December 5, 2015
For the first time since 1920, the New York Times has run a front page editorial.
Condemning American gun owners as responsible for the attack by foreign terrorists on San Bernardino.
You can read the whole thing here. But the end is where they really kick you in the stomach:
It is not necessary to debate the peculiar wording of the Second Amendment. No right is unlimited and immune from reasonable regulation.
Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the good of their fellow citizens.
What better time than during a presidential election to show, at long last, that our nation has retained its sense of decency?
Yes, goyim. You must give up your freedoms for “decency.”
And Jews know a thing or two about “decency,” let me tell you what.
Of course, you cannot debate the “peculiar wording” of the Second Amendment. It’s only 27 words, and there is absolutely nothing ambiguous about it.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
“Shall not be infringed,” kikes. No way to use Jew legalism on that bit there. And yes, taking away modified assault rifles would absolutely be an “infringement.”
The funny thing is that they admit that when they strip people’s guns from them, they will be punishing people who are not guilty of anything. Yet, when we say that all Moslems should be deported in response to these terrorist attacks, they whine that you would be punishing people who haven’t done anything (except leech our wealth and breakdown the fabric of our social order).
Also interesting is that absent is any mention of the fact these people had a bunch of bombs. You obviously can’t ban bombs, as there are too many things you can make them out of. And overall, bombings tend to be more deadly than shootings.
Logically, you would ban Moslems.
It is very worrying when you see the New York Times, which is hands down the most influential publication in the world, making these types of demands.
However, it isn’t surprising. Like all groups calling for gun-grabbing, the NYT is run by Jews.
These Jews want to destroy our country. Period. That is their collective goal.
They are obsessed with taking away our freedom so they can further crush us. After the Second Amendment goes, then goes the First. Or maybe it will be the other way around – it is definitely more important to Jews to take our speech than our guns, but it might be easier to get the guns than to get the speech.
But these are the points of attack. These Jews are fully obsessed with taking guns and speech.
Even if you are not fully on-board the Trump Train, you should at least know that he won’t take our guns or our speech from us.