Categories » ‘Treason’
May 22nd, 2013 by olddog
By Dave Hodges
Bakersfield, CA resident, David Silva, was executed for being drunk in his own home. He was executed by the Kern County Sheriff’s Department. What happened to Silva was clearly an abuse of power but is representative of what the federal government has in store for all of America in which the people are the enemy of law enforcement and will be treated accordingly.
The Tenth Amendment provides for the division of power and law enforcement between the federal, state and local governments.
Unfortunately, The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is changing the face of local law enforcement.
DHS’ Original Mission
In the aftermath of 9/11, DHS was created to protect the “Homeland” from further terror attacks from foreign-born terrorists. DHS kept us safe at the airports by goosing granny. They also protected us from the trauma of natural disasters through the use of FEMA, with such stellar performances like the one in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina. And of course, FEMA has been instrumental in creating a multitude of so-called FEMA Camps which they say are to house a sudden influx of illegal aliens. Newsflash, there are 30 million illegal aliens here, you might want to roll back the covers and keep the soup warm. Of course, the camps are not for the illegal’s, they are for the citizens of this country who are deemed to be a threat to the rollout of martial law. Meanwhile, the real terrorists, al-Qaeda are being funded by the CIA in places like Libya and Syria.
DHS’ Real Mission
Meanwhile, back in reality, DHS was only created to pretend to thwart a foreign terror threat. The real reason that DHS has been created is now becoming obvious to all. With the advent of the MIAC Report which listed gun owners, Second Amendment supporters, Ron Paul supporters, Libertarians, Constitutionalists, Veterans and Christians as “domestic terrorists.” This was the real reason why DHS was created.
Recently, DHS sponsored a self-study entitled, "Homeland Security and Intelligence: Next Steps in Evolving the Mission", in which DHS proclaims that they are no longer concerned with foreign-inspired terrorism. They are only going to focus on domestic terrorism, ostensibly, against the American people. Does the DHS purchase of 2.2 billion rounds of info, the acquisition of 2700 armored personnel carriers and the beta test of martial law in Boston last April begin to make any sense?
Obfuscation of DHS’ Original Charter
Incredibly, DHS says that other agencies can deal with what once was the omnipresent and all-encompassing threat of terrorism that was initially used to justify DHS’s creation, powers and huge budget. The report went on to say that
There are enough agencies pursuing the terrorist adversary to allow DHS to build a new analytic foundation that emphasizes data, analytic questions, and customer groups that are not the focus for other agencies…
Subsequently, the real purpose behind the creation of this domestic East German Stasi secret police was to monitor and control the American population. Unfortunately, DHS has shared its high-tech toys with most local police departments and Sheriffs Departments and has, as a result, co-opted their local function. In other words, the federalization of local police forces, in violation of the 10th Amendment, is well underway. The early returns on this process are in and the results are extremely ugly.
The DHS trains police that Christians and Libertarians want to kill them as do the returning veterans. The DHS is training local law enforcement that the people are their enemy. DHS has even gone so far to use pregnant women, old people and children as cutout targets for their drills. In short, they are being trained to attack America. Local law enforcement are being trained to use deadly force, even when its use is not warranted, against average Americans.
Salt Lake City: The Federalization of Our Police
Under the creation of the Unified Police Department (UPD) in Salt Lake City, Utah local jurisdictions and municipalities which were previously controlled by the Salt Lake County Sheriff’s Office were reallocated to UPD. The UPD is a regional police force. They answer to no mayor, no city council and no county commissioners. The UPD is Salt Lake City’s new police department and serves as the model for the program which is being implemented in other police departments across the nation.
It is clear that the police departments are being trained as the local enforcers of the coming martial law and they also being trained to use horrific brutality.
The Murder of David Silva by the Kern County Sheriff’s Department
There is a new gang in Bakersfield, CA. No, it is not the Bloods, the Crips nor is it the Zetas. The new gang in town is the Bakersfield Sheriff’s Department, as they did their best imitation last week as eight Deputies beat an unarmed David Silva to death while he was lying prone on the ground. Silva’s crime was that he was drunk in his own home.
Six sheriff’s deputies and the sergeant involved in last week’s incident were placed on paid administrative leave, primarily for their own safety due to several email threats which have been sent to the department.
All of the non-cop witnesses are saying that Silva didn’t resist and the cops just murdered him. That, and the fact the cops confiscated the better videos from local citizens.
Here is what the witnesses are saying about the murder of innocent civilian, David Silva.
Film Cops and Get Life In Prison
Michael Allison, recorded police officers on duty in his front yard inspecting vehicles he was repairing. The police cited Allison for failing to properly register his vehicles, and so he requested an ordinance review hearing. Allison now faces five felony counts, with each count carrying a penalty for 15 years in prison. For videotaping police and a court proceeding, Allison faces an unbelievable total of 75 years, or the rest of his life in prison under Illinois new eavesdropping statutes.
Any Reason to Practice DHS Style Police Brutality
Look at the out-of-control stampede herd of thugs belonging to the NYPD at the 135th Street subway station when Clive Utter allegedly jumped the turnstile. Utter was slammed into the wall, dropped onto the floor and cuffed by a mob of at least 25 officers.
A bystander exercising his constitutionally protected right to film this act of police brutality was forced out to the street and was manhandled in the process. Utter was charged with resisting arrest, criminal trespass, theft of service, and criminal possession of a controlled substance. Can you imagine what would have happened to him if he pick-pocketed a wallet or snatched a purse? Utter, like Silva, would likely be in the morgue.
What’s Next? Rendition Centers for Jaywalkers?
America, we are living in unparalleled times. With the portion of the country awaiting a barrage of false flag attacks and the rollout of martial law, to be followed by war with Russia over Syria and Iran, these are uneasy times. If we had any hope that our police would defend the people from federal tyranny in the coming days and months, think again. The people are almost out of options, and options are something I will discuss in the next article.
RELATED ACTIVIST POST ARTICLES:
Justice for David Silva, Father Beaten to Death by 9 Sheriffs
The Ultimate Betrayal: Police and Military Working Together to Oppress Americans
Dave is an award winning psychology, statistics and research professor, a college basketball coach, a mental health counselor, a political activist and writer who has published dozens of editorials and articles in several publications such as Freedoms Phoenix, News With Views and The Arizona Republic.
May 15th, 2013 by olddog
12 May 2013 Initiate the orders of We THE People
We THE People who are the Civilian Authority with superior lawfull position over the U.S. Corporation and U.S. Military acting under the Original Jurisdiction of the United States Constitution 1789, Bill of Rights 1791 with the original 13th Amendment=”which removes persons who has an entitlement from holding public office” as the United States of America, Republican form of Government, standing as the true form of Government is proud to announce the following effective IMMEDIATELY.:
As Interim President=Commander in Chief of the Republic it is the duty of this de jure office to ensure the orders issued to the United States Military , Secretary of the Treasury, Provost Marshall and its Public Servants are carried out within the proper time as required by We THE People of The United States of America.
This announcement is for We THE People of the United States of America and our Friends World Wide and
To Chief of Staff of Joint Chiefs, Field Generals, Admirals, Office of General Council for Pentagon, Secretary of the Navy, Trustees of the Constitution and Office of the Inspector General, Provost Marshal, Flag Officers and Secretary of the People's Treasury;>asury Mr.
This announcement and order is to the Secretary of the Peoples Treasury Mr. Jack Lew, the Flag Officers assigned to The Secretary of the Treasury Mr. Jack Lew and the Provost Marshall,
You are hereby ordered to use any force including EXTREME PREJUDICE toward any and all public officers including any and all people in the U.S. Corporation=Internal Governmental Departments=Agencies, Individual Corporations=Organizations, and any other Entity=sentient beings WHOM are delaying=derailing= holding up=stopping any other delaying manipulation tactic on the execution of the following announcements and orders:
1. The Flag Officers assigned to The Secretary of the Peoples Treasury Mr. Jack Lew and Provost Marshall is ordered to commandeer all main stream television and radio broadcasting companies and start the announcements that have been prerecorded to inform the Nation:
a. The Republic being re-set, shutdown of the US Corporation (founded in 1871),
b. The shutdown of the Federal Reserve (99 Year Contract Ended),
ii. The collector of this debt shall look to and upon US Corporation and its CEO / Presidents, their staff including Legislative and Judicial holders plus the Executives of the Federal Reverse to repay ALL DEBT from their;; color:#0070C0">
ii. The collector of this debt shall look to and upon US Corporation and its CEO / Presidents, their staff including Legislative and Judicial holders plus the Executives of the Federal Reverse to repay ALL DEBT from their wealth which they stole from the We THE People
c. The shutdown of the Internal Revenue Service=IRS (taxation was repealed by Congress in 1939 and has been in operation fraudulently and while working for foreign agents it has fraudulently told the American people that is a department of the Treasury)
d. To Immediately begin broadcasting the educational=truth of this nation's true history
2. The Secretary of the Peoples Treasury Mr. Jack Lew is established and operating under the Republican form of Government as the true Treasury
3. The Secretary of the Peoples Treasury Mr. Jack Lew will
a. Conduct a forensic audit of the IRS, freeze all assets, shut down all IRS operations and return all stolen funds to We THE People of The United States of America by depositing the returned funds in the Peoples United States Treasury.
