American Gladio: Compulsory Gun Buyback Plan to be Aided by Bill Clinton

by Scott Creighton

UPDATE: They demonized the NRA spokesman for suggesting we have armed cops in schools to protect against mass shooting events like the one at Sandy Hook, they called him “crazy”. Funny… do you know who first suggested such a thing back in 1998? A guy by the name of Bill Clinton:

Two weeks ago, President Clinton announced a program called Cops in Schools, aimed at making it easier for school districts to get money to hire police officers in hopes of preventing the types of shootings that have resulted in the deaths of students and teachers in half a dozen schools in the last three years. New York Times Nov. 1998

Do you know who also shares that “crazy” idea and think it’s a better way to protect our kids than rounding up assault rifles? The majority of the American people:

Americans are most likely to say that an increased police presence at schools, increased government spending on mental health screening and treatment, and decreased depiction of gun violence in entertainment venues would be effective in preventing mass shootings at schools. Americans rate the potential effectiveness of a ban on assault and semi-automatic guns as fourth on a list of six actions Gallup asked about. Gallop poll results

Hmmm… here’ a republican “strategist” who claims the exact opposite of this poll… I guess the facts just don’t matter when billionaires like Bloomberg want your guns.

Frank Luntz, a top Republican strategist and pollster, said Wednesday that the National Rifle Association’s recent calls for armed guards to be stationed at every school in the wake of the Newtown, Conn. massacre suggested the organization isn’t listening to public opinion on the issue.

The public wants guns out of the schools, not in the schools, and they’re not asking for a security official or someone else,Luntz said on CBS’s “This Morning,” responding to a proposal first floated by top NRA lobbyist Wayne LaPierre during a press conference last week. Huffington Post


In the wake of the Port Arthur Massacre, in which the motive remains a “state secret”, the Aussies put together a compulsory gun buyback plan in which Australians were forced to sell their weapons to the state for around $200 bucks a pop.

Whenever you have a program like this new American Gladio operation, there are always ways to benefit from the action for those who design them. Obviously the billionaires and the financial elites wish to disarm the American public prior to the designed collapse of the economy when they finish turning this country into the largest free trade zone in the world.

A couple weeks ago I talked to a reader here and I said that what they would probably do is institute a mandatory gun buyback plan because in a plan like that, there are many levels of graft that they will build into it.In this case we are talking about 50 million guns at around $500 bucks a pop. I could be wrong but that looks like around $25 billion.

The compulsory buyback program is now in the mill with people like Bill Clinton promising to do his best too see it through. (remember, it was Clinton’s Secretary of State who claimed that killing a half million Iraqi children was “worth it”)

Here are a couple of ways I said they would be able to profit from the pending buyback program:

  1. We are talking about a lot of money first of all, that has to be borrowed from the privately owned Federal Reserve system; the same bankers and billionaires that are pushing the disarming in the first place. They will benefit right off the bat from the interest we owe on the 25 billion.
  2.  The massive amount of cash needed will instantly add to the “debt monster crisis” which will help to facilitate even more vicious genocidal austerity cuts.
  3.  The massive amount of money will probably be handed over to JPMorgan Chase like they do food stamp money. The people turning in guns will be given a Chase debit card in return. This allows Chase to handle the cash for an extended period of time keeping it on their books and being used by them in various other ways.
  4. The guns will be re-purposed, not destroyed, and begin a whole new “Fast and Furious” program on a scale that boggles the mind

There are literally a million ways they can exploit this bundle of cash. These are just the first three that come to mind.

Diane Feinstein floated the buyback program in an interview the other day and talked about how Bill Clinton contacted her to “help” push this program through.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said that she and other gun control advocates are considering a law that would create a program to purchase weapons from gun owners, a proposal that could be compulsory.

“We are also looking at a buy-back program,” Feinstein said today in a press conference. “Now, again, this is a work in progress so these are ideas in the development.”

Gov. Andrew Cuomo, D-N.Y., already discussed the possibility of a buy-back law for his state, but he made clear it would be a forced buyback

.. Some liberal activists want the policy imitated here. “That would be like destroying 50 million guns in America today,” the Center for American Progress’ Matt Miller wrote after noting that Australia eliminated 20 percent of the weapons in the country. “The Australian ‘outlaw and repurchase’ option is one approach. But if Congress balks at banning certain weapons entirely, it could make gun owners an offer they can’t refuse. Instead of $200 a gun, Uncle Sam might offer $500.”

