwagon — corporations, governments, and NGOs line up.

• Peak saturation — it’s everywhere, all the time.

• The drop-off — it fades, replaced by the next thing.

By the time people stop arguing, you’re already onto the next Current Thing.

Why Do Current Things Matter?

They aren’t random — they’re how modern politics works.

• They give people identity badges. Display the right emoji, wear the right pin, and everyone knows which tribe you belong to.

• They offer moral clarity. Forget nuance — this is good vs. evil, right vs. wrong.

• They act as elite coordination tools. Governments, media, and corporations all get to signal they’re “on the right side.”

• And yes, they can be distractions.

While everyone fights over flags in their bios, bigger, slower issues — like rights being restricted or mass surveillance — slide under the radar.

The Ugly Side of the Current Thing

The problem isn’t that people care. It’s that the care is shallow, manic, and disposable.

• Hashtags don’t fix broken systems.

• Binary framing crushes complexity.

• Yesterday’s “moral emergency” is today’s forgotten headline.

Yesterday’s “moral emergency” is today’s forgotten headline. The victims remain. The policies stay. The crowd moves on.

Meanwhile, as Noam Chomsky pointed out decades ago, the media doesn’t just tell us what to think — it tells us what it’s acceptable to think about.

And corporations have learned to exploit this. They swap their logos during Pride Month, pledge solidarity during protests, or change colors for the flag of the moment. Then, once the spotlight fades, so does their commitment.

Corporations swap their logos during Pride Month, pledge solidarity during protests — then go silent once the spotlight moves on. Marketing masquerading as morality.

Some Examples You’ll Remember

• COVID-19: Masks and vaccines weren’t just health issues; they became political purity tests.

• George Floyd / BLM: Corporate logos went black, fists went up, and protest slogans were suddenly everywhere.

• Ukraine (2022): The blue-and-yellow flag emoji became unavoidable, as Western governments and companies pledged loyalty.

• Israel–Gaza (2023–2025): Competing Current Things (#StandWithIsrael vs. #FreePalestine) split publics down the middle.

• Meanwhile… Yemen, Congo, Sudan? Crickets. Some crises just never qualify as The Current Thing.

And it’s not only foreign policy. Think of the Flint water crisis or the opioid epidemic. Both were once national scandals. Both were described as urgent emergencies. And yet, both faded from public attention long before solutions were reached. That’s how the memory hole works.

Why You Should Care About The Current Thing (Even If You’re Sick of It)

You might think: so what? People always follow trends.

But here’s the kicker: Current Things aren’t just trends — they’re tools.

They show us:

• Who has the power to set the agenda. Why Ukraine, but not Yemen? Why Gaza now, but Congo never?

• How shallow engagement warps democracy. Politics gets reduced to virtue-signaling instead of real policy.

• How attention itself has become currency. If we’re always reacting to the Current Thing, who’s doing the long-term thinking?

If we’re always reacting to the Current Thing, who’s doing the long-term thinking?

A Historical Reminder

The Current Thing has always existed — what’s new is the speed.

• During World War II, Pearl Harbor transformed American opinion overnight.

• In the 1950s, McCarthyism forced Americans to prove their loyalty or risk ruin.

• In the 1960s and ’70s, Vietnam War protests dominated public life, splitting the country into hawks and doves.

Back then, it took weeks or months for public opinion to coalesce. Today, it happens in hours — because social media compresses outrage into viral bursts.

Final Thought

The phenomenon of The Current Thing is not trivial. It reflects how collective attention is orchestrated, how political identities are formed, and how moral clarity is manufactured in a media-saturated society.

While Current Things can mobilize the masses and bring urgent issues into focus, they also risk superficiality, polarization, and distraction from structural change. In the networked age, where attention is currency, politics is increasingly governed by spectacles of the moment.

The challenge for democratic societies is to find ways to engage beyond the Current Thing — to cultivate deeper deliberation, longer-term commitment, and more nuanced debate. Otherwise, we risk a politics permanently trapped in cycles of outrage and amnesia.

The Bezmenov Angle

If you want a deeper understanding of how these cycles work, a good place to start is with Yuri Bezmenov’s warnings about “ideological subversion.”

His four stages — demoralization, destabilization, crisis, normalization — describe exactly how societies can be manipulated. In many ways, Current Things are the perfect vehicles for this process:

• They demoralize by overwhelming people with outrage.

• They destabilize by polarizing groups.

• They create a sense of crisis that demands instant response.

• They normalize the new status quo once attention moves on.