b. All bankruptcies of the United States to date are terminated.
c. All debt tied to the social security numbers shall be set to zero.
i. Due to corrupt and unlawful banking practices and corrupt and unlawful government activities ALL injured parties shall be notified immediately following these actions and public announcements on all major media outlets shall commence immediately.
d. Remove=Terminate all unlawful taxation on all privately held property=land=labor.
e. Remove=Terminate all private personal income tax and private business taxation.
f. The return all government agencies CAFR=off book accounts and all court CRIS account funds to the Peoples United States Treasury.
i. CAFR=Consolidated Annual Financial Report
ii. CRIS=Court Registry Investment System
g. Restore financial privacy to all private sentient beings.
h. Introduce the United States Treasury currency (UST) backed by Gold and other Precise metals replacing the Federal Reserve Note effective IMMEDIATELY.
i. Release the 1.5 Trillion dollars of the Wanta-Regan-Mitterrand Protocols into the United States Treasury for We THE People
j. Announce the largest banks in United Sates of America are now Basel 3 Banking Regulations complaint along with several hundred mid-size banking institutions.
i. Basel 3 – A comprehensive set of reform measures designed to improve the regulation, supervision and risk management within the banking sector.
ii. Basel 3 – Largely in response to the credit crisis, banks are required to maintain proper leverage ratios and meet certain capital requirements protecting the end customer.
4. The “Fines & Penalties”, Foreign Currency Revaluation, Prosperity Packages, the Global Settlements Program, Prosperity Packages, Native American Claims, Humanitarian funds are to be paid out simultaneously effective IMMEDIATELY.
5. The Secretary of the Peoples Treasury Mr. Jack Lew will oversee the delivery Sunday 12 May 2013 to all recipients of the Farm Claims=Fines and Penalties=Farm Claims Class Action Law Suit Settlement=Bank Claims=Resolution Trust proceeds to the people;
a. The Farm Claims shall be moved to the Royal Bank of Canada for complete delivery=disbursement effective IMMEDIATELY.
b. The Farm Claims Lawsuit shall be unsealed and made part of the public record with=by publication, posting on the internet which is freely accessible to the public at large and=or full disclosure to all claim participants. The executive order that has kept this information hidden was done with the intent to defraud the people and has delayed the execution and delivery of the settlement.
c. These claims shall be delivered using any of the following methods of delivery or all of them together; National Guard, County Sheriffs, Bonded Couriers, Registered Mail, and the Organized and Unorganized State Militias.
d. There shall be NO taxation, NO fees, NO NDAs, NO hidden=misleading language, NO terms or condition or forms that create a contract causing loss of value through BANK FRAUD=MANIPULATION against the private citizen's.
6. The Secretary of the Peoples Treasury Mr. Jack Lew shall conduct the release of the foreign currency exchange to all tier three foreign currency holders known as the "U.S. Treasury Hold" on the participating banks Sunday 12 May 2013 and
a. To communicate on all main stream media channels that the global re-set has occurred every hour for the next seventy- two (72) hours.
b. All banks are to make the hours of operation from 07:00 AM to 24:00 PM daily for the next ninety (90) days.
c. All tier three foreign currency holders shall be given VIP=Group rates with NO taxation, NO fees, NO NDAs, NO hidden=misleading language, NO terms or condition or forms that create a contract causing loss of value through BANK FRAUD=MANIPULATION against the private citizen's when they exchange their currency.
7.The Secretary of the Peoples Treasury Mr. Jack Lew will release the Global Settlements Program, Prosperity Packages, Native American Claims, and all other programs and claims of a similar nature on 12 May 2013.
It is Ordered, sentenced, and decreed by the Political Will of the People~
The United States of America
Reference: Contempt of the Constitution, Declaration of Independence circa 1776 and 2012, Orders #1-10
Whoever authored this article must have testicles the size of planets!
LORD GOD! IF ONLY IT WERE TRUE.
No doubt you will have read or heard about the U.S.A. being a corporation that usurped the Constitution many years ago. In fact you may have read about it on my two sites, but ! Considering the method of establishing a countries freedom or enslavement to another power by an act of war, all America needs is for our existing military to get off their ass and re-establish our organic Constitution as the real and only rule of law by conquest of the existing powers that be. Namely, the international banking cartel, and it’s various corporations. Then, hold a military tribunal and hang the existing tyrants. Perhaps they are too afraid of the bankers, but my guess is the People would rise up and protect them forever. They would become a new level of hero’s. The person who wrote the article above is no dummy, and what he/she outlined is entirely possible, if our military had the same amount of guts as the writer. Why not forward the article to a few generals and see. Every military man wants to be a hero.
May 15th, 2013 by olddog
By Dave Hodges
In Article II, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution states, “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
The U.S. House of Representatives has the power to commence impeachment proceedings. If the House adopts an impeachment resolution, the U.S. Senate conducts a trial and determines whether to convict or acquit. If an official is convicted, he or she is removed from the position and may be barred from holding office again. The official may also face criminalprosecution.
Obama Is Ineligible to Hold the Office of the Presidency
Investigators for an Arizona sheriff’s volunteer posse, under the command of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, previously declared that President Barack Obama‘s birth certificate is definitely fraudulent. In short, Obama should never have been permitted to run for the highest office in the land.
Regardless if Obama’s conduct is warrants impeachment and conviction, he should never have been allowed to run for the presidency and the allegations against him should be a moot point with regard to his potential impeachment.
Crimes Against Humanity
Only two American presidents have been impeached by the House of Representatives and they were Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. The Senate failed to convict both presidents. A third President, Richard Nixon, resigned over the Watergate scandal before the House of Representatives had voted on his impeachment.
If Clinton was subsequently impeached by the House for lying about his affair with Monica Lewinsky. However, the Lewinsky affair was a smokescreen as Obama committed war crimes through his bombing of Afghanistan and Iraq.
In the following video, Ron Paul, in 1998, made the case for impeaching Bill Clinton for gross violations of the Constitution and committing war crimes by bombing Iraq without congressional approval. Ralph Nader weighs in with a stunning indictment of Obama’s criminality.
Obama’s reckless and criminal actions have led to the slaughter of countless numbers of civilians in Afghanistan.
Despite claims to the contrary which stated that the Obama commanded forces which only deployed U.S. drones exclusively against known senior leaders of al Qaeda and their allies, the Obama administration has targeted and killed hundreds of suspected lower-level Afghan, Pakistani and unidentified “other” militants in scores of strikes in Pakistan’s according to classified U.S. intelligence reports show.
According to McClatchy’s review of drone strikes and found that theObama administration, in 43 of 95 studied drone strikes, hit groups other than al Qaeda.
Obama has not only brought discredit to the reputation of the United States, Obama has proven himself to be a war criminal and should not only be impeached, but should be brought to justice by an international tribunal along with fellow war criminal George W. Bush.
Obama has illegally participated in the overthrow of the sovereign government of Libya without a declaration of war from Congress. In the process Libyan “rebels” toppled Gadaffi. We now know that in the process of arming the rebels, Obama was actually arming al-Qaeda. And history is repeating itself in Syria as Obama, again, is arming al-Qaeda in an attempt to topple Assad of Syria.
If we do indeed hold al-Qaeda responsible for 9/11, as a government, isn’t the arming of al-Qaeda an act of treason because he is overtly providing aid and comfort to the enemy? President Obama is guilty of treason which is a high crime under the Constitution.
The Murder of Chris Stevens
Obama was warned in advance of the coming attack in which Stevens begged for more protection and his impassioned pleas were denied by Clinton. Clinton is unquestionably dirty in the death of Ambassador Stevens. However, the buck stops with Obama. He likely gave the stand down order, but he certainly must take responsibility for Clinton’s multiple refusals to protect an Ambassador.
As Stevens was begging for help after the attack had begun, AFRICOM Commander, General Hamm, had activated a special forces team within minutes of learning that the embassy, which was really a CIA safe house, was under attack. On the orders of the White House, Hamm was arrested and relieved of command and the rescue mission was cancelled.
We now know from the Hicks testimony, that there were weaponized drones flying overhead which could have stopped the attack on the compound. This means that there were three separate ways that Stevens could have been saved and Obama’s Murder Inc. blocked all potential rescue attempts
Obama later claimed that there was not time to launch a rescue mission. This is a blatant lie because if a drone can reach the scene and video the events, fighter planes could also have reached the scene and intervened and then this could have been followed up by a rapid deployment force trained in rescue.
Execution of American Citizens Without Due Process of Law
Since 2009, Obama’s minions, through aerial assaults also have killed three U.S. citizens as well as countless of innocent civilians in both Pakistan and Afghanistan. Obama’s actions begs the question as to whether the president has the right to order the death of Americans without due process of law. Attorney General, Eric Holder, has stated that does but would not do so. The intent behind Holder’s proclamation is self-evident.