Feinstein also said that that former President Bill Clinton had volunteered, on a phone call, to help her get a new gun law passed.

“[Clinton] was talking about the battle back in 1993 with the bill that, interestingly enough, was introduced and passed within the year fo 1993 and went into effect in 1994,” she said. “And, of course, he was president and the White House came alive and was very very helpful in enabling the passage of that bill both in the senate and in the House. So, to have him part of the team again is really quote special for us.” Beltway Confidential

Important to note: the Center for American Progress is a left-wing neoliberal think tank which supports the Clintons like they were their relatives.

Also important to note: the first ban on assault weapons of ’94 took effect because of another slaughter of 20 kids at Waco. Of course they were shot by soldiers positioned outside the kitchen when they tried to flee the burning building and killed with CS gas which was pumped into the safe room for an hour by the Clinton’s tactical team which attacked them on April 19th 1993.

The feds went to the Waco property to seize guns they claimed the Branch Davidians were hoarding while in fact they were selling them legally at gun shows to raise money for their community. But, Clinton still got his gun law passed didn’t he. And here we are again.

This bill will pass into law and you will be forced to sell your $1,800 weapons for $500 bucks or less. If you don’t there is already talk of using tactical forces to come get you.

And if you think for one minute these guns will be destroyed as the CAP shill suggests, you are an idiot.

These guns will be “walked” into countries like Mexico to arm our favorite drug cartels, the ones who launder their cash with our favorite banks like UBS and Wachovia. Maybe they will end up in “rebels” hands in Russia or Iran or North Korea. The possibilities are endless.

These weapons will be shipped to our favorite terrorists in places like Libya and Syria and Africa in general. Some of them, the nicer ones, may be kept by our local police and other enforcement officials.

Think about this: in this scenario, they are literally talking about ending up having to send tactical units into people’s homes to collect weapons that are currently legal and registered. These situations are potentially extremely dangerous and will certainly involve several horrific outcomes before it is all over and by that I mean family members being shot and killed… possibly children.

So in order to protect the kids they are talking about setting up a situation where tactical units, SWAT, kicks in doors of homes across the US to take someone’s gun, putting countless children in harm’s way.

The complicit media will blame any child fatalities during this operation on the gun owners themselves and they will serve as a brutal warning to others who are thinking of holding out. In the end, people who are claiming now that they will not yield their weapons, will.

The 2nd amendment is on it’s way out the door while the bankers and the toadies who serve them are playing every angle they can to steal more and more from the people of this country. The only thing we can do is expose the American Gladio operation for what it is too as many as we can.

10 Responses

  1. I can’t even imagine honest Americans without legal guns and mobsters and heavy duty criminals with illegal guns… in the US.
    China, Japan, and Israel will love this…… we’ll be an open market for whatever or whoever wants to shove us around.

  2. Try my hand with this tablet I got from “all the kids”—moving me into the PCD world.

    Anyway, this is one crazy American who’s all in behind those Gallop poll results.

    r ap

  3. I don’t think that Martin Bryant’s motive is a state secret per se, Scott. My understanding is that his lawyer knows the motive, and that is covered by privilege.

    There are odd things about the Port Arthur massacre but there are also some wildly inaccurate and downright false crime statistics being bandied around by the gun lobby in Australia too.

    • They showed him the two guns which killed most of the people in the massacre and he claimed they weren’t his and he had never seen them before. They tried putting a scope on one to confuse him, but again he said he had never seen it.

      as to motive, he doesn’t claim to have killed all those people. He admits to jacking a car and kidnapping a guy but not the Port Arthur massacre. When asked for motive, of course, he says “I can’t help you there” because he claims he didn’t do it.

      Q. Do you think people should take responsibility for their actions Martin?

      A. … inaudible … responsibility?


      Q. Well.


      Q. I mean do you think that people should accept the consequences of what they do?

      A. Yeah I do. I spose I should for a little while for what I’ve done. Just a little while and let me out, let me live my own life. I’m missing my Mum. I really miss her actually, what she cooks up for me, her rabbit stews and everything. She’s not even allowed to bring a little bit of food for me, that, that’s a bit upsetting. Mmm.

