[JoeHuffmanBlog] Throwback to 2018, but the kind of people who think this way are evergreen.
I have pinned this post to the top of my blog. It is to remind people of what many of our opponents want. Alison Aires wants a tyrannical government. They want summary execution for private possession of firearms.
This is why we have a Bill of Rights. This is why I created Boomershoot.
Via a Facebook message from Kathy Jackson.
Claude Werner shared something posted by Alison Airies on Facebook (minor spelling errors corrected):
You *can* legislate culture. You just don’t have the guts to do it. Prohibition was half-assed. The war on drugs is half-assed. Let me tell you how you *actually* get guns banned.You use the fucking data that the NSA has. You check membership in gun clubs, you check the surveillance footage to see who’s a regular at shooting ranges. You check the people who are associated with the NRA. You get yourself a good long list of the people in America who love guns.
Then at random, regular intervals, you do spot checks on them. Stop-and-Frisk them in the streets, get warrants and search their houses, monitor their online activities. Conduct raids and spot checks.
And when you inevitably catch these fuckers with banned material? You don’t haul them into a cushy prison. Once the gavel comes down, you haul their asses into the town square or the main road or whatever the local equivalent is and you execute them. Make sure everyone sees. Make sure they get a good, hard look at the fate that awaits those that disobey the law.
Perform this ritual thrice a month or more for the length of a full year, and we see how many black markets people try to set up, how many Mafia members try to muscle in, with the threat of summary detention, with the threat of public execution.
And if people rebel? If people get angry and erupt into civil war? Then you put them down. I do not care if they are MAGA NRA members or poor black people trying to scrape a living. Those who violate the law have no place in civilized society.
Perform things as I lay out, and I guarantee you that America will be free of guns in a year’s time. Except you won’t because you pussies that care more about civil liberties than properly enforcing legislation.
#1
"Once the gavel comes down, you haul their asses into the town square or the main road or whatever the local equivalent is and you execute them. Make sure everyone sees. Make sure they get a good, hard look at the fate that awaits those that disobey the law".
Probably a student of the "Great Leap Forward".
#4
500M guns in the hands of Americans. Your police and a good portion of your military live among the civilian community. Don't know what world the author is living in but one of their own fantasies .
Those who violate the law have no place in civilized society.
Seems certain communities and political associated individuals get away with violating a good number of laws right now.
#6
A modificaation of Alison's project would be random checks for firearms in high crime areas and arrest of people carrying illegal guns or without permits.
Of course somwthing like that was done once upon a time but it resulted in too many blacks being arrested and was ruled unconstitutional.
Posted by: Lord Garth ||
05/04/2026 9:06 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Would she be so willing to apply her argument to abortionists?
#9
Crazy lady wants to overturn the US Constitution.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
05/04/2026 12:07 Comments ||
Top||
#10
The Left overturns the Constitution everyday.
We should play by their rules and start winning.
The thing about these ladies, and an honest truth: only their sons would defend them. They are so toxic, no one cares for them outside their peer groups. If there was an invading army, most of us would turn our back on the domestic woke rainbow commies and let them get what they deserve and advocate.
#11
"And if people rebel? If people get angry and erupt into civil war? Then you put them down"
Who does the putting down? Blue areas are essentially disarmed now except for criminals. The Red areas are the armed. I don't think it will work out too well for the blue areas. Particularly since the Red areas produce the food and energy and have the guns.
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited by Mark Leshkevich
[REGNUM] Eighty years ago, on May 3, 1946, the trial of Japan's top military and political leaders opened in Tokyo. The International Tribunal, sitting in the Ichigai Palace—the former headquarters of the Imperial Army—was called upon to determine the degree of guilt of Hitler's main allies in World War II.
There are events in 20th-century history that have become proper names. Say "Nuremberg" and it's immediately clear: the trial of Nazism, retribution for the global carnage, humanity's attempt to legally define evil as evil.
The Tokyo Trials remain in the shadows. Yet, in terms of scale, the number of victims, and the consequences for the Chinese, Soviet, and Korean peoples, as well as for the people of Southeast Asia, it was one of the key processes of the post-war world.
It was here that the mass murder of civilians in Nanjing (where more than 200,000 people died) and Manila (at least 100,000 victims), the reprisals against prisoners of war, and the violation of the rules of war were recognized as crimes against humanity.
But one of the main crimes of Hitler's allies remained "in the shadows" - outside the scope of the Tokyo Tribunal.
Evidence of the Japanese leadership's guilt began to be collected during the war—just as evidence of Nazi crimes in the occupied territories was collected for the future Nuremberg trials.
Thus, the Allies learned details of the "death march" in the Philippines. After the surrender of the American forces on the Bataan Peninsula (on the northern Philippine island of Luzon, near Manila) in April 1942, approximately 78,000 soldiers were captured by the Japanese. Most of them were wounded, sick, and exhausted.
The prisoners of war were formed into columns and forced to walk more than 100 kilometers to the place of imprisonment.
During the march, people were denied even the most basic necessities, even a sip of water. Those who became weakened or simply displeased the guards were killed on the spot. Around 18,000 prisoners never reached their destination. The United States and Great Britain, through neutral countries, warned Tokyo that the Bataan Death March would not be forgotten.
"Fighting France" warned of the future responsibility of the Japanese for crimes in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia (Indochina remained de jure a French possession). Thus, the Japanese export of food from Tonkin—Northern Vietnam—coupled with natural disasters (the consequences of which the occupiers failed to combat) triggered a famine by the spring of 1945, which claimed the lives of 2 million people.
In China, Kuomintang and Communist leaders documented the consequences of the Japanese policy of "sanko sekusen"—"three alls." This involved "pacifying" occupied territories based on the principle of "kill everything, burn everything, loot everything."
The Japanese burned the houses of those suspected of collaborating with the partisans (entire villages were set on fire) and destroyed grain and rice that they could not export.
By order of the commander of the troops in Northern China, Yasuji Okamura, the entire male population from 15 to 60 years old in the “pacified” areas was to be exterminated “on suspicion of complicity.”
Modern Japanese historian Mitsuyoshi Himeta and a number of other authors admit that “the tactics of the three ‘alls’ led to the death of 2.7 million Chinese civilians.
Japan heeded these Allied warnings. But war crimes continued even after the defeat of the Third Reich.
The entry of the USSR into the war, which destroyed the Kwantung Army in less than a month in August 1945, forced the empire to capitulate. World War II ended on September 2.
On December 6, 1945, an Allied prosecution team led by US Representative Joseph Keenan arrived in Japan.
THE TRIBUNAL IS NOT ONLY IN TOKYO
Preparations for the Tokyo Tribunal were as meticulous as those for Nuremberg. As with the Nazis, the condemnation was not limited to a single trial.
A distinctive feature of the condemnation of Japanese militarism was that war crimes trials were heard not only in Tokyo and neighboring Yokohama. Trials were held in Khabarovsk, Batavia (now Jakarta), Kuala Lumpur, Manila, Singapore, Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Nanjing.
Eleven countries participated in the investigation of the crimes. From 1945 to 1951, 920 Japanese were sentenced to death and approximately 3,000 to prison terms across the Far East.
In the capital of Japan, those considered the main architects of the war were tried: prime ministers, ministers, generals, diplomats.
THE STATE AS AN INSTRUMENT OF CRIME
In Tokyo, the main question was being decided: could political and military leaders be held personally responsible for starting the war?
Before Nuremberg and Tokyo, international law looked different. War could be considered unjust and cruel, but it long remained an instrument of state policy. In 1946, aggressive war was declared a crime for which specific individuals must be held accountable.
This position was formulated in a speech by the USSR prosecutor Sergei Golunsky:
“The state mechanism itself was transformed into an instrument of crime… This apparatus was the same weapon as a knife or a revolver in the hands of an ordinary murderer or bandit.
The only difference was that only a few would die from a knife in the hands of a bandit, whereas millions died from the monstrous instrument of crime that these people had made the Japanese state apparatus into.”
The tribunal's chief prosecutor, Joseph Keenan, said the same : "Planning and commencing the destruction of the lives of a million people is no less criminal than planning and commencing the murder of one person."