One of those controversial and well publicized drone attacks involved the killing of Anwar al-Awalki. He was an American citizen and, at the same time, a radical Muslim cleric who had relocated his family to Yemen. He was rumored to be involved in repeated attempts to attack the U.S., including the Christmas day underwear bomber plot in 2009 that would have blown up a passenger jet over Detroit. The murder of Anwar al-Awalki was committed without any due process of law.
Also killed as the result of a drone attack was American citizen, Samir Khan. He was the editor of “Inspire,” an alleged al Qaeda ‘s online magazine. Kahn was never accused of participating in, or being involved with the planning of any terrorist activity. And since when has it been a criminal offense to be involved in al Qaeda, since we used their assets to attack Libya and have involved members of this organization in trying overthrow Syria’s Assad.
Two weeks later, after the death of his father, in a separate drone attack, al-Awalki’s 16-year-old son, who was born in Denver was also murdered by a drone. If these three individuals were involved in terrorist activity, then they should have been arrested and tried for their crimes. Instead, our communist-in-chief, decides on his own authority to murder these three Americans without any due process of law.
Obama’s actions in these three cases brings to a total of four murders that we know that Obama had carried out at his behest. In a Republic, it is unacceptable to continue to allow such a murderous despot continue to run this country.
I maintain that if Obama is only guilty of one of the aforementioned allegations, he should be impeached, convicted and immediately removed from office. He, in fact, is guilty of all charges set forth here. The fate of the Republic hinges on Obama’s impeachment and conviction.
It is highly probable that Obama is directly responsible for the murder of Chris Stevens, yet nobody in Congress has the intestinal fortitude to thoroughly investigate. In fact, John McCain has already said that he will not back impeachment against Obama. The Republicans will only push so far because they do not want their own skeletons to be exposed. Case in point has to do with the Fast and Furious that Obama got caught in terms of running guns into Mexico so they could blame the Second Amendment. Republican Issa was hot on Holder’s trail until he found that Fast and Furious was originated under George W. Bush and that was the end of the investigation. We cannot let the Benghazi scandal to suffer the same fate as Fast and Furious.
This is most likely a case of first degree murder. At minimum, Obama is obviously guilty of gross misconduct, malfeasance and criminally negligent homicide. Not only should Obama be impeached and convicted, he should criminally convicted and sentenced to prison.
May 9th, 2013 by olddog
By: Jim R. Schwiesow email@example.com
THE WAY OF THE FORMER ROMAN EMPIRE IS THE WAY OF THE UNITED STATES
The United States could correctly be likened to a huge glacier that has – through the years of its being – run a broad and seemingly non interruptible course through the world panorama, a course that emphasized its power and magnificence and illumined a connected series of divinely enhanced events, actions and developments throughout its diachronic existence. Unfortunately there has also been concomitantly a broad and morality dissipating U.S. national progression that has extraordinarily eroded its base and shorn from it the last steadying vestiges of the anchoring social and spiritual appendages that brought it into being and helped greatly to steady the journey and to stabilize the course of the whole of the mass.
The United States now rests on the precipice of last hope, overlooking a sheer chasm of despair, and struggles frantically to hang on to the last vestiges of promise as it struggles against a nation of a collectively polluted morality and clings to a now mostly vanished – and neigh onto impossible to recover – given the apostasy that is upon it – promise of its former glory and greatness. With a will born of desperation the people and their political leaders cling to a grudging hold on the nation’s former glory. Like that glacier previously mentioned this nation is slipping from that last desperate grip and is poised for a final slide into the boiling brine that will forever dissolve its greatness and dissipate into nothingness the residuals of its former glory and magnificence.
It will be an ignoble end to a greatly noble dream. As with Jericho, God has set into motion the cadence of that final march around the borders of this nation that will precipitate the collapse and eternal extinction of what was arguably the greatest nation to ever exist on this earth. The nation runs wobbly on, but its continuance is mostly fueled by the illustriousness of its previous existence and glory, in other words an inertia born of God’s divinely and blessedly bestowed gift of magnificence and prominence.
SECULAR HUMANISM – A BLUEPRINT FOR DISASTER
The soul of the sluggard craves and gets nothing, while the soul of the diligent is richly supplied. Proverbs 13:4
For we hear that some among you walk in idleness, not busy at work, but busybodies. Now such persons we command and encourage in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work quietly and to earn their own living. 2 Thessalonians 3:11-12
Rise up, you women who are at ease, hear my voice; you complacent daughters, give ear to my speech. In little more than a year you will shudder, you complacent women; for the grape harvest fails, the fruit harvest will not come. Tremble, you women who are at ease, shudder, you complacent ones; strip, and make yourselves bare, and tie sackcloth around your waist. Beat your breasts for the pleasant fields, for the fruitful vine, for the soil of my people growing up in thorns and briers, yes, for all the joyous houses in the exultant city… Isaiah 32:9-20
Upon close inspection intelligent thinking people ought to be able to discern the source of the liberal/progressive ideology, it is an ideology spawned by the demonic realm under the auspices of that dragon of old Satan, and it has been diligently pursued by our exceedingly ignorant politicians as a birthright and as a cradle to grave doctrine emphasizing a person's supposed innate capacity for self-realization. This though none can exist or prosper without the staying hand of God…None!
Man was created in the image of God. God hates sloth and feigned whining helplessness; He has equipped mankind with the tools to make His world one of worth and great dignity. Satan, who looks upon men as usurpers of what he believes to be rightfully his despises mankind and continually endeavors to eliminate the whole of mankind from God’s creation. In the United States he has made great headway in this quest…thanks to the liberal/progressive community, particularly the satanically endowed Elite and the collective of spiritually deprived politicians who carry out the debilitating programs hatched in the mind of Satan, the greatest criminal in the Universe.
CORRUPTING THE YOUTH
Our youths – those who were fortunate to escape the butchering hands of the filthy abortionists, and from equally despicable mothers who deliver them up as sacrifices to the idols of worldly and temporal desires, are increasingly being abandoned by non nurturing parents to the inducements of progressively promoted socially destructive pursuits.
These young people enter communities as dominates of the political and social secular humanists who immerse them into the nasty and debilitating vices promoted by the now dominant corporate elite that fancies itself, as a whole, as our social authoritarian motivator.
These unfortunate young people are enrolled into public schools and indoctrinated, Kindergarten through College, in the corrupting values of these same conscientious less and irreverent liberalists; they learn to live on the dole and expect that the necessities and luxuries of life will be handed them on a Silver platter by an ever increasingly indebted society.
They are possessors of totally worthless liberal arts degrees paid for by the taxpayers, and must after graduation live either on their parents or on the welfare dole. They have learned nothing in regard to useful trades and believe that the world owes them a living and a cushy life at the expense of the hard- working industrious souls that pay exorbitant taxes to support this collective of pampered lifetime drags on society.
GROUPING THE FACTIONS
Ours is a bifurcated society, and it is divided thusly:
The first group is comprised of the hard- working industrious souls that pay exorbitant taxes to support a rapidly burgeoning collective of pampered lifetime drags on society, this group – spoken of earlier – are re rapidly dwindling and since they are the life’s blood of society, when they have become extinct through the stupidity of the progressives of the political domain, this nation will collapse and become non-consequential on the world scene.
Next we have the totally worthless eaters, too damn lazy to work and provide for themselves or families, but not too proud to ease their shiftless carcasses down to the welfare offices to dip into the appropriated assets that have been stolen and accumulated by government entities for distribution to the pokes who have no pride or worth.
The third group is comprised of those who believe themselves to be elites bestowed with the wisdom to order the rest of society to comply with their every wish and desire in regards to social duties and responsibilities. These have attained their status by happenstances of life and in most cases have accumulated obscene wealth; a wealth that they believe affords them an exalted place in society and places upon them in a responsibility to create the rules that govern the entirety of the people whom they believe to be inferior and undeserving.
PAYING THE PRICE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER
God holds all governments and the peoples of the Nations morally accountable for their actions. Evil and wrong will be punished; and by His will societies adhering to moral principles pronounced by His commandments will be honored and recompensed. Goodness and righteousness will ultimately prevail over evil, and we reap, by God’s power, the profits, good or bad, of that which we have sown. National morality will, in the end, profit the obedient, the moral choices we make in this life are infused with an eternal significance. This nation must change course, lest it be swallowed by the roiling tide heretofore described.
The slaughter and sacrifice of innocent babies to worldly lusts must cease, sodomy must not be either condoned or promoted, unlawful expropriation of personal chattel by the government, thievery by business interests and service providers must be eradicated, and the denigration of Biblical truth and of the living God must cease. If this nation is to survive, God’s laws must be enforced and obeyed. If the Ten Commandments are not honored, we can kiss this nation goodbye.
Repentance is in order and it must be immediately forthcoming. This nation will either live by the Word of God, or it will die by the will of God.
NOW YOU KNOW WHO SHOULD BE OUR NEXT PRESIDENT!