      Q. We’d really like to know why mate because you know, I mean, it’s … inaudible ..

      A. I’d really love to help you out … inaudible … but I can’t. Have you had other trouble like this, dramatic?

      Q. Not on this scale, no.

      A. No. Spose it happens, doesn’t it.


      Martin was left handed and all the witnesses say the shooter was right handed. When asked by the interrogators to show them how he holds a rifle, he demonstrated showing a left handed style. The shooter was very good at what he did with almost all of the shots being headshots. Martin had very little experience firing the rifles he owned and accepted as his in the interrogation.

      When it first went to trial and the judge listed off all the people he was being charged with killing, he started laughing in the courtroom

      He was mentally unstable, probably mentally developed to the 11 year old level. He should never have been questioned without his attorney or parent with him.

      When I say he doesn’t have a motive I mean he doesn’t have a motive. The state makes the claim that his lawyer knows his motive but won’t tell anyone. I don’t buy that.

  4. I accept all that, but it’s not accurate to say that the state is covering up a motive.

    I should have said his barrister CLAIMS to know the motive and refuses to divulge it, as that would be covered by privilege.

    I’m skeptical about the official story but also skeptical about the gun lobby.

    • That kid will never get out of prison. He was sentenced to 35 years in his plea deal but they wrote in a clause that stipulates he will never be allowed out. That’s very rare in Australia isn’t it?

      Under circumstances like that, especially dealing with a mentally challenged individual in a case that literally changed the constitutional rights of every Australian, the state is obligated to provide the people with the entire story of the event and that includes his motive. I don’t even think they can accept a plea bargain and confession without one. I could be wrong on that but the state owes the people a full accounting of the case and they certainly have not provided them that. as far as I know there is no motive and it would certainly behoove the state to provide that tidbit of info. If they can go to the extreme to lock the guy up till he dies, then I think they could probably force the lawyer to disclose the motivation behind the shootings. But they don’t. And there’s probably a good reason for that.

      I don’t say they are “covering up” the motive, I say they are content saying it’s a “secret” and if the state chooses to do that, then by that account, ipso facto, it’s a “state secret”… of course the “secret” is… it doesn’t exist. Which, serves the state’s interests to keep that from the people

      • It’s rare but not unique. It does beg some questions about why his legal team would allow him to make the plea, certainly. Where was the benefit to their client in making it?

        But I don’t think motive is an essential element for a court to convict on a guilty plea.

        I’d certainly like to see a full accounting of it all, but legal privilege is an essential right in any justice system too imo. That is where the secret lies in this case. It’s his own legal team suppressing it. It may well be in some sort of connivance with the state, but we have no evidence of that that I know of.

        We never had any right to arms in our constitution and I’d guess that if one were put to referendum it would be overwhelmingly defeated anyway. Very very few Australians want more guns out there.

        They just aren’t part of the culture.

        I find it a bit annoying that the gun lobby in the US quite disingenuously makes a lot out of what happened in my native land. The people you see on Youtube are very much a tiny fringe and at least some of them are demonstrably dishonest.

        It certainly hasn’t resulted in any increase in violent crime.

        • There can be no argument that the Port Arthur massacre led to gun control in Australia just like the Dunbaine (?) shooting in Scotland led to the same result in the UK in the same year. Again, no real motive for the suspect just like the ones we are seeing here in the states. The circumstances are similar and suspicious in these cases. There is a vested interest in disarming the population. Yes, the gun lobby uses questionable stats but so too do those who wish to disarm us.

          What I am trying to say is.. there is a motive and it’s obvious. People just don’t want to see what they don’t want to see. Not that you are like that, but many others here in the states.

          • Interesting to hear you comment on the Port Arthur Massacre as that is one of the oddest mass shooting accounts Ive ever read and do see it as a deep state op ala Brebant/Gladio. Im happy to see someone make these uncomfortable conclusions. It is incontravertable that The Italian State carried out the Bologna train station bombings as well as the assasination of Aldo Morro. These behaviours are not distinct, the CIA et al were deeply involved in coordinating operations via Gladio in Europe as was the OSI who implimented the “stay behind armies” system. These are the most uncomfortable truths for the masses to grasp as the lead to a compkete reversal of every deeply held belief one has about the society they live in.

  5. OSS. Sorry.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: