Image result for dr dans freedom forum

Help Educate America
Click on the following link to help educate America.
Donations are not tax deductible.

Keith Broaders
1230 N Street #510
Sacramento, California 95814
Phone (916) 399-4881

Do you think 20,000 gun laws in America is enough? If so, then Do NOT watch this video, the first 42 minutes anyway.

Views: 305

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

This is one video that every Country loving person needs to watch and pay close attention to.  Somehow, I sense that those who are bent on disarming all of us would inflict the same end for anyone who defies them, like what happened in every country in this video. 

For me, I will either live free or, if necessary, die fighting as I blatantly refuse to give up what few firearms I own.  No branch of government has the right to deny our rights as they Never granted any citizen any right to begin with. 

Only the Traitors to our Constitution think about gun control and to me, this is the absolute truth!

The German part is BS.  Hitler relaxed the gun laws previously passed.  This information has been propagated by the Jews.  There was no Jew Holocaust.  Netanyahu just admitted that the other day.

I know it's hard for American's to accept that they were lied to all these decades by the Jewish controlled American government and media but it is fact.

According to the official story from the Red Cross, only about 280,000 Jews died during WWII in the Work Camps(NOT DEATH CAMPS)

I'm really tired of Americans denying the actual information.  Turn your damn TV off and RESEARCH THE TRUTH!

That's just Hitler Jim,

What about all the others who used the same techniques to do their bidding?

I don't disagree at all.  But the narrative about Germany, the NSDAP, and Hitler has to be corrected for anyone to totally understand what is going on today, who is in control, and the lies that allowed for this all to happen.

The vast majority of those 271,000 died of Typhus and starvation.  Typhus was a major problem in all of Europe during WWII.  The starvation was simply the result of the Allies success in destroying Germany's infrastructure.  Getting food became a problem for ALL in Germany by the end of the War.

And he didn't.  This crap from Netanyahu is just a sign that their massive lie about the so-called Holocaust is collapsing because the Truth is coming out so they have to lie again and try to change the story.  These are very Evil people.

Really?  You keep saying America.  What about the other countries in this world?  What about the people that was there and the surrounding countries?  Didn't hear you say a thing about what they had to say about death of Jews or experienced it.  Get the whole story right before you open you fat mouth about Americans.  One person says something and you take just his word for it. Research it from all nations involved.

Nearly 3,500 blacks killed from 1880 to 1965, 85 years.  That's a whopping 41.18 deaths per year.  Hardly a mention when the deaths including Black Americans stands as follows:

Civil War - Approximately 750,000 deaths within 4 years, that's 187,000 deaths per year and mainly white Americans

WWI - 116,000 deaths within 2 years, that's 58,000 deaths per year.

WWII - 405,399 deaths within 4 years, that's 101,350 deaths per year.

Korean Bullshit conflict - 36,516 deaths within 3 years, that's 12,172 deaths per year.

Vietnam War - 58,209 deaths within over an alleged 20 years, that's 2910 deaths per year



I'm sorry about the deaths of the blacks but let's get real.  Someone is playing an AGENDA and it's obviously against White Americans.

Well done, Jim. Especially,as you continue to defend the truth.

I do believe Netanyahu does need to take a rest and gather his thoughts, for he surely is displaying his frustrations and confusing true historical facts.  Of course just after seeing videos as to the means in which the Palestinians train their poor innocent children to HATE the Jews and experience this Hatred day in and day out, one would eventually need to escape from reality.  God Bless and protect God's Amazing World.

See the link and article below.


Defiant, but wrong.

Photographer: Menahem Kahana/AFP/Getty Images

The latest round of violence in Israel was not Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s biggest problem this week, although it may yet spin out of control. Most of his week was devoted to damage control after he foolishly said it was Haj Amin al-Husseini, the grand mufti of Jerusalem during the Second World War and a father of Palestinian nationalism, who invented the idea of the Final Solution, in which the Nazis and their collaborators murdered 6 million Jews in Europe during the Holocaust.

Speaking to the World Zionist Congress in Jerusalem, Netanyahu laid the blame for the extermination of one-third of the Jewish people not at the feet of the Nazis but, essentially, on the Palestinians. “Hitler didn't want to exterminate the Jews at the time, he wanted to expel the Jew,” Netanyahu said. “And Haj Amin al-Husseini went to Hitler and said, ‘If you expel them, they'll all come here.’” Then, Netayanhu said, Hitler asked al-Husseini, “What should I do with them?” and said that the mufti suggested, “Burn them.”

Two-State Solution

It was a ludicrous claim. There is no evidence whatsoever of that conversation having taken place, and as Dina Porat, chief historian for Yad Vashem noted, “all of the facts show that during Hitler and the mufti’s meeting, the ‘final solution’ was already under way.”