Jim R. Schwiesow
Send him a thank you for his beautiful use of God’s most powerful force.
May 6th, 2013 by olddog
If there is hope, you are it. You are motivated to find truth. You can think outside the box. You can see through propaganda. You are the remnant with the common sense that once was a common American virtue. You come to this site, because you get explanations that are not agenda-driven, that are not BS, that are not right-wing or left-wing, conservative or liberal, Republican or Democrat. You get explanations based on my lifetime of unique education and experience. Some of you are young enough to be equipped with the energy and courage to organize whatever resistance there may be to the Gestapo State that is descending on the United States of America. This is your site. Support it.
Until the George W. Bush Regime, I never thought that it could happen here. I could not imagine law professors and Department of Justice (sic) officials writing legal memos justifying, in the name of a hyped “war on terror,” the termination of civil rights for United States Citizens. We were the land of the free. The Constitution was our bedrock. Yet, the Constitution and Bill of Rights were easily taken away from the inattentive American people.
The Constitution did not protect native inhabitants and slaves who were not considered part of the American population, but the universal suppression in the US of non-whites’ rights produced in the end the civil rights movement that brought moral awareness of the wrongs and successfully hitched its cause to the founding documents of the country.
Where today is moral awareness as Washington bombs civilian populations around the globe? Where is the moral conscience of the the civil rights movement as the First Black President, the first member of the oppressed class to sit in the Oval Office, validates the Bush Regime’s assertion of the right of the unaccountable executive to ignore habeas corpus and due process? Not satisfied with this crime, Obama asserted the right of the executive branch to murder any citizen suspected, without proof being offered to a court, of undefined “support of terrorism.” Today all Americans have fewer rights than blacks had prior to the Civil Rights Act.
Anything, including a column critical of war and the police state, can be declared to be “in support of terrorism.” As the tyrant Bush put it: “You are with us, or you are against us.”
The print and TV media and many Internet sites got the message: Serve Washington’s agenda, and will you will prosper. Advertisers and the CIA will pump money into your coffers. Challenge us and you will be demonized and could face a military tribunal, indefinite detention, or assassination. Bradley Manning and Julian Assange are being persecuted for telling the truth.
So far, Washington has convinced the public that Washington’s terror is mainly limited to Muslims, who are obligingly demonized by print, TV, and much of the Internet media. However, if Muslim American citizens lack civil liberty, so do all other American citizens. Those who are safe are those who ally with the tyrant and remain subservient.
To ally with the tyrant, a United States citizen must have no moral conscience, no sense of justice, no compassion for the innocent and dispossessed. These are the worst kind of Americans; yet, they are the only ones who can succeed in the present environment.
Every time I write a column that is the truth or the truth as I am able to discover it, instead of hawking the propaganda line, I move up on the list of those who are persona non grata in the Empire.
A writer can find himself demonized and declared a kook simply by reporting findings from distinguished scientists, high-rise architects, structural engineers, first responders, and an international collection of high government officials. Not too long ago a writer or reporter for the Huffington Post discovered to his surprise that Pat Buchanan and I disagreed with all the wars that had been launched to protect us from terrorism. He asked me for an interview, and I agreed.
An hour or so after the interview was posted on the Huffington Post, I received an emergency call or email. He had been criticized for interviewing me, “for giving you a forum when you are a 9/11 sceptic.” He was unsure that it was possible for a Reagan presidential appointee to be a 9/11 sceptic and asked if I was.
I replied that I had reported the findings of scientists, architects, engineers, and the public testimony of first responders, because I thought these were qualified people whose opinions at least ranked equally with the politicians on the 9/11 Commission and the talking heads on Fox “News” and CNN, none of whom could pass a high school test in the laws of physics, much less high-rise architecture and structural engineering.
The Huffington Post writer panicked. Instead of taking down the interview, he felt impelled to assure readers and his boss that he had been deceived. He wrote at the beginning and ending of the interview that he did not know he was interviewing someone about the Iraq War who had given ink to those conspiracy theorists who raised questions about the truthfulness of the US government. He wrote that my views on the wars should be disregarded, because I wrote that scientists, architects, engineers, and first responders provided evidence contrary to the government’s claims.
And there you have it.
The Huffington Post has far more readers than I do, and far more money. There is no limit on the ability of the Huffington Post to tell and sell the lies of the Agenda.
I can remember when I was a Wall Street Journal editor and columnist, a Business Week columnist, a Scripps Howard News Service columnist and appeared regularly in the major mainstream print media and even from time to time on TV talking head programs. Today, the editor or producer who gave me a forum would be fired instantly, and they all know it.
It is discouraging that after so many transparent lies and orchestrations–weapons of mass destruction, al-Qaeda connections, Iranian nukes–the majority of Americans still believe the government. Americans are even buying into the line that Syria is ruled by a brutal dictator whose overthrow justifies Washington’s alliance with its 9/11 enemy, al-Qaeda, in order to overthrow a secular ruler who constrains al-Qaeda.
Washington has come full circle. Its enemy is now its ally. Washington wasted trillions of dollars and countless lives in eleven years of war and constructed a domestic police state all in order to combat al Qaeda with whom Washington is now allied against the Syrian government.
The public’s response to the Boston Marathon Bombing is even more discouraging. Not even King George and his Redcoats could achieve what Homeland Security just pulled off–locking down 100 square miles of Boston and its suburbs with heavily armed troops tramping through citizens’ homes barking harsh orders, all justified by a hunt for one 19-year old suspect. It was the Third Reich’s Gestapo in operation right here in “freedom and democracy” America. Ron Paul is correct that the suspension of civil liberty is a greater threat than the bombing. Note the government’s euphemism for martial law–”shelter-in-place.”
Two brothers have been convicted in the media and by the Obama Regime, including the president’s own words, of a bombing without the public ever being presented with any evidence except anonymous unattributed reports and a film of the alleged brothers walking with backpacks, which were ubiquitous.
I am old enough to remember when it was impermissible for government and media to convict a person prior to the jury’s verdict. Americans once lived in a free country governed by the rule of law in which a person was innocent until proven guilty.
What was the reason or evidence for naming the brothers suspects? Was any reason given, or was the film of the two walking with backpacks simply shown over and over, hour after hour, day after day, with the media reporting that these are the suspects. In other words, was it beat into your brain that they were suspects because there they are in the film? If not, why was the same film shown repeatedly? Fox “News” was still showing the film on April 26, eleven days after the bombing and might still be showing it. Did you experience: “Here are the suspects. See them. They have backpacks. See. We know that they are suspects, because, see, there they are.”
When is the last time the media investigated anything? A good candidate for investigation is the post-bombing rampage the brothers allegedly went on, robbing a 7/11 store (later contradicted by local police), killing a campus policeman, shooting a transit cop, high-jacking a SUV and releasing the owner.
Why would terrorists seeking to escape in order to strike again call attention to themselves in such outlandish ways and release a car-jacked owner to alert the police of the tag number? If the brothers were willing to kill police with gunfire and innocents with bombs, why release the guy whose vehicle they stole so he could inform the police of the license plate and make the brothers’ capture easier? What is the evidence, other than “reports from authorities,” that these events occurred or had any more connection to the brothers than the falsely reported 7/11 robbery that local police disavowed? Why does the US media simply accept whatever government authorities say?
Where is the evidence of a first shoot-out and a second shoot-out? The second shoot- out consisted of the authorities bombarding a motionless youth bleeding from wounds in a boat with multiple volleys of stun grenades and then multiple gunshots. The unconscious 19 year old was unarmed and unable to respond to the boat owner who discovered him. As he lies there, he is shot many times, including through the throat, and is on life support. But the very next day, according to the presstitute media, he is providing hand-written confessions.
Was the purpose of the reports of a murderous rampage to create fear among the population so that they would accept martial law and home invasions by armed troops ordering American citizens out of their homes with hands over their heads on the pretext that they might be harboring the Boston Marathon Bomber?
The videos of the street celebration in which Bostonians thank the police and of the two Boston families, if not scripted by actors, shows Americans who far from opposing the police state welcome it. A father says that he with his daughter in his arms was forced out of his home by troops pointing automatic rifles at their heads, but that he was thankful for the safety the police provided him by violating every civil right that the Constitution gave him. A woman says it was scary but that “the police are just doing their jobs.” Are Americans now so brainwashed that they attribute their safety to the presence of a Gestapo Police State?
Why have detention facilities been built? Why did Homeland Security purchase a billion or more rounds of ammunition? Why does Homeland Security have 2,700 tanks and a para-military force? Why aren’t these questions being investigated?
The US Constitution is the product of 900 years of human efforts to restrain brutal government and to make government subject to law. It only took Bush and Obama eleven years to get rid of it.
This is my quarterly appeal for your support. If you want this site to continue, donate. Unless it brings you more enlightenment than it brings grief to me, there is no reason for it to exist.
I SEE NO WAY THAT ANOTHER CIVIL WAR CAN BE AVOIDED!