Demoralization. Destabilization. Crisis. Normalization. Current Things are the perfect vehicles for ideological subversion.

Reader Challenge

When the next Current Thing hits, don’t just ask what it is. Ask:

• Who benefits?

• Who is ignored?

• What’s being buried while the spotlight shines here?

Because the spectacle will pass. The only question is: what will you remember when it does?

Definition of tyranny

Tyranny is usually thought of as cruel and oppressive, and it often is, but the original definition of the term was rule by persons who lack legitimacy, whether they be malign or benevolent. Historically, benign tyrannies have tended to be insecure, and to try to maintain their power by becoming increasingly oppressive. Therefore, rule that initially seems benign is inherently dangerous, and the only security is to maintain legitimacy — an unbroken accountability to the people through the framework of a written constitution that provides for election of key officials and the division of powers among branches and officials in a way that avoids concentration of powers in the hands of a few persons who might then abuse those powers.

Tyranny is an important phenomenon that operates by principles by which it can be recognized in its early emerging stages, and, if the people are vigilant, prepared, and committed to liberty, countered before it becomes entrenched.

The psychology of tyranny

Perhaps one of the things that most distinguishes those with a fascist mentality from most other persons is how they react in situations that engender feelings of insecurity and inadequacy. Both kinds of people will tend to seek to increase their power, that is, their control over the outcome of events, but those with a fascist mindset tend to overestimate the amount of influence over outcomes that it is possible to attain. This leads to behavior that often brings them to positions of leadership or authority, especially if most other persons in their society tend to underestimate the influence over outcomes they can attain, and are inclined to yield to those who project confidence in what they can do and promise more than anyone can deliver.

This process is aided by a common susceptibility which might be called the rooster syndrome, from the old saying, "They give credit to the rooster crowing for the rising of the sun." It arises from the tendency of people guided more by hope or fear than intelligence to overestimate the power of their leaders and attribute to them outcomes, either good or bad, to which the leaders contributed little if anything, and perhaps even acted to prevent or reduce. This comes from the inability of most persons to understand complex dynamic systems and their long-term behavior, which leads people to attribute effects to proximate preceding events instead of actual long-term causes.

The emergence of tyranny therefore begins with challenges to a group, develops into general feelings of insecurity and inadequacy, and falls into a pattern in which some individuals assume the role of "father" to the others, who willingly submit to becoming dependent "children" of such persons if only they are reassured that a more favorable outcome will be realized. This pattern of co-dependency is pathological, and generally results in decision-making of poor quality that makes the situation even worse, but, because the pattern is pathological, instead of abandoning it, the co-dependents repeat their inappropriate behavior to produce a vicious spiral that, if not interrupted, can lead to total breakdown of the group and the worst of the available outcomes.

In psychiatry, this syndrome is often discussed as an "authoritarian personality disorder". In common parlance, as being a "control freak".

The logic of tyranny

In Orwell's classic fable, Nineteen Eighty-Four, the protagonist Winston Smith makes a key statement:

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.

Following the trial of the surviving Branch Davidians in San Antonio, Texas, in March, 1994, in which a misinstructed jury acquitted all the defendants of the main crimes with which they were charged, but convicted them of the enhancements of using firearms in the commission of a crime, the federal judge, Walter F. Smith, first dismissed the charges, correctly, on the grounds that it is logically impossible to be guilty of an enhancement if one is innocent of the crime. However, under apparent political pressure, he subsequently reversed his own ruling and sentenced the defendants to maximum terms as though they had been convicted of the main crimes, offering the comment, "The law doesn't have to be logical."

No. The law does have to be logical. Otherwise it is not law. It is arbitrary rule by force.

Now by "logical" what is meant is two-valued logic, which is sometimes also called Boolean, Aristotelian or Euclidean logic. In other words, a system of propositions within which a statement and its negation cannot both be true or valid. One of the two must be false or invalid. The two possible values are true and false, and every meaningful proposition can be assigned one or the other value.

A system of law is a body of prescriptive, as opposed to descriptive, propositions, that support the making of decisions, and therefore its logic must be two-valued. It is a fundamental principle of law that like cases must be decided alike, and this means according to propositions that exclude their contradictions.

It is also a fundamental principle of logic that any system of propositions that accepts both a statement and its negation as valid, that is, which accepts a contradiction, accepts all contradictions, and provides no basis for deciding among them. If decisions are made, they are not made on the basis of the propositions, but are arbitrary, and that is the definition of the rule of men, as opposed to the rule of law.

