Posted originally on Mar 16, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
There is a critical failure in the Neocons’ playbook. They assumed that Iran would NOT close the Strait of Hormuz, for they assumed that they would line it with mines and physically close the waterway, which would be suicidal for them as well. Still, they sought out and destroyed several of their mine laying ships. But Iran has been able to close the Strait with just threats. Ships headed to China are passing with no problem and the US is not doing anything about it fearing (1) it would be confrontational with China, and (2) it would cause oil prices to rise even higher. Iran attacks ships selectively. That is the fear tactic that has shut the Strait without mines or Iranian naval ships.
Our greatest problem here is that we DO NOT know what the goal of this war is supposed to be. Trump has said regime change, end nuclear weapons, as well as degrade the Iranian military. As long as he does not clearly state what is the objective, then this leaves the door open to declare victory and exit. If he says it was just to degrade the military, then he can declare victory and end it tomorrow. Bur why then assassinate the Ayatollah? That made it seem to be the regime change and calling to the people to rise up was in line with that. Iran has stated that it 400 kg of uranium is under ruble. If that is true, then the nuclear argument is off the table. Yet to do either the regime change or the seizure of the nuclear material will necessitate boots on the ground and there is no real support in America for that.
No matter what the truth may be, the perception remains that this is Israel’s war and we have participated in the targeting and killing of the Ayatollah, which was Israel’s policy of decapitation.
Apocalypse fears, once associated with the fringes of society, are now commonplace across North America—and are shaping attitudes towards perceived threats. New research has revealed just how widespread these beliefs have become, fueled by climate change, geopolitical instability and rapid advancements in artificial intelligence. Belief in the end of the world is surprisingly common across North America, and it’s significantly influencing how people interpret and respond to the most pressing threats facing humanity. This is becoming a dominant concern with many viewing the Middle East war as leading to Armageddon.
Posted originally on Mar 15, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
QUESTION: Marty, looking at Socrates, it does not show that this release of 400 million barrels of oil will do much. Am I reading this correctly?
ANSWER: The International Energy Agency released 400 million barrels of oil into the global market, the largest release of emergency oil stocks in history. This is just for show. However, it actually makes things far more vulnerable. This is all predicated on a quick victory with the conquest of Iran. If that assumption is wrong, this will not help.
1. MATHEMATICALLY INSUFFICIENT (won’t even cover 2-3 months of lost supply) 2. STRATEGICALLY STUPID (leaves U.S. vulnerable to future crises) 3. POLITICALLY DESPERATE (election-year panic move) 4. ECONOMICALLY FUTILE (treats symptom, not disease)
Let’s get real. Global oil consumption is about 100 million barrels/day (mb/d). U.S. consumption is about 20 million barrels/day. The disruption of the Strait of Hormuz supply affects about 21 million barrels/day (21% of global supply). Releasing 400 million barrels at the global consumption rate would last 19 days (400M ÷ 21M/day). There is no way this will calm markets in the long term.
As I have been warning since the turn in the ECM in 2024, the US would enter STAGFLATION but Europe would be more of an economic Depression. The Marxist agenda of the EU oppresses the economy and it has posted the lowest economic growth of the major powers in the world. They hatred of the rich and insistance on exploiting them is why the economic growth is pathetic. As I have said, the capitalization of just the NYSE is nore than all the exchanges of Europe, including London, combined.
The Trump administration has wisely invoked the Defense Production Act and had overriden California which shut down offshore oil operations in California. Trump has wisely addressed oil supply disruption risks and reduce reliance on foreign crude by increasing domestic production. Releasing 400 million barrels is just not a real solution.
The Trump Administration has directed Sable Offshore Corp., an oil and gas company headquartered in Houston, to restore operations at the Santa Ynez Unit and the Santa Ynez Pipeline System off the coast of Santa Barbara. Failing to do so allows Iran to engage in a supply war like the 1970s. Trump is also lifting sanctions on Russia. The best thing to come out of this Iran War is to put a check against Zelensky.
I am still concerned about June/July. While President Trump said “Iran wants to make a deal, and I don’t want to make it because the terms aren’t good enough yet,” on NBC on Saturday, saying that a “very solid” agreement would have to include a commitment by Tehran to abandon nuclear ambitions. However, the Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the Islamic Republic is open to “any regional initiative that leads to a fair end to the war,” according to an interview published by the UK-based Al-Araby Al-Jadeed news website on Sunday.