OUR PRESENT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS WORSE THAN GREAT BRITAIN WAS, AND DUE TO THE ADVANCEMENT IN WEAPONS, ONLY A LONG AND BLOODY HIT AND RUN SUSTAINED EFFORT ON THE PART OF PATRIOTS WILL FREE US ONCE AGAIN. LOCK AND LOAD FOLKS, THE SHIT IS CLOSE TO THE FAN. WHO HAS THE BALLS TO SUPPORT THE MEN WHO WILL FREE YOU FROM TYRANNY? WILL THE SOUTH RISE AGAIN? DAMN RIGHT THEY WILL!!!
May 3rd, 2013 by olddog
Tom Heneghan explosive intelligence briefings ALL patriot Americans MUST know, with sources inside American/European intelligence agencies and INTERPOL, reporting what is really going on behind the scenes of the corporate-controlled, fascist, extortion-friendly propaganda U.S. media's massive deceptions
International Intelligence Expert
UNITED States of America – It can now be reported that it was the TREASONOUS Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that ordered Katherine Russell, the wife of the late Boston bombing suspect, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, to destroy the laptop computer that is now in question in regards to the three Facebook students from the nation of Pakistan that were arrested today and charged with obstruction of justice.
Note: These three students did nothing except to have a friendship with the Tsarnaev brothers and put nothing of substance concerning this case in their trash. The laptop computer contained phone numbers and emails of DHS contacts and Russian FSB colleagues and Israeli Mossad assets in the nations of Chechnya and the Republic of Georgia.
We can now divulge that Katherine Russell Tsarnaev, as well as her late husband, and the younger brother of Tamerlan Tsarnaev were all Russian FSB Intelligence agents and employees of the Department of Homeland Security.
The phone call made by Katherine Russell Tsarnaev was actually made to the highest level of the Department of Homeland Security who then gave her her marching orders to destroy the computer.
P.S. At this hour we can report, reference CBS News, that the computer was not destroyed and that Katherine Russell Tsarnaev turned over the computer to U.S. Provost Marshals who are now in possession of 'smoking gun' evidence that fingers the TREASONOUS Department of Homeland Security for unabashed HIGH TREASON against the American People in the Boston FALSE FLAG Black Op attack on U.S. citizens on U.S. soil.
How dare you, you conspiratorial tyrants and kings and notable queens!
Senator Lindsey Graham, (R-SC)
Reference: Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, is currently in possession of the evidence.
P.P.S. Senator Graham of South Carolina is also in possession of overwhelming evidence linking the Boston FALSE FLAG Black Op to a terrorist team out of Chechnya and the Republic of Georgia to the same terrorist team financed by the American-Turkish Council (ATC) and the U.S. State Department that coordinated the attack on the unregistered diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya that led to the assassination of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three Americans.
In closing, the conspiratorial TREASONOUS privately owned U.S. Federal Reserve has now cross-collateralized $78 TRILLION of worthless Deutsche Bank derivatives to $234 TRILLION of worthless Deutsche Bank derivatives with now 90% of the derivatives tied to the Central Bank of Japan and naked short positions in the Japanese yen currency.
April 25th, 2013 by olddog
By Brandon Smith
I have no personal experience in the business of false flag terrorism, but I imagine that engineering a successfully staged terror attack to be blamed on innocent or semi-innocent parties with the goal of psychologically manipulating a population requires that one also be an accomplished storyteller. It demands an avid imagination and an organized sense of foresight. And, most of all, it requires a consistency of narrative. Without consistency, the audience’s ability to suspend its disbelief is damaged, and they become disconnected from the fantasy being portrayed.
If I were the “writer” behind the “story” of the Boston Marathon Bombing, I would consider my efforts an abject failure.
The narrative of the event has changed multiple times in only a few days, following a hailstorm of conflicting observations from the government and the establishment-run media. The “villain” of the original plotline was clearly meant to be “rightwing extremism” as numerous mainstream talking heads, led by federal agency inferences, began repeating the “homegrown right wing terrorist” meme everywhere. This meme was partly abandoned after the alternative media and the Liberty Movement began its own investigation, revealing a large federal presence on the scene, including military Civil Support Teams often tied to the DHS and NORTHCOM, as well as the witnesses who observed what on-scene officials called “training exercises” during the marathon. I have no doubt that these citizen investigations forced the establishment to change the direction of their crime tale, and use Plan B patsies instead. This, however, complicated the momentum of the fiction, and created even more questions.
The Chechen brothers now implicated in the attack have been revealed as long time FBI contacts. This is a bit awkward for the FBI considering they asked the American public to help them “identify the suspects in on-scene photos” while they failed to mention that they knew EXACTLY who the two young men were already (this is what we might call a contrived story arch). Today, the older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, is conveniently dead. The younger brother, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, had his throat conveniently shot out. The feds are now supplying the media with “written confessions” from Dzhokhar to which there is no proof of legitimacy. For all we know the boy hasn’t written a word.
The new “villains” get no voice in this drama, and thus become two dimensional characters. They exist so that we can hate them. Understanding them, or hearing their side of events from their own lips, is certainly out of the question. Poorly fleshed out antagonists are a sure sign of a poorly constructed story.
Finally, we get to the “heroes”. Though the criminal elements of our federal government and adjoining alphabet agencies did not yet get the right wing patriot patsy they obviously wanted, they have still so far gleaned considerable social capital from the bombings. The point of a false flag is to frighten the population of any given nation into relinquishing freedom in the name of safety, which in the process gives the central government even more control. In the wake of the Boston attack, the establishment is having a field day….
Martial Law Conditioning
For a few days, Boston became an Orwellian nightmare. The city lockdown and subsequent militarization was swift, though any intelligent and guilty suspect could have easily left the area before hand. This kind of response to catch only two supposed perpetrators is outlandish, unless you understand that it was not about catching the bombers. Rather, it was an exercise designed to test the malleability of the American people during a crisis scenario. In Watertown, residents were not only forced into lockdown; they were also subjected to house-to-house searches without warrant, pat downs, and numerous other violations of their 4th Amendment rights. Take note that almost everything you see in the video below is an illegal and unconstitutional action on the part of Boston authorities:
As this was occurring, officials were consistently pushing media cameras away from the area in the name of “safety”, even though media cameramen are sent into domestic shootouts and foreign warzones on a regular basis. The only real purpose that I can see to removing them from the scene was to reduce the amount of video footage depicting these illegal searches and seizures:
For those who can’t grasp what has happened here, let me explain; the dynamics of liberty have just been erased. This kind of behavior on the part of government will not be limited to disasters like Boston, or New Orleans during Katrina; a precedence is being set to use martial law-style tactics anywhere for any reason at anytime. The “national security argument” is being used as a free license to institute any measure regardless of law to achieve a particular combat objective. The environment we saw in the dark days of Boston is an environment we’ll soon see all over the country, and here is why…
Boston represents a clear escalation of the use of NDAA and martial law measures in the aftermath of a security event. After the arrest of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 2012, his Miranda Rights under the Constitution were denied due to “extraneous circumstances of national security”. Numerous lawmakers called for the suspect to be treated as an “enemy combatant” so that he could be interrogated under the laws of war without due process: (Source)
The Obama White House has cleverly called for a civilian trial of Tsarnaev in order to reduce criticisms of its support for numerous unconstitutional measures, including the NDAA and the use of assassination against American citizens. The White House has always claimed that it would not use the combatant provisions against American citizens, but has never denied that those provisions could be applied to us. The idea is that while the president does have these powers at his disposal, we’re supposed to have “faith” that he will not abuse them.
During the debate over the passage of the NDAA, Obama opposed certain language within the legislation that REQUIRED him to treat accused domestic terrorists as enemy combatants, not because he thought it was wrong, or unconstitutional, but because he wanted the OPTION to decide whether he would or would not black bag a citizen and throw him into an unspecified hole. He has simply exercised his “option” for a citizen trial, at least this time around…
In the meantime, a simultaneous and so far poorly verified “train attack” has been averted in Canada, opening the door for more discussion on something the establishment has been trying to squeeze out of the populace for years: consent for the federalized lockdown of travel and public events. Whether through TSA, or the use of state authorities under the watch of the DHS, the government has been desperately clamoring to expand the control grid out of airports and federal buildings into the bus stations, subways, trains, highways and sidewalks of America: (Source)
I believe that we will soon see much greater presence of TSA VIPR teams at large public arenas and in transportation venues outside of airports, and that the Boston Bombing will be used as a primer for this expansion. Recent comments by NY Mayor Michael Bloomberg only reinforce my belief. Bloomberg, in reference to the marathon attack, stated that:
…we live in a complex word where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.
Look, we live in a very dangerous world. We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms. New Yorkers probably know that as much if not more than anybody else after the terrible tragedy of 9/11…
We have to understand that in the world going forward, we’re going to have more cameras and that kind of stuff. That’s good in some sense, but it’s different from what we are used to…
Ironically, the only enemy out there that appears ready to “take our freedoms away” are men like Bloomberg; snakes in the grass that pay lip service to the Constitution while constantly trying to undermine it.