Netanyahu was correct that the mufti was an unabashed supporter of Hitler. And Netayahu, the son of a sometimes maverick historian, wasn't the first to tie al-Husseini to the Final Solution. But no credible historians suggest that the conversation Netanyahu described ever took place.

The gaffe prompted international ridicule, to which much of the Israeli press pointed with glee. YNet, Israel’s most popular news website, noted that the “son of the historian grossly misrepresents history.” Including screen shots from around the world, YNet also noted that Netanyahu’s gaffe had aroused condemnation from sources as varied as the U.K.'s Guardian, Reuters and the Independent, Italy’s La Republica, France’s Le Parisien, and the French Jewish paper Le Monde Juif. The U.S.'s Daily Beast, YNet noted, reported that Netanyahu had “absolved Hitler” of responsibility for the Holocaust.

Netanyahu took no less heat from the Israeli press. Haaretz listed a series of comedic reactions to Netanyahu’s absurd rendering of history. Israelis posted cartoons on Facebook suggesting (using Disney characters) that Hitler was under an evil spell. And the Times of Israel couldn’t help but point out that even German Chancellor Angela Merkel demanded that Netanyahu not deflect responsibility for the Holocaust from the Germans. That Germany had to set Israel straight on Holocaust history struck many Israelis as a new low.

The White House, not surprisingly, used Netanyahu’s remarks as yet another opportunity to demand that the prime minister stop feeding the violence -- an accusation undoubtedly annoying to Netanyahu given that that is precisely what he has been accusing Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas of doing. An op-ed article on Ynet's English language site called his claim a “blatant historical lie.” Even the Jerusalem Post, often supportive of Netanyahu, cited the historian Porat’s suggestion that Netanyahu retract his accusation.

The question is why Netanyahu, undeniably intelligent and well-read, stumbled so badly. The Wall Street Journal quoted Saeb Erekat, secretary-general of the Palestine Liberation Organization, who offered the obvious Palestinian explanation. “Netanyahu hates Palestinians so much that he is willing to absolve Hitler of the murder of six million Jews,” he said. Netanyahu “should stop using this human tragedy to score points for his political end.”

Many Israelis couldn’t help but agree with Erekat -- the absurdity of Netanyahu's accusation appeared nothing less than the flailing of a desperate leader out of moves. If he refuses to negotiate with the Palestinians under fire, the violence will likely increase, perhaps spiraling out of control. (YNet posted a video interview with the head of the Tanzim, a militant Palestinian faction, threatening much more violence -- that Abbas will not be able to quell -- if Netanyahu does not give the Palestinians more cause for hope.) If Netanyahu does show flexibility, however, he knows that just as the First Intifada led to the Oslo accords and the Second Intifada to the 2005 withdrawal from Gaza, he will be rewarding Palestinian violence and setting the stage for more.

Many Israelis think that Netanyahu ignored the Palestinian issue for years because he believed that the status quo could be maintained and he was singularly focused on Iran. He lost the Iran battle -- the approval of the deal he vigorously opposed is no longer in doubt.

It was thus particularly noteworthy that Israel’s Atomic Energy Commission came out in favor of the Iran deal this week, saying that it would probably prevent Tehran from getting a nuclear bomb. That announcement was another symbolic stab at the prime minster. Israelis, tired of the violence and worried about what may lie ahead, are increasingly muttering that Netanyahu fought the wrong battle and then lost it. He would be in political trouble were there anyone at all that Israelis trusted to navigate them out of this crisis. Fortunately for him, there is no one.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

To contact the author of this story:
Daniel Gordis at

To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Stacey Shick at


Status Report: States Can Nullify Federal Gun Control in Practice

There were several important victories in the fight to protect the Second Amendment from federal attack during the 2015 legislative session. This sets the stage for further action to nullify in practice federal infringement on the right to keep and bear arms in 2016.

In light of the recent murders at an Oregon college, Obama is once more trying to use a vicious crime as an excuse to violate our... via executive orders. Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have both stated they intend to introduce gun control measures such as magazine capacity limits, background checks and waiting periods. Of course no criminal bothers to obey these laws, but the do encroach on our right to keep and bear arms.

The foundation is set for state action to stop these plans in their tracks.


Sixteen states considered Second Amendment Preservation Act (SAPA) bills in 2015, and significant laws relating to the Second Amendment went into effect in two states.

A new Tennessee law prohibits the state from implementing or enforcing federal gun measures that would “violate the Tennessee state constitution.” This bill sets the foundation for further action and represents a first step toward nullifying many current and future federal measures.