Let me cut through the diplomatic bullshit and tell you what’s really happening: Netanyahu is absolutely pushing for regime change in Iran, and Trump is going along with it. But the relationship is more complex than simple puppet-master dynamics.
NETANYAHU’S POSITION has been clear and consistent. He wants the complete destruction of Iranian regime (not just nuclear program, not just military degradation—REGIME CHANGE). He has wanted this for 40+ years (documented, consistent). He has stated this explicitly multiple times in recent months (post-Feb 28 strikes). The first strike was to implement his insane policy of DECAPITATION assuming that would cause the government to collapse assassinating Khamenei and the IRGC leadership.Let’s be clear. That is not “deterrence,” that’s REGIME CHANGE operation and Trump agreed.
TRUMP’S POSITION looking at his public statements, suggests “maximum pressure,” “they must change behavior.” He has also made occasional regime change hints. His actions are consistent with regime change decapitation strikes, “every weapon” threats, no clear offramp for Iran. This presents the problem of no exit strategy all based on the assumption Netanyahu whispers in his ear that DECAPITATION will succeed. Yet, Trump is also transactional might accept “deal” if Iran capitulates completely, but that does not see likely based on our computer models. Netanyahu absolutely in his ear, but Trump has own motivations (political, ego, strategic)
The real question is: Why is Trump doing this BECAUSE Netanyahu demands it, or are their interests ALIGNED? It appears that Trump and Netanyahu both want regime change, yet for independent motivations. Netanyahu has been pushing Trump further/faster than Trump would go alone.
Netanyahu does have domestic US support he is using against Trump. The Evangelical base (30-40% of Trump’s coalition) are fanatically pro-Israel, see Iran as biblical enemy as the Amalek of 1 Samuel 15:2-3! Then there are the domestic Jewish donors who are also major Republican funding such as Sheldon Adelson’s widow Miriam, others—billions at stake. There is also the AIPAC influence, which is a powerful lobbying group that can make/break candidates. Add to this, the media support, which spins the Neocon agenda and is Pro-Israel amplifying Trump when he’s tough on Iran.
The Byzantine Empire did try to defeat the early Arab-Islamic Caliphates and lost a significant portion of its territory. However, the Empire managed to survive, fight back, and eventually reclaim some of its lost lands. Yet the conflict was not a single, short war but a protracted series of campaigns known as the Arab-Byzantine wars, spanning over four centuries from the 7th to the 11th century. The outcome was a mixture of catastrophic defeat and eventual resurgence. They conquered Constantinople and the last emperor died fighting on the walls trying to save the last remanent of the Roman Empire.
This war is pushing the system over the edge and at stake will indeed be the 2026 Midterm Elections. The vast majority of congressional Republicans are publicly supportive of President Donald Trump’s decision to launch a war on Iran. This does not help matters. My concern is that nobody seems to comprehend that this is NOT the same as Iraq. Saddam was just a head of state. This is a religious war as was the case in Afghanistan. There is no historical precedent for winning such a war when the core is to undermine or destroy a religion.
Posted originally on Mar 14, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
QUESTION: Marty; I was rereading the Middle East report from the 2023 WEC. You had everything pointing to this starting in 2025. Even your Wave 10 on Islam pointed to 2025. Do you still see this ending bad for Israel and a broadening war? It is obvious, the press is told to stay far away from you because they do not like your computer’s forecast. They treat you like they did Kondratieff because Stalin did like his cyclical forecast either.
HG
ANSWER: Unfortunately, yes. Israel’s Iron Dome has failed. Netanyahu is a Neocon. He has over estimated his own position and assumes dragging in the United States ensures total destruction of Iran. The Neocon believe their own BS that the USA has the strongest military and nobody can defeat them. That arrogance is their downfall. They assassinated the Ayatollah following Israel’s policies which are dead wrong. The new Ayatollah is now much more anti-West and pro-nuclear weapons as the only deterent against Israel.