In practice, the prosecution in Tokyo, as at Nuremberg, used the categories of class A, B, and C crimes.
Class "A" meant planning, preparation, initiation, and waging of aggressive war. Class "B" concerned murder. Class "C" covered ordinary war crimes and crimes against humanity.
On April 29, 1946, Allied prosecutors indicted 28 Japanese.
Among them: Hideki Tojo, Prime Minister at the time of the attack on Pearl Harbor, Koki Hirota, former Foreign Minister and Prime Minister, Colonial Minister Shigenori Togo, military commanders Iwane Matsui and Shunroku Hata.
WHO THE US SAVED FROM RETRIBUTION
The Tokyo Trials had a flaw, particularly obvious when compared to the Nuremberg Tribunal, and it is worth remembering it even now.
At Nuremberg, responsibility was shared by the four victorious powers: the USSR, the USA, Great Britain, and France. National justice systems prevailed in the "minor trials" against Japanese militarists—in Khabarovsk, Nanjing, and Manila.
But at the main trial in Tokyo, the United States played a key role. It had single-handedly occupied Japan. Tokyo had one chief prosecutor, American Joseph Keenan, and ten assistant prosecutors from other countries. Therefore, the composition of the "defendant's dock" essentially depended on the United States.
The most egregious example of such selective justice involved Unit 731, which developed biological weapons and conducted inhumane experiments on humans. Unit commander Shiro Ishii and his henchmen received immunity from the Americans in exchange for research data.
The leaders of the zaibatsu—the monopolies that contributed to the war—were also not brought to trial. Supposedly, insufficient evidence was found against them. The head of the aggressor state, Emperor Hirohito, who was by no means a "reigning, but not ruling, monarch," also remained free.
But, as American Judge William Webb stated, "the Emperor's immunity, when compared with his role in bringing about the Pacific War, must be taken into account in determining the penalties."
Occupation commander Douglas MacArthur believed the Emperor's power should be limited (Hirohito, among other things, had declared his renunciation of divine origin), but he was certain that condemning the Mikado would lead to increased resistance in Japan. The Americans, however, needed to maintain control.
THE ARGUMENT AGAINST THE TRICK
Soviet prosecutor Golunsky, in a foreign-field situation, took an important step by emphasizing the culpability of the Japanese leadership in the long and deliberate preparation for aggression. Golunsky recalled: The Japanese Empire was the first to start the war with Russia in 1904–1905, followed by the annexation of Korea in 1910.
From the late 1920s to the early 1940s, Tokyo was already preparing for global aggression. The occupation of Manchuria in 1931, the Sino-Japanese War from 1937, the Battle of Khalkhin Gol (effectively a local war with the USSR and Mongolia) in 1939—all of this chronologically preceded World War II, but in essence constituted its first episodes.
At the same time, during the same period, from 1920 to 1939, international agreements were adopted declaring the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy. These included the Geneva Protocols of 1925 and 1929, as well as the Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928, which was signed by 63 states, including Japan.
If the war, according to these documents, was considered aggressive and unlawful, then the deaths caused by it must be considered murder. This argument was used to counter the defense's argument that the concept of aggressive war and crimes against humanity emerged only "here and now," in 1946, and could not be applied retroactively.
THE MARQUIS'S DIARY AND THE EMPEROR'S INTERROGATION
It was evidence of crimes against humanity that formed the basis of the indictments in Tokyo. Nearly 700 eyewitnesses testified to the abuse of camp prisoners and the extermination of civilians.
The world was presented with documents incriminating the Japanese army in "traditional" war crimes—violations of the rules of war. Among them was a March 1943 order from the Supreme Headquarters ordering submarine commanders to eliminate the crews of sunken ships.
An important piece of evidence was the diary of Marquis Koichi Kido, Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal, who recorded all the "secrets of the court," including the discussion of the attack on Pearl Harbor.
But the Soviet side presented "living proof"—Pu Yi, the former head of the puppet state of Manchukuo. At the Khabarovsk trial, this key witness testified that Japan's 1931 invasion of Manchuria was aimed at the political, economic, and religious subjugation of China and the preparation of aggression against the USSR.