Free Speech Is Next
The bombings in Boston took place, apparently by coincidence, just before Oath Keepers, a national organization of current serving military, police officers, and veterans promoting adherence to their constitutional oath was to hold a large rally at Lexington Green. The Lexington Green board, one member of which had been openly hostile to Oath Keepers in the past, decided to use the crisis as an excuse to deny the rally permit already attained by the liberty minded group.
The Lexington Selectmen claimed that under the suggestions of “state officials” the rally had to be cancelled due to the “lack of police” available to secure the area and ensure public safety. However, when Oath Keepers held a brief oath ceremony at the Green in protest of the decision, a police force was sent to watch them: (Source)
This means that public safety was not the issue. Rather, safety and security were being used yet again to deny a constitutional right, and this time it was the most vital and valuable right of all – free speech.
During the height of the civil rights marches of the '50s and '60s, the exact same tactics were used to silence dissent. Black protesters were told that they could not obtain proper permits for peaceful marches because their “own safety” and the safety of the public could not be ensured. This matter of using broad hypothetical dangers as a catalyst for censorship was finally argued before the Supreme Court in Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham. The court sided with the protesters pointing out that the use of undefined safety concerns and “prior restraint” to silence speech was unconstitutional. Unfortunately, the decision has not prevented the U.S. government from slowly undermining public protest rights ever since.
The fascinating thing about incremental tyranny is the way in which naïve members of our society try to rationalize it. They debate using logical fallacies like:
How have your rights been violated in particular? If your rights haven’t been violated, what right do you have to complain?
And how about this gem…
Yeah, there are problems in this country, but at least we have some freedom. In many countries, you wouldn’t be allowed to complain the way you are…
This is statist psychology at work. Freedom, in their minds, is a privilege doled out by governments, rather than an inborn attribute outside of the realm of law. They do not understand that the violation of the rights of one American is a violation of the rights of ALL Americans. They do not understand that the destruction of some constitutional protections will one day lead to the destruction of ALL constitutional protections.
The establishment and the useful idiots they manipulate want to make the “threat” the center of attention, but ultimately, the threat is irrelevant. There will always be the danger of terrorism and death. Always! And, if our government is following the Operation Gladio false flag model (look it up, folks, it was openly admitted government funded terrorism), as I believe they are, then we can count on Boston-style bombings all over the U.S. very soon.
True crisis lay in what we refuse to see, and the greatest crisis today is not the bombing of a marathon, but the destruction of our freedoms in the name of “security”. The bottom line? Our civil liberties are not up for compromise. Period. Shootings, bombs, nukes, nothing! There is no rationalization that will ever make tyranny a moral enterprise. I, like many other Americans, do not care what boogeyman fantasy is paraded in front of me. We are not frightened, and we are not ignorant. No attack, no matter how heinous, will ever convince us to hand over our freedom.
You can contact Brandon Smith at: firstname.lastname@example.org. Alt-Market is an organization designed to help you find like-minded activists and preppers in your local area so that you can network and construct communities for mutual aid and defense. Join Alt-Market.com today and learn what it means to step away from the system and build something better.
In the absolutely catastrophic environment of my youth, not even the most frightening nightmare prepared me to envision what America has devolved into. The education and media industry had already taken control of my impression of America, and I was convinced we were the hero’s of freedom, and mercy for the less fortunate. What a shock to compare present day America to the forties and fifties. Back then I was convinced that our government was staffed with the best that humanity had to offer, and everyone in uniform of any kind were hero’s and protectors of everything good and lawful.
Now, DC is a putrid cesspool of everything decadent in humanity, and the men in uniform are content to be feared instead of admired. What ever happened to Mom and Pop American, who would surely die before bowing down to tyranny? Today, America seems willing to kiss ass and hide in their obsessive compulsive life styles, and freedom can go to hell. As long as they can afford their luxuries, and hide from reality, they could care less about freedom, and unalienable God given rights, as everything is subject to change and negotiation.
I am speaking here of the majority, not the loyal patriots who are risking all to bring our wayward countrymen back to protectors of freedom and the less fortunate. The internet reformation is the last stand in America, and if we do not succeed in awaking the fury needed to stimulate the people, all will be lost forever. If someone could paint a picture of the horrors awaiting us, I wonder if it would awaken the dull and ignorant from their intellectual coma. Those of us who are awake almost feel like foreigners in a land of conquered zombies, but, as Brandon has said above, “We are not frightened, and we are not ignorant. No attack, no matter how heinous, will ever convince us to hand over our freedom.”
WAKE THE HELL UP
April 24th, 2013 by olddog
By Gary North
This is deeply disturbing and could cause a run on gold out of banks. If you have gold, you are a cautious person and you are not going to want your gold somewhere where you can't get it during an emergency.
King World News reports:
Today legendary trader Jim Sinclair stunned King World News when he revealed that a dear friend of his who is very affluent just had a Swiss bank refuse to return his large hoard of gold when he asked for it out of an allocated account. Below is what Sinclair, who was once called on by former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker to assist during a Wall Street crisis, had to say in this remarkable and candid interview.
Eric King: “Maguire spoke on KWN yesterday about the fact that one of his clients went to the LBMA to get the metal from them and could not get it. They told him he would be cash settled. This is what you have been talking about is the failure of the physical markets.”
Sinclair: “A person that I know with significant deposits in one of the primary Swiss banks, in allocated gold, wanted to take out his gold and was just refused on the basis of directives from the central bank….
“They told him the amount was in excess of 200,000 Swiss francs and the central bank had instructed them not to do it because it has to do with anti-terrorism and anti-money laundering precautions.
I really wonder whether those are precautions or whether the gold simply isn’t there. Now you tell me that a London delivery has basically failed. It has to raise our suspicions that the lack of physical gold behind the paper gold is literally so severe that we are coming to understand that it is in fact not there.
The gold that people think is stored is not stored, and the inventory of the warehouses for exchanges may not be holding deliverable gold. There has always been speculation about whether or not the physical gold the US claims to store is in fact in those vaults.
The greatest train robbery in history might be all of the gold, and it would only be something like we have described above that would happen right before gold makes historic highs.
There simply is no gold behind the paper. One example is AMRO, a second is your example with Maguire, and a third is my dear friend who was refused his gold on the basis that its value was too high. Remember this friend of mine had his gold in an allocated account in storage at a major Swiss bank. I repeat, there is no gold.”
Given what just occurred in Cyprus and now this report, it should be clear that money, including gold, must be kept outside the system. The government money grab is on. Bitcoins are not safe. The government will eventually close down the bitcoin exchanges. At this point, money that it isn't buried in your backyard is vulnerable to the government grab .
What will it take for the people to wake up? OUR GOVERNMENT IS NOT LEGITIMATE. It is a de facto government of the International Banking Cartel ruling by force only, not constitutional law. The Federal Reserve is the stud duck of global banking and they will steal our money in every form to render us powerless to resist, and powerless to exist. If you have any, bury your money in gold or silver form before it’s too late.
American Eagle Gold Bullion Coin Sales Suspended; U.S. Inventory Depleted
Now do you believe me?
How about Simon Black, from the SovereignMan.com
When you've got a guy like Senator John McCain who says "The battlefield is the United States of America," it tells you that almost nothing is safe in the Land of the Free.
Whatever remains of civil liberties is going to feel the full brunt of the state's boot heel.
They're already regulating some of the most fundamental aspects of life, from how we are allowed to educate our children to what we can / cannot put in our bodies to the very nature of money.
People are forced to hold their savings in insolvent banks backed by insolvent insurance funds backed by insolvent governments. And those insolvent governments have demonstrated that they are perfectly willing to directly confiscate accounts.
Retirement funds have proven to be an easy, tempting target. A number of countries including Argentina, Ireland, and Hungary have appropriated private pensions. Even the US government temporarily dipped into federal employee pensions.
Western governments are making every possible effort to take over the Internet. Despite every previous attempt (SOPA, PIPA, etc.) failing due to public outcry, they keep trying and trying (ACTA, CISPA, etc.).
They're raising taxes, creating new ones (including Maryland's new 'rain tax'), imposing capital controls, racking up debt, and rapidly devaluing their currencies.
It all reeks of desperation… and it's all so obvious. At least, for anyone paying attention.
Unfortunately it's easy to lose sight of the truth. After all, how can there be any economic problems when the stock market is at an 'all-time high' and Nobel Prize winning pseudo-scientists tell us that debt levels don't matter?
Truth is, these enormous challenges shouldn't be ignored. The entire global financial system is sitting on a bed of dynamite. Central bankers are dousing the pile with gasoline while politicians are standing around smoking.
The potential for epic disaster cannot be understated.
This is not to say that the world is coming to an end. Far from it. History is quite generous with past example of once-great civilizations that collapsed under the weight of their own hubristic debt.
Things didn't end. They changed. Simple. And that's what's happening now in a textbook fashion.
Governments in trouble almost ALWAYS resort to the same destructive tactics. When things are clearly on the decline, rather than INCREASING freedom and opportunity, they try to control EVERYTHING.