The hardline position of Iran has been made clear by the new Supreme Leader, Ayatollah-ul-Uzma Mojtaba Khamenei, following his ascension to power after the US and Israel assassinated his father. In a formal statement delivered via Swiss intermediaries, Iran presented a three-point ultimatum to the United States, demanding:
– Complete withdrawal of all U.S. military forces from the Middle East within 30 days
– Immediate lifting of all sanctions on Iran
– Payment of $500 billion in compensation
The deadline for compliance is April 10, 2026. If unmet, Iran threatens to:
– Close the Strait of Hormuz to all maritime traffic
– Pursue nuclear weapons development, including possible deployment
– Allow China and Russia to establish military bases on Iranian soil
The arrogance of the Neocons who judge the world through the eyes of their perceived power like some bully in the school yard, completely fail to understand not just what they have done, but the very soul of their adversary. Iran’s new leadership has shown ABSOLUTELY no willingness to soften its stance toward the West, despite significant onslaught of this military attack. I have warned that I would turn this into a proxy war to drain the United States. Reactions have been swift as both China and Russia have publicly backed Iran’s “legitimate security concerns.” Indeed, this is about regime change and the destruction of the Islamic Republic. As always, the Neocons in their mind paint their adversary as ruthless and the people will rise up to overthrow their government. That did not happen in Iraq and the spun the same exact nonsense.
Global markets reacted sharply, with oil prices surging nearly 20% and the S&P 500 has entered the correct phase the computer projected. Trump has been suckered into this quagmire and there is no victory on the horizon. A leaked White House document acknowledges that military strikes have achieved tactical but NOT strategic success. It is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE to win this war from the air. The Neocons know that Trump does not like to lose and will use this character trait against him to send in boots on the ground. They do not care how many soldiers die and they will always lie just to win like the Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Iran has issued its own ultimatums:
To international shipping nations: Allow safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz only if they expel U.S. and Israeli diplomats
To Azerbaijan: “Expel the Zionists” from its territory or face military consequences—a demand Baku has rejected as a violation of international law.
These moves reflect a broader pattern of using diplomatic and economic leverage amid military vulnerability, with Tehran attempting to shift pressure onto global powers while maintaining a defiant posture. The US now stands to risk the entire Middle East and this war will by no means be short and sweet.
Every empire in decline has a moment where it CHOOSES between strategic restraint (accept limits, preserve strength) and imperial overreach (one more war to prove dominance). Rome chose overreach (endless Germanic wars, Persian campaigns) → collapse. Britain chose restraint (post-WWII, liquidated empire peacefully) → survived as smaller power. USSR chose overreach (Afghanistan) → collapsed. The U.S. is at that choice point RIGHT NOW. Iraq and Afghanistan were warnings. Iran is the test. Choose overreach → follow Rome and USSR into history’s graveyard. Choose restraint → painful but survivable transition to multipolar world. The cycles are clear. The choice is ours. The Neocons always choose power, never wisely. Israel is making the same fatal mistake. Its future looks grim post-2028 for it is always the arrogance of power that ensures history buries all such empires in a common grave.
Posted originally on Apr 22, 2018 by Martin Armstrong
QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; Are you familiar with Professor Easterbrookof Western Washington University who agrees with you and is projecting a decline in temperatures for the next three decades? It seems that those who simply claim that it has been getting warmer live in a bubble of biased news. One even said to me that it has been getting warmer for the past 10,000 years because of civilization. I asked what was the solution? Should we just commit suicide to save the planet? Just can’t understand these people who deny there are cycles within every trend.
LR
ANSWER: I know. We are closer to the lows than the historic highs in temperature. Our model does agree with Professor Easterbrook that the immediate decline in temperatures should extend out for about 43 years from 2007. It was unseasonably cold in Florida and snowed in the northern regions also for the first time since the Blizzard of 1899 and even that was about 120 years before. It was excessive snow and gold in Britain, Japan, and China, as well as Russia. They ignore these reports as one-time flukes.
The Global Warming crowd tries to deny that there are also cycles set in motion by the Sun and they attribute everything to human activity. Nobody wants air we cannot breathe. I lived in London back in the 1980s when the busses were blowing out diesel. It was horrible. But to stop pollution by distorting history or claiming the trend is really warmer for 10,000 years is the danger. That is like saying the Dow Jones Industrials is only in a bull market since 1932 pretending there are no corrections. We must understand that nature is bigger than we are and the Sun just maybe the majority of climate change.