Pu Yi was handed over to the chief prosecutor, Keenan, and the ex-emperor's testimony largely undermined his former masters. The trial lasted a long time—925 days. For comparison, Nuremberg lasted 316 days.
On November 12, 1948, the reading of the 1,000-page verdict began. It was based on the Soviet side's argument that the defendants should answer for their country's aggressive actions from the late 1920s to 1945.
All 25 defendants remaining at the time of the verdict were found guilty. Seven people, including Tojo and Hirota, received death sentences, and 16 were sentenced to life imprisonment. On December 23, 1948, the seven defendants were hanged in Sugamo Prison.
#2
John Toland's 2 volume book 'The Rising Sun' describes Hirohito as someone who did have absolute the power, but almost never used it. There was even a serious attempt by army officers to kidnap Hirohito after he ordered Japan's surrender, in an effort to continue the war. While it's been sometime since I've read the book, the prime minister and others went to Hirohito with a decision already made and Hirohito pretty much rubber stamped everything. I doubt he knew the details of what was going on, the PM & others tended to only give him news that put them in a postive light.
#4
The same Chinese who will tell you about Nanjing will also tell you about the Opium Wars. Some of those same Chinese killed more of their own people than the Japanese ever could have.
Japan was merely the latest entrant into the Great Game of Empires. Earlier contestants included Great Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, Austria, the Netherlands and, yes, Russia. Maybe shouldn't forget the Turks while we're at it, or the Americans for that matter except the Americans called their conquests states or territories instead of colonies.
When Commodore Perry first arrived in Japan, that country was a mostly rural, pastoral society divided into several shogunates. Perry made it clear to the Japanese that they could be colonized by Europeans, or Americans, just like India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Indochina, Hong Kong, Burma, Malaysia, Macau, etc. By then Japan was one of the few Asian nations that had yet to be colonized. Long before the outset of WWII, Hawaii, Guam and the Philippines had become American territories.
So the Japanese established a centralized government by giving power to the emperor. They modernized, industrialized, militarized and established their own empire. What crimes did they commit that all those other imperial powers did not?
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
05/04/2026 12:59 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Some of those same Chinese killed more of their own people than the Japanese ever could have.
The Chinese thought they were culturally superior and the European were unwashed barbarians. The Japanese came to the realization that it was the European institutions. They sent 'teams' out to get the technology and methodologies. They divided up their institutions by clans with the first taking the army, the second the navy, and others to banking, railroads, and industries. Yes, they did follow the pattern of the Europeans.
#2
Firmly ensconced behind enemy lines in the OC. As Limbaugh would say - the only shortage we have is hand baskets. No predictions on the Gov race other than it won't be a Republican. LA is a cesspool, they're going full bore on the Train to Nowhere, and the state's finances are in deep doo doo. But hey - we have the 4th largest economy in the world don't cha know!
Posted by: Bangkok Billy ||
05/04/2026 11:08 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Billy: Glad we both knew Mac. I lost track of him when he married that gal from DIA.
[AT] The implications of the Supreme Court's Louisiana v. Callais overturning race-based voting districts are far more profound and far-reaching than anyone has yet realized.
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/04/2026 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1765 views]
Top|| File under: Tin Hat Dictators, Presidents for Life, & Kleptocrats
#1
The Dems will gerrymander on non-racial lines and achieve the same result. It will be like the DEI office at all the universities. Those people did not go away, nor did the policies.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
05/04/2026 6:04 Comments ||
Top||
#2
While we still have him, we should all take a moment to appreciate Justice Thomas. He's done as much for the Republic as anyone in our lifetimes.
Posted by: Matt ||
05/04/2026 9:48 Comments ||
Top||
Pod Save America's Jon Favreau grilled DNC Chair Ken Martin on why he won't release the DNC autopsy report. Cenk Uygur and Ryan Grim discuss on The Young Turks
Note: Videos unless showing bullets flying should go to opinion
Posted by: Unerert Jiper3466 ||
05/04/2026 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1771 views]
Top|| File under: Tin Hat Dictators, Presidents for Life,
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
A video that covers the major causes of the problems for California in a left-handed way.
