We explore real-life reformation here in this informed, online community.
From the time of Alfred the Great in the 9th Century, the good kings of England made sure that every male citizen was armed with personal, military grade weaponry: weapons for offense, and personal armor for personal protection.
Wicked and tyrannical Kings like John (13th Century) fell down in their duties “to inspect every citizen twice a year” to ensure that each possessed military arms. In 1215, a group of armed citizens forced him to sign an agreement that he would resume these and other duties. Essential words and meaning of this “Magna Carta” said,
“Know that before God, for the health of our soul and those of our ancestors and heirs, to the honour of God,” you will not be a tyrant, and we who are armed will hold you to this agreement you are signing this day.
Today the citizens of the British Isles are disarmed. This happened slowly, by incremental acts of administrative law and other arbitrary rules. The bureaucratic government even forced the late Queen Elizabeth II to surrender her personal collection of family guns.
This later in May, her son will be crowned King Charles III. Will the nation hold him accountable to rebuild an armed citizenry? Or are the men of that nation now so domesticated, weak, passive and ignorant that they will continue to follow the script written by the petty-tyrants in government? What in the world will citizens mean when they chant, “God Save King Charles?”
https://static.independent.co.uk/2022/10/09/09/newFile.jpg?width=1200
...are beginning to speak up and point out how invasion immigration is killing Britain. This is how the government responds:
'First, that it isn’t happening, that what you are seeing with your eyes you are not seeing; second, that it is happening but it is good for you; third, that it may not be good for you but you deserve it; and finally—it doesn’t matter, because it’s going to happen anyway.'
This is why the new Reform Party is leading in the polls.
Can we avoid entangling foreign alliances?
“A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification.”
--- George Washington, Farewell Address.
Mark Sheboda concludes,
"The US/Israel realized:
that their regime change plans were not coming to fruition,
that the Iranian govt had more support and stronger foundations than they had believed,
that Israeli air defense was collapsing/exhausted and
that an attrition war of long range strike was going to go badly for Israel.
And Trump began to get freaked out over the rising price of oil with the Iranian threat of closing the strait of Hormuz.
So they wrapped it up, declared victory, and demanded a ceasefire.
Iran agreed because they too have been badly shaken through Israeli covert warfare and their own air defense all but collapsed.
The can will only be kicked down the road, and both sides will start rebuilding, and making preparations and plans for the next round, the next war. This was only a skirmish at the end of the day ..."