So what Winston Smith is saying is that freedom means being able to distinguish between a true proposition and a false one, and what his nemesis O'Brien therefore does to crush him is make him accept that "2 + 2 = 5", which cannot be true if the logic is Aristotelian. O'Brien represents the logic of arbitrary power, a "logic" we might call Orwellian, although Orwell, whose real name was Eric Blair, was strongly opposed to it.

The methodology of tyranny

The methods used to overthrow a constitutional order and establish a tyranny are well-known. However, despite this awareness, it is surprising how those who have no intention of perpetrating a tyranny can slip into these methods and bring about a tyranny despite their best intentions. Tyranny does not have to be deliberate. Tyrants can fool themselves as thoroughly as they fool everyone else.

Control of public information and opinion

It begins with withholding information, and leads to putting out false or misleading information. A government can develop ministries of propaganda under many guises. They typically call it "public information" or "marketing".

Vote fraud used to prevent the election of reformers

It doesn't matter which of the two major party candidates are elected if no real reformer can get nominated, and when news services start knowing the outcomes of elections before it is possible for them to know, then the votes are not being honestly counted.

Undue official influence on trials and juries

Nonrandom selection of jury panels, exclusion of those opposed to the law, exclusion of the jury from hearing argument on the law, exclusion of private prosecutors from access to the grand jury, and prevention of parties and their counsels from making effective arguments or challenging the government.

Usurpation of undelegated powers

This is usually done with popular support for solving some problem, or to redistribute wealth to the advantage of the supporters of the dominant faction, but it soon leads to the deprivation of rights of minorities and individuals.

Seeking a government monopoly on the capability and use of armed force

The first signs are efforts to register or restrict the possession and use of firearms, initially under the guise of "protecting" the public, which, when it actually results in increased crime, provides a basis for further disarmament efforts affecting more people and more weapons.

Militarization of law enforcement

Declaring a "war on crime" that becomes a war on civil liberties. Preparation of military forces for internal policing duties.

Infiltration and subversion of citizen groups that could be forces for reform

Internal spying and surveillance is the beginning. A sign is false prosecutions of their leaders.

Suppression of investigators and whistleblowers

When people who try to uncover high level wrongdoing are threatened, that is a sign the system is not only riddled with corruption, but that the corruption has passed the threshold into active tyranny.

Use of the law for competition suppression

It begins with the dominant faction winning support by paying off their supporters and suppressing their supporters' competitors, but leads to public officials themselves engaging in illegal activities and using the law to suppress independent competitors. A good example of this is narcotics trafficking.

Subversion of internal checks and balances

This involves the appointment to key positions of persons who can be controlled by their sponsors, and who are then induced to do illegal things. The worst way in which this occurs is in the appointment of judges that will go along with unconstitutional acts by the other branches.

Creation of a class of officials who are above the law

This is indicated by dismissal of charges for     wrongdoing against persons who are "following orders".

Increasing dependency of the people on government

The classic approach to domination of the people is to first take everything they have away from them, then make them compliant with the demands of the rulers to get anything back again.

Increasing public ignorance of their civic duties and reluctance to perform them

When the people avoid doing things like voting and serving in militias and juries, tyranny is not far behind.

Use of staged events to produce popular support

Acts of terrorism, blamed on political opponents, followed immediately with well-prepared proposals for increased powers and budgets for suppressive agencies. Sometimes called a Reichstag plot.

Conversion of rights into privileges

Requiring licenses and permits for doing things that the government does not have the delegated power to restrict, except by due process in which the burden of proof is on the petitioner.

Political correctness

Many if not most people are susceptible to being recruited to engage in repressive actions against disfavored views or behaviors, and led to pave the way for the dominance of tyrannical government.

Avoiding tyranny

The only honorable course for a citizen is to conduct his life as though the Constitution, as originally understood, is in full force and effect, and if and when that brings him into conflict with public agents, to take a firm stance in opposition to their usurpations, regardless of consequences to himself, to them, or to others. Maintaining the Constitution, in every particular, is more important than human lives, even millions of them, if it should come to a choice. Individuals die. The Constitution needs to live for as long as one human remains alive, and perhaps even beyond that. 

— Jon Roland, 2003

--Context for blog post--

What are the odds the patsy taking the fall for the Charlie Kirk incident just so happens to have a transgender partner?

What are the odds the very last question Kirk was asked before being "unalived" was on tranny mass shooters in America?

Last month it was Minneapolis, this month Salt Lake City, both incidents involving tranny's in the narrative.

Do you see the pattern here?