There have simply been historical periods with far greater amounts of CO2 than today. Pollution is a separate issue from blaming everything on CO2. There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that CO2 changes the climate. The ice core sample demonstrates that there have been periods of significantly higher levels of CO2 before civilization. There is a natural cycle of everything. Their analysis is always to deny a cycle and presume whatever trend is in motion will remain in motion. With this analysis, I am alive today the same as yesterday so therefore this trend will last forever.
Posted originally on Mar 13, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
QUESTION: You said they always kill the assassin when there is a conspiracy. I think you said that about the attempted assassination of Trump. You also said that about Oswald and Epstein. You said the only question about Epstein you wrote “When will Epstein be found Dead? Before or After a Deal?” I know you are a history buff. What is the precedent for this plot?
Jake
ANSWER: This is pretty standard throughout history. The Roman Emperor Caracalla was assassinated in just such a conspiracy. A disgruntled soldier named Justin Martialis, whom future emperor Macrinus had recruited to assassinate Caracalla so he would become emperor. The soldier stepped forward and stabbed Caracalla to death. Martialis was immediately killed by one of Caracalla’s bodyguards, conveniently silencing the direct link to the conspirators. The primary conspirators also included two tribunes of the Praetorian Guard.
After the failed boat trap intended to kill his mother, Agrippina Jr., Nero had Anicetus kill her. To provide cover, Nero framed Agrippina’s freedman, Agermus, as an assassin and had him killed, claiming Agrippina’s murder was a suicide resulting from her own failed plot.
Killing the assassin ensures their silence. Oswald was killed to prevent any trial. His wife had said he was innocent, but was intimidated by the FBI. While everyone is focuses on Epstein and the people who flew to his island, that is all the distraction and it’s a good one as people think they are protecting “pedophiles.” It was a blackmail ring. The real question is who was this for. It was not for fun. All the people were high profile. They characterize the girls who accepted money and gifts somehow did not understand at 17 this was prostitution? That knowledge only comes at 18?
I have said before that Maxwell was part of the Club. Robert Maxwell did not simply “lose” money before he died; he stole approximately £460 million from his own companies’ pension funds to prop up his failing business empire. These were indeed the pension savings of his employees. While there is substantial evidence of his deep and questionable ties to Soviet/Russian intelligence, the money he stole was used to cover his massive personal and corporate debts—not directly to “manipulate Russia,” though his espionage activities were likely a significant financial drain. Maxwell died on November 5th, 1991. This was linked to the Russian 1991 coup against Gorbachev. Epstein points out that he tried to blackmail Israel for £400 million. That probably served the justification for his death. Bill Browder was Maxwell’s right hand man covering Russia. He then went into partners with Edmund Safra and formed Hermitage Capital Management. That was the company I was solicited to put in $10 billion and I refused.
Russia experienced a profound and multifaceted financial crisis in 1991. However, it’s crucial to understand that this was not just a financial crisis in the modern sense; it was the total economic collapse of the Soviet Union, which led to the state’s dissolution in December of that year.
This crisis was a complete breakdown of the Soviet system, characterized by the failure of its core institutions. Here is a breakdown of the key dimensions of the 1991 crisis. The central government literally ran out of money. By late 1991, the Soviet state bank (Gosbank) could no longer meet its financial obligations. The Soviet Union was on the verge of defaulting on its foreign debts, with the foreign trade bank (Vnesheconombank) running out of cash
I wrote in the Plot to Seize Russia that Maxwell was widely suspected of being a triple agent, with links to MI6, the Israeli Mossad, and the Soviet KGB. The coup against Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev occurred in August 1991. It began on August 18 when he was placed under house arrest and officially commenced on August 19, collapsing just a few days later on August 21. Maxwell brokered a deal to support the 1991 coup in Russia in return for the release of all Russian Jews so they could migrate to Israel. When the coup collapsed, Maxwell was on the wrong side.
The evidence suggests his relationship with the Soviet state was one of mutual benefit. He gained unparalleled access and prestige, while they gained a useful asset with access to Western leaders and information. The money he stole was to cover the debts of his business empire, which was likely financially weakened by the costs of his espionage activities and his prestige-driven, often unprofitable, global ventures. His espionage was a separate but parallel operation to his business fraud.
I believe Maxwell took a swim aided by Mossad to ensure he was silenced. Browder abandoned ship, and the Neocons looked to blackmail Yeltsin to step down sticking in Boris Berezovsky as their puppet to run Russia. Eventually, his bodyguard said Berezovsky dod not commit suicide, he was killed by MI6 to cover up the plot to seize Russia.