We're already seeing the early stages of this with competitive devaluation, basic capital controls, and bank withdrawal limits.
These will soon give way to wider capital controls, increased border controls, wage and price controls, asset confiscation, and more.
It only delays the inevitable. The more they control, the more rapid the deterioration becomes. Again, this isn't some sensationalist prediction; it is the very common historical trend.
The other thing that history shows us, however, is that there are always a handful of people who see the writing on the wall and take action. And that action has almost universally involved looking abroad and diversifying internationally.
This is a time-tested strategy that was once available only to the wealthy landed class. But with modern air transport, digital communication, and global competition, solutions are now available to just about anyone.
I'll be honest with you– moving one's assets, business, and even family overseas isn't easy. These are complicated topics with numerous tax, financial, and professional implications. So go carefully and rationally.
But when structured properly, history shows that a well-informed offshore strategy can have a generational impact should chaos ensue.
And, should nothing ever go wrong in the world, you won't be worse off for it.
Senior Editor, SovereignMan.com
SUBSCRIBE AND LEARN
OR SUFFER AND BURN!
IGNORANCE IS VOLUNTARY!
April 23rd, 2013 by olddog
The airwaves are still blanketed with coverage of the Boston bombings, with some in the media morbidly displaying pictures of the young suspects, battered, bloodied, dead and hurt. There was dancing in the streets simultaneous with the capture of the second alleged teen terrorist.
I understand the jubilant relief of the Boston people; they can now try to return to some semblance of normalcy. But one terror act has heavily overshadowed another. At least 15 people were killed and over 150 were injured in the massive explosion at a fertilizer plant in West, Texas, on Wednesday. First responders are among the dead, but the media has virtually ignored that carnage.
I Day Before Boston Bomb & Texas Missile Attack: CIA, Bill Clinton, George Bush Jr., & Barack Obama Indicted By Congressional “Constitutional Task Force” For Crimes Against Humanity!
Waco Texas Fertilizer Company Hit By Drone/Laser Strike After Lawsuit Filed Against Monsanto!
Waco Texas Fertilizer Company Hit By Drone/Laser Strike After Lawsuit Filed Against Monsanto!
Daily wall-to-wall “terror experts” dissect, analyze and expound on the evil, the dangers and the psychology of a terrorist. But no talk on the even more dangerous white-collar terrorists sitting in plush offices in corporate America. Those who put huge profits above human safety. Those whose gross negligence cost countless loss of lives and widespread, long-term environmental pollution.
Like Nation of Change aptly put it, the “real terrorists” are the corporate execs who’ve bought government regulators.
Moreover, that corruption which often leads to explosions, oil spillage, toxic chemical leakage, environmental pollution, deaths, terminal illnesses, deadly fires, deformities and more is global, for coporate America exports its kind of terror even more efficiently than the religious and ideological extremists.
Of course the media aren’t eager to expose the deadly negligence; after all, most of our news is controlled by just six giant corporations, which makes conflict of interest an understatement.
So as the small Texas town of West continues to dig out their dead and their homes smolder in rumble around them, the “terrorists” over at the West Fertilizer Co. who purposely violated many laws, are not even mentioned in the news.
Which brings up another bewildering question: Why was this plant, which handled toxic anhydrous ammonia, built in the middle of the town? Why do corporations continue to operate plants with deadly chemicals in residential areas?
West Fertilizer was reportedly built in 1962, and records show that in 2006 the Environmental Protection Agency cited several violations at the plant, namely the lack of a risk plan. A plant which handled highly toxic materials located in the middle of a small town reportedly had no sprinklers, water-deluge systems, blast and firewalls and other safety measures needed.
This kind of unconscionable neglect is rampant throughout the globe. Remember the devastating BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010, the worst in environmental history?
How about oil spills in Africa or in Asia, where oversight is even more lax than in the US and corporations can literally get away with murder, or even worse, wipe out an entire village’s livelihood?
In November 2012, a raging fire that engulfed a factory in Bangladesh killed 112 workers who were making clothes for Walmart and others while being paid shockingly low wages and laboring under abhorrent working conditions. A few months later, another fire killed several more workers. Since 2006, more than 600 workers have reportedly died in factory fires in that country, which is a mecca for outsourcing US labor.
The lack of safety measures is the sole cause of the rising death toll, but this kind of “terrorism” does not strike terror or incite revulsion, anger or mass objection in the media or beyond.
We declare martial law-type security measures in a town, bring in the entire battalion to capture two alleged terrorists, while the white-collar fat cats continue their brand of crime unopposed.
Justice seems to have 50 shades of grey in the US.
Details How The International Banking Elite Richest 1% And CFR Collude To Hide The Deliberate Murder Of Over 1 Million Children Every Month.
Obama Regime Using Computer-Generated Twitterbots: Appearance Of Social Media Support For Anti “Bill Of Rights” Gun Regulations!
Slavery By Consent: “Every War In The Past 50 Years Is A Result Of Media Lies” ~ Julian Assange Movie
Waco Texas Fertilizer Company Hit By Drone/Laser Strike After Lawsuit Filed Against Monsanto! (politicalvelcraft.org)
Eyewitness in Waco CONFIRMS LIVE DRILL AND MILITARY PRESENCE PRIOR TO EXPLOSION @ FERTILIZER PLANT [W/ VIDEO] (secretsofthefed.com)
Fertilizer plant explodes near Waco, Texas (theatlanticwire.com)
UPDATED: Explosion At fertilizer Plant North Of Waco, Texas(patdollard.com)
Breaking News Explosion in Waco Texas!
In answer to your question about material which may provide answers to some of your questions, you may find some solace in the following two year investigative report on how ‘SUSPECTED’ prisoners were treated contrary to Our United States Constitution that was sworn by Mr. Obama to be upheld while he is in office.
The investigative report about Barack Obama, William Clinton, & George Bush Jr. is the most comprehensive, bipartisan investigation into the detention and treatment of suspected terrorists yet published.
The product of more than two years of research, analysis and deliberation by the Task Force members and staff, it provides the American people with a broad understanding of what is known — and what may still be unknown — about the past and current treatment of suspected terrorists detained by the U.S. government during the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations, and across multiple geographic theatres, including Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantánamo and the so-called “black sites.”
Lets hope The Congressional Constitutional Task Force Members Are Not added to his “kill list” not so…
I DAY BEFORE BOSTON BOMB & TEXAS MISSILE ATTACK: CIA, BILL CLINTON, GEORGE BUSH JR., & BARACK OBAMA INDICTED BY CONGRESSIONAL “CONSTITUTIONAL TASK FORCE” FOR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY!
I feel terrible sorrow for the people of Waco and the ordeal they are having to cope with. Words cannot even remotely succeed to bring those who lost dear ones any form of comfort or even inspire them at this time to believe they even have a future left when their sense of despair must be beyond imagining and one can only hope that all those who perpetrated this deed are brought to justice.
But how do you fight these corporate fiends? Why has Obama himself not even showed his face in West, whose tragedy in a way is far worse than even Boston’s, when considering the loss of life suffered? And on top of it, when it is clear that these were actions of ruthless corporate criminality, as shown by the tell tale video footage. Not only was there loss of life, homes were destroyed and along with it the futures of many, scarring adults to the depths of their beings while the psychological shock it caused children must surely be the worst and can never be obliterated.
How are ordinary honest Americans going to fight and root out the inhuman corporations behind this hideous act?
Is there any question that supports the possibility that Obama is perhaps a fatally threatened man, completely controlled by the corporate monsters who actually rule the US? Maybe his family too is threatened? Is he forced to be a puppet or face the death or even torture of his daughters and his wife? Is he wracked and torn apart inside by what he has been forced to do to America? Are tears he has cried perhaps genuine, as he is a completely broken human being? I mean he must know that for ordinary citizens the shock of the last few days must be soul wrenching — especially when he knows that he in fact is the cause of the slaughter happening in West and in Boston and maybe all the other events of naked terror such as Sandy Hook and Benghazi, but that he had been helpless to prevent it?
Surely the passionate Barack Obama the World saw during his campaign was not an act? Did he only find out after he won the presidency that he would never be able to fulfill, what seemed at the time, his unbelievably heartfelt and sincere promises to the American People? Is he perhaps hoping desperately that someone in the halls of power of America, who is still honest and incorruptible, would come to realize that Obama is a prisoner – hostage as it were, watched every moment and that somehow, they would come and rescue him and his family?
Nonetheless, when I think it through, I know there are so many holes in the above reasoning. Surely any real American president would have made some plan to rescue his family or himself from such a terrible situation and with his family safely out of the way, would then have had the loyalty to his country and her people to protect and save everything and everyone against her enemies with his life — as the seals laid down their lives in Benghazi!
I pose the above scenarios because I am baffled to the core about Obama’s behavior which one would think he may be afflicted by some rare touch of madness or even possessed by an evil spirit (laughable if it was not so tragic). I am no psychiatrist but God alone knows, this man acts like an automaton; akin to someone whose been “taken over” – does that sound a bit crazy?