Additional steps can be taken in Tennessee:

  • Amend the current law to remove language requiring a judicial determination that a federal act would be counter to the state constitution prior to the state withdrawing support. This would ensure that state participation in federal gun control would end immediately.
  • Concurrently introduce new legislation that expressly bans participation in any new federal gun control measure
  • Compile a report of federal enforcement actions taken on firearms in Tennessee, highlighting those enforced with the participation of state agencies, and which ones likely violate the new law. From there, state-based gun rights groups can file an injunction to stop state participation under the law already on the books

Indiana Governor Mike Pence signed a bill that takes a small, but important, step forward. The new law “Repeals the prohibition against manufacturing, importing, selling, or possessing a sawed-off shotgun.” Enforcement of federal restrictions on such weapons rely on participation between state and federal governments. With the new law, Indiana now authorizes what the federal government restricts, and this sets the stage for people to take things further.

The Montana House and Senate both passed a SAPA as well, but Gov. Steve Bullock vetoed the bill.


As we move into the 2016 legislative season, we are preparing to build on our successes and overcome some of the challenges we faced this year.

In 2014, Idaho passed a bill that bans state enforcement of any future federal laws or acts relating to firearms. This should be the blueprint first step for all states in 2016 and beyond. Idaho can build on this by expanding the ban from future to specific current federal gun control measures, and eventually all of them.

Alaska and Kansas also have laws on the books that set the stage for future action.

In Alaska, HB69 was signed into law in April 2013. It establishes the principle that no state or local agency may use any resources to “implement or aid in the implementation” of any federal acts that infringe on a “person’s right, under the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, to keep and bear arms.”

Like Tennessee, follow up legislation should be introduced that specifically clarifies which federal acts qualify as an infringement, and that expressly prohibits state and local assistance or participation in any enforcement action.  Strategically, we recommend starting with any new federal gun control measures as a starting point, with a long-term goal of including all federal acts.

In Kansas, SB102, the 2nd Amendment Protection Act, was also signed into law in April 2013. It establishes the foundation for a ban on state and local assistance or participation in the enforcement of federal gun measures. It reads, in part:

Any act, law, treaty, order, rule or regulation of the government of the United States which violates the second amendment to the constitution of the United States is null, void and unenforceable in the state of Kansas.

In a minor legal victory, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Kansas law, saying the suit from the Brady Campaign was “without merit.” While this was a win, it should be noted that the federal court didn’t say that the federal government doesn’t have the power to regulate firearms under the commerce clause, as the Kansas law states. The Brady suit was dismissed for lack of standing.


Moving forward, it is clear that we have numerous opponents to contend with if we are to make further gains.

One of our biggest and most significant detractors were state and local law enforcement. Despite the fact many agencies claim they support the right to keep and bear arms, they had no qualms about opposing their state’s SAPA bill. Some sheriffs declared they would even violate state law to infringe on your gun rights. For many, protecting the Second Amendment would mean risking the loss of all the cool toys they get from the feds via police militarization programs.

At the same time, there are still those who believe in adhering to the Constitution, and we will continue to identify and reach out to those who support our efforts.

The other group standing in our way are the quislings from the “pro gun” Republican party. While Vichy Republican Governor Bullock vetoed Montana’s version of SAPA, mainstream GOP members chairing committees where SAPA bills were being considered refused to push them through for a floor vote.

The only way to overcome this kind of opposition is to create a groundswell of grassroots support that overwhelms the law enforcement lobby and makes wishy-washy politicians fear for their political lives.


It is time to go on the offensive and do what has to be done to get other states to pass their own version of the SAPA.

You play an important part in the fight.

  • Spread the message via social media.
  • Get the model legislation and get it to your state legislators. click here
  • Sign up for action alerts and newsletters at our 2nd Amendment-only campaign, 

A farmer does not plow his fields when winter arrives, but during good weather, in anticipation of those colder months, so that when snowy winds blow, he does not fret. In the same way, we must sow the seeds necessary to reap a bountiful harvest of liberty in the future by ensuring that regardless of the tyranny politicians in D.C. hatch violating our gun rights, they will have to go it alone. States will not come to their aid. Without the cooperation of the states, no federal gun control law can succeed.

I'm a female, at 85 years am not a big enough fool to get rid of the only protection that I have. I will keep my gun and use it if needed for protection!!! Our Communist worshiping government can do as it pleases but I will keep my gun, if it's members do not want or need guns, that is OK by me, I don't care but don't make the stupid opinion that I do not need a gun..I would get me a big mean German Police dog, but it is all I can do to take care of myself, to say nothing about a dog, bigger than I am.


© 2020   Created by Online Professor.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service