What came from the Minneapolis PsyOp?

AI predictive policing and more reason for "personalized medicine."

Aside from the other telling signs and the obvious division this is causing (by design) this event will also justify both AI predictive policing (Palantir) and AI personalized medicine (Project Stargate) into the minds of the feeble masses – and yes even those who claim to be "awake."

I could be wrong (I want to be) but I haven't been so far...

While the public is distracted with headlines and culture wars, a series of quiet but decisive moves are reshaping the United States. The Epstein files remain sealed. Boycotting Israel is on the edge of becoming a federal offense. The economy is staggering under the weight of debt, inflation, and upward wealth transfer. And perhaps most dangerously, the meaning of words — particularly Nazi — is being bent and retooled to serve a new political purpose.

 This isn’t paranoia. It’s a pattern. And unless more people recognize it, America is being maneuvered into a future where surveillance, censorship, and control are normalized — all under the guise of “protecting democracy.”

 Epstein and the Politics of Secrecy

 The Epstein scandal should have been a moment of reckoning. Instead, it became another lesson in how effectively power protects itself. Despite endless speculation, only fragments of his network have ever been revealed. Now, by congressional maneuvering and judicial stonewalling, the remaining files are effectively locked away.

 The official line is that disclosure would harm “national security” or unfairly implicate the innocent. In reality, it keeps the machinery intact. Transparency here would topple too many pillars — political, financial, and cultural. And so, secrecy wins.

 Criminalizing Boycotts

 At the same time, legislation across multiple states and at the federal level has taken direct aim at boycotts of Israel. These “anti-BDS” measures do more than target one political movement; they carve a hole in the First Amendment.

 If political and economic boycotts — historically one of the most powerful nonviolent tools of American citizens — can be criminalized because they run counter to foreign policy, then the very concept of protected speech is hollow. It would mean Washington has the power to dictate not only what you can say, but what you can buy, sell, or refuse to purchase.

 That isn’t democracy. It’s policy enforcement by coercion.

 The Economy: Bleeding Out in Real Time

 Meanwhile, the economic reality for most Americans is grim. Inflation continues to devour wages. Debt has ballooned to historic levels. Servicing the interest alone now threatens to overwhelm the federal budget.

 On the ground, the middle and working classes are being hollowed out. Housing, food, fuel, and taxes consume nearly all disposable income. Whether the unraveling is intentional — a controlled demolition — or simply the consequence of decades of negligence doesn’t matter. The effect is the same: Americans are being stripped bare before the next phase of restructuring.

 Language as a Weapon: Redefining “Nazi”

 But perhaps the most insidious shift is linguistic.

 The word Nazi once referred specifically to the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. Over time, it became shorthand for authoritarianism, fascism, and absolute evil. Today, however, the term is increasingly untethered from history.

 There is a growing effort to flip the definition, recasting “Nazi” as a form of left-wing extremism. This linguistic sleight of hand serves a strategic purpose. Once established, it allows lawmakers and media alike to:

•  Label dissenters, populists, and gun owners as “Nazis.”

•  Justify mass surveillance, censorship, and unconstitutional laws under the banner of “fighting Nazism.”

•  Package authoritarianism itself as a moral crusade.

 It’s the same move that followed 9/11 with the word terrorist: stretch the label until it covers anyone the state wishes to target.

 Surveillance by Consent

 The groundwork for this has already been laid. Over the last decade, cancel culture and online witch hunts normalized the idea of punishing people for speech. Every time someone lost a job over a tweet, the precedent grew stronger: free expression is conditional, subject to the whims of outrage.By cheering on these purges, society gave implicit consent for mass surveillance. Neighbors snitched on neighbors. Employers policed thoughts as much as behavior. 

And the state — always watching — realized it could do the same on a national scale.

 What Comes Next

 So where does this leave us?

•  Litigation: Fighting through the courts is slow, costly, and rarely victorious. The system is designed to exhaust challengers.

•  Preparation: Building parallel networks, decentralized communication, and legal defense strategies is more practical than waiting for the system to correct itself.

•  Recognition: Most Americans won’t understand the magnitude of what’s happening until it’s irreversible. Those who do see it now have to prepare outside the herd.

 The Hard Truth

 The most bitter pill is this: those who eagerly participated in silencing others, enforcing conformity, and cheering on surveillance will never fully grasp the damage they enabled. They were useful to the machine, and once their role is complete, they’ll be discarded like everyone else.

 The few who recognize the game have a choice: adapt now, or be consumed in the reset.