They will never allow a trial when something behind the headlines will surface. In my own case, I had ZERO restitution because to impose restitution you still have to get trial. I could have called all the bankers to the stand. They already tried to kill me. I was in a coma for three days but survived. They could not allow any trial that would expose their involvement with the bankers to take over Russia. The bank’s involvement with the US Treasury et al shipping billions to Russia in case would have also been fully aired.
Posted originally on Mar 13, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
The resignation of Caitlin Kalinowski from OpenAI has triggered a debate that goes far beyond Silicon Valley. Kalinowski stepped down shortly after the company entered into an agreement with the United States Department of Defense to deploy its artificial intelligence models on government systems. The issue was not simply the partnership itself, but the speed at which the decision was made and the implications for how such powerful technology could be used as a weapon against American citizens.
“I resigned from OpenAI. I care deeply about the Robotics team and the work we built together. This wasn’t an easy call.” She was not rejecting national defense outright. She even acknowledged that “AI has an important role in national security.” Yet she warned that certain lines had been crossed. In her own words, “surveillance of Americans without judicial oversight and lethal autonomy without human authorization are lines that deserved more deliberation than they got.”
When someone inside the system walks away and raises that type of alarm, you should pay attention. For years, I have warned that governments are steadily constructing the infrastructure necessary to monitor populations in ways previous generations could not even imagine. After the September 11 attacks, intelligence agencies dramatically expanded their surveillance powers under the banner of protecting national security through the Patriot Act. Phone data, internet activity, and financial transactions became data points feeding enormous intelligence databases. The public was told these programs were narrowly targeted at foreign threats. Behind the curtain, the databases were growing larger every year. Governments now have access to EVERYTHING we do.
What most people do not realize is that the financial system was also pulled into this surveillance web. I have written before that governments began monitoring bank accounts and financial transfers on a scale that few citizens fully appreciate. Under the administration of Obama, programs quietly expanded to allow intelligence agencies to track international banking activity, financial flows, and transaction patterns in the name of national security. Those systems became permanent fixtures inside the intelligence community.
The trend accelerated under Joe Biden, when federal agencies aggressively pushed for greater reporting requirements from banks and financial institutions. Governments argued this was necessary to combat tax evasion, money laundering, and illicit activity. The financial behavior of ordinary citizens came under scrutiny, and Biden’s team was caught red-handed spying on anyone who supported his adversary. Donated to Trump? You’re on a list to be monitored. Hold religious beliefs that do not coincide with current political leanings? Anyone who purchased a Bible was placed on a list. Your bank account, your transactions, and even your spending patterns increasingly became part of enormous government databases.
What Kalinowski exposed is that the next phase is already underway. Once AI becomes embedded in national security systems, the surveillance state moves to an entirely new level. Governments will have the ability to monitor populations in real-time. Populations—not merely persons of interest—but the entire population. The people operating these systems are rarely elected officials. They are bureaucrats, intelligence officers, and agencies operating behind the curtain where the public has almost no visibility. Then the power is placed into the hands of a computer system that can instantly flag and target people or groups without moral discernment.
This is why the Kalinowski resignation matters. She warned openly about AI being used for domestic surveillance without oversight. Once these systems are integrated into government networks, the temptation to expand them becomes irresistible. Governments always claim these tools are necessary for security. But history shows that the definition of “security” tends to expand until it includes monitoring the population itself.
What is even more revealing is that officials within the Pentagon have already begun describing certain advanced AI systems as potential national security risks if they cannot be controlled by the government. In other words, artificial intelligence itself is now viewed as a threat unless it is firmly under the state’s control. That should tell you everything you need to know about where this is heading.
Do not assume these systems will remain limited to foreign adversaries. Surveillance infrastructure rarely stays confined to its original mission. Once built, it inevitably expands. The technology now exists to construct the most comprehensive monitoring system ever devised in human history. And if you think governments will not use it, you have not been paying attention.
The biggest constraint on artificial intelligence is not chips, software, or capital. It is electricity. Now the tech giants are finally admitting it. Seven major companies, including Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Meta, OpenAI, Oracle, and xAI, have signed a pledge committing to supply or finance their own power generation for the massive AI data centers they are building. The agreement essentially states that these firms will build or purchase new electricity sources and pay for the infrastructure needed so that the exploding demand for AI computing does not drive up electricity costs for ordinary consumers.
Data centers were once a background piece of infrastructure. AI has changed that completely. The energy requirements of AI computing are on an entirely different scale. Analysts now say AI data centers consume an order of magnitude more power than traditional server warehouses because of the massive computing loads required to run advanced models.
The numbers are staggering. U.S. data center electricity demand is expected to surge dramatically, reaching roughly 75.8 gigawatts in 2026 and potentially more than 134 gigawatts by 2030. Meanwhile, the Department of Energy estimates data centers could consume between 6.7% and 12% of all U.S. electricity by 2028. Global projections are even more dramatic, with data center electricity consumption potentially reaching hundreds of terawatt-hours annually as AI infrastructure expands worldwide.
Anyone who has followed my work already knows this problem was inevitable. I wrote previously that an electricity crisis was on the horizon precisely because governments were pursuing contradictory policies. They pushed electrification of everything from cars, heating systems, and industry while simultaneously shutting down reliable power generation and blocking new nuclear development. Then, suddenly, the world discovers AI requires an entirely new layer of energy infrastructure.
Even utilities are now warning that electricity demand is entering a new phase of rapid growth. After years of relatively flat consumption, U.S. power usage is expected to hit record levels in both 2026 and 2027, driven largely by AI data centers and the electrification of industry and transportation.
This is why the tech companies are suddenly pledging to build their own power sources. Local communities and utilities have begun pushing back against massive data center projects that could strain power grids and raise electricity costs for consumers. The pledge is essentially an attempt to reassure regulators and voters that the AI boom will not destabilize the energy system.
But this only highlights the deeper structural issue. Electricity infrastructure takes years or decades to build. AI demand is exploding now. The result is a growing gap between technological expansion and energy capacity. The irony is remarkable. Governments around the world spent years lecturing the public about reducing electricity consumption while simultaneously promoting industries that require exponentially more power. Artificial intelligence is not just a technological revolution, it is also an energy revolution.
If electricity supply does not expand dramatically, AI growth itself could hit a hard physical limit. The warning signs are already appearing. Tech companies are reopening nuclear plants, building dedicated power facilities, and now pledging to generate their own electricity simply to keep AI infrastructure running. When private companies begin building power plants to support their software, you know the system has reached a turning point.
Posted originally on Mar 13, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |
The push to ban firearms in the United States never really stops. It simply advances in stages. Minnesota has now produced one of the more revealing examples of how far some politicians are willing to go. Democratic lawmakers are proposing legislation that would ban many semiautomatic rifles and magazines while forcing citizens who already own them to register their firearms and submit to government inspections inside their own homes. The proposal effectively says that if you wish to keep a legally purchased firearm, the government must first be allowed to verify how you store it.
According to the legislation, gun owners would need to obtain a certificate to keep firearms that the state plans to prohibit going forward. Even more troubling is the requirement that law enforcement be permitted to inspect the owner’s residence to verify compliance with storage rules. In other words, the state is asserting the authority to enter private homes to ensure obedience to government mandates.
The constitutional problems are obvious. The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution explicitly states that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The rifles being targeted are not rare or exotic weapons; they are among the most commonly owned firearms in the country. The courts have repeatedly acknowledged that arms in common use fall within the protection of the Constitution. Attempting to ban them outright invites a direct constitutional conflict.
At the same time, the proposal collides head-on with the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. That amendment was written precisely to prevent the government from entering a citizen’s home without proper cause and a warrant. Yet Minnesota’s proposal essentially conditions the ownership of private property on allowing police access to your residence. If you refuse, you lose the right to keep the firearm. This is a remarkable inversion of the principle that government power must be limited by the Constitution rather than the other way around.
Throughout history, governments have always preferred populations that are dependent and compliant. An armed citizenry is far more difficult to control. That is why the debate is rarely just about crime. Just look at Minnesota, a state riddled with fraud against taxpayers. The attention instead falls on the law-abiding citizens who legally purchased firearms and followed every rule imposed by the government. Politicians refuse to acknowledge the problems plaguing society unless those problems personally affect their campaigns.
Laws that directly challenge the Second and Fourth Amendments will almost certainly end up in the courts. The real question is whether the Constitution still serves as a meaningful restraint on government power or whether legislators now believe they can simply rewrite those limits whenever political convenience demands it.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 