I just don’t know, but I so hoped he’d be one of the best president’s in American history – the whole Western world did — saw him as man bringing world peace. I just cannot believe how he can live with the taunts and insults that are thrown at him daily and remain almost unaffected by it?
Maybe I just have not grasped the full picture and that Obama is affected by it, but not as I would hope, as those opposing him just get added to his ‘kill list’ not so…
What to me is so terrible, is that in 1990 when I was there, US citizens would never even have given a thought that these horrifying atrocities would ever hit their home soil – it is the type of things they’d naturally assume only occurred in uncivilized Third World countries far away. Then so much started happening to shatter the American Dream, yet of all, the worst was 9/11 and while all thought it would change their lives forever it did not, as to this day MSM lapdogs report 9/11 as an attack by al qaeda and not the false flag it had been proven to be.
I can only say that I look forward to the day when my inbox pings continually with news that America has been saved and freed from the evil ones bent on destroying her and her people. You are all constantly in my meditation and in those of many all over the Planet.
If I may be so forward, I hope you can compile and present some article which to some extent may provide answers to some of my most burning questions, which may be questions and reasoning others may be asking and wondering about too…
May another Thomas Jefferson be closely placed in the wings to rebuild America….thanks.
April 22nd, 2013 by olddog
Michal Massie is a respected writer and talk show host in Los Angeles.
The other evening on my twitter, a person asked me why I didn't like the Obama's? Specifically I was asked: "I have to ask, why do you hate the Obama's? It seems personal, not policy related. You even dissed (disrespect) their Christmas family picture."
The truth is I do not like the Obamas, what they represent, their ideology, and I certainly do not like his policies and legislation. I've made no secret of my contempt for the Obamas. As I responded to the person who asked me the aforementioned question, I don't like them because they are committed to the fundamental change of my/our country into what can only be regarded as a Communist state.
I don't hate them per definition, but I condemn them because they are the worst kind of racialists, they are elitist Leninists with contempt for traditional America. They display disrespect for the sanctity of the office he holds, and for those who are willing to admit same, Michelle Obama's raw contempt for white America is transpicuous.
I don't like them because they comport themselves as emperor and empress. I expect, no I demand respect, for the Office of President and a love of our country and her citizenry from the leader entrusted with the governance of same. President and Mrs. Reagan displayed an unparalleled love for the country and her people. The Reagan's made Americans feel good about themselves and about what we could accomplish. His arrogance by appointing 32 leftist czars and constantly bypassing congress is impeachable. Eric Holder is probably the MOST incompetent and arrogant DOJ head to ever hold the job. Could you envision President Reagan instructing his Justice Department to act like jack-booted thugs?
Presidents are politicians and all politicians are known and pretty much expected to manipulate the truth, if not outright lie, but even using that low standard, the Obama's have taken lies, dishonesty, deceit, mendacity, subterfuge and obfuscation to new depths. They are verbally abusive to the citizenry, and they display an animus for civility.
I do not like them, because they both display bigotry overtly, as in the case of Harvard Professor Louis Gates, when he accused the Cambridge Police of acting stupidly, and her code speak pursuant to now being able to be proud of America. I view that statement and that mindset as an insult to those who died to provide a country where a Kenyan, his illegal alien relatives, and his alleged progeny, could come and not only live freely, but rise to the highest, most powerful, position in the world. Michelle Obama is free to hate and disparage whites because Americans of every description paid with their blood to ensure her right to do same.
I have a saying, that "the only reason a person hides things, is because they have something to hide." No president in history has spent over a million dollars to keep his records and his past sealed.
And what the two of them have shared has been proved to be lies. He lied about when and how they met, he lied about his mother's death and problems with insurance, Michelle lied to a crowd pursuant to nearly $500,000 bank stocks they inherited from his family. He has lied about his father's military service, about the civil rights movement, ad nausea. He lied to the world about the Supreme Court in a State of the Union address. He berated and publicly insulted a sitting Congressman. He has surrounded himself with the most rabidly, radical, socialist academicians today. He opposed rulings that protected women and children that even Planned Parenthood did not seek to support. He is openly hostile to business and aggressively hostile to Israel . His wife treats being the First Lady as her personal American Express Black Card (arguably the most prestigious credit card in the world). I condemn them because, as people are suffering, losing their homes, their jobs, their retirements, he and his family are arrogantly showing off their life of entitlement – as he goes about creating and fomenting class warfare.
I don't like them, and I neither apologize nor retreat from my public condemnation of them and of his policies. We should condemn them for the disrespect they show our people, for his willful and unconstitutional actions pursuant to obeying the Constitutional parameters he is bound by, and his willful disregard for Congressional authority.
Dislike for them has nothing to do with the color of their skin; it has everything to do with their behavior, attitudes, and policies. And I have open scorn for their constantly playing the race card.
I could go on, but let me conclude with this. I condemn in the strongest possible terms the media for refusing to investigate them, as they did President Bush and President Clinton, and for refusing to label them for what they truly are. There is no scenario known to man, whereby a white president and his wife could ignore laws, flaunt their position, and lord over the people, as these two are permitted out of fear for their color.
As I wrote in a syndicated column titled, "Nero In The White House" – "Never in my life, inside or outside of politics, have I witnessed such dishonesty in a political leader. He is the most mendacious political figure I have ever witnessed. Even by the low standards of his presidential predecessors, his narcissistic, contumacious arrogance is unequalled. Using Obama as the bar, Nero would have to be elevated to sainthood… Many in America wanted to be proud when the first person of color was elected president, but instead, they have been witness to a congenital liar, a woman who has been ashamed of America her entire life, failed policies, intimidation, and a commonality hitherto not witnessed in political leaders. He and his wife view their life at our expense as an entitlement – while America's people go homeless, hungry and unemployed.
MASSIE FOR PRESIDENT!
DEPORT THE OBAMA'S!
April 17th, 2013 by olddog
Gun owners all over the country – including law enforcement who take their oath of office seriously – are shocked by the level of attack against the Second Amendment since the horrendous tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary school last December.
"Gun control" is chanted a hundred times a day by members of the Democratic/Communist Party USA and their sycophants. The useful fools in print and electronic media, as well as barkers on the boob tube, make sure Americans get daily mega doses of carefully crafted propaganda. The families of children and teachers killed in Newtown have allowed themselves in their profound grief to be used as tools for tyrants and they're very serious about it:
Newtown families: Victims turn lobbyists
"When a lobbyist for families of Newtown shooting victims called the office of Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) to set up a meeting, the first response was a standard D.C. offer. They could get a meeting with her staff, and Collins would stop by, they were told. The families’ answer: not good enough. According to their lobbyists, the families have a rule against staff-only meetings: They won't do them. They insist on sitting down with the senators themselves. The families wound up getting more than 15 minutes with Collins.
"That rule is just one of the ways that the Newtown families, political novices just a few months ago, are proving to be savvy, effective advocates as they promote the gun legislation that has finally begun to move through the Senate. The families are well-educated, and many are well-off. They have been polished and sharp on TV. They're mostly non-political, but quite accomplished in their own fields. With access to money and media, they're using persistence, visibility — and, most all, their unique moral authority — to help prod Senate action. They also have their own lobbyists — several of them, in fact."
I won't use the over-used "we cannot imagine their pain". We can't. However, those families have no right to demand the Second Amendment be infringed, altered or amended, period.
For those who might not be familiar with the issue of the Seventeenth Amendment and the point I'm making in this column, here's a short refresher:
When the First Continental Congress was convened via a resolution of the Congress of the Confederation, one of the first issues discussed on May 29, 1787, was the balance of power for a newly created General Government.
The delegates were firm: The American people would be represented by a representative voted into office from lawfully created districts according to population. The states were to be represented in the U.S. Senate by individuals elected by each state legislature.
James Madison, known as the Father of the Constitution wrote: "The Senate will be elected absolutely and exclusively by the State legislatures." John Jay, co-author of The Federalist Papers is quoted: "Jay then informed Governor Clinton that, unlike the Senate, where the two-thirds rule was in force for treaties and impeachment, the lower house had nothing to do with treaties; it represented the people whereas the senate represented the states - for the Federalists always a significant distinction."
The U.S. House of Representatives was to be the legislative body for the people. Each district within the states of the Union would elect an individual to Congress (Art. I, Sec. II) who would represent them under Art. 1, Sec. 8 of the U.S. Constitution. The framers were adamant that the states remain sovereign entities and have equal representation in Congress. Thus, the U.S. Senate would be comprised of two senators from each state. (Art. I, Sec. III)
Those senators would be elected by their state legislature to go to Washington, DC to represent the interests of the state, not the people. If they didn't, the state could recall them, fire them and hire someone new. The Senate confirms federal judges and supreme court justices. The Senate must advise and consent to ratification of treaties that have been negotiated and agreed to by the President — Art. II, Section II, U.S. Constitution.
The framers of the Constitution wisely understood the absolute necessity of ensuring the people would have the right to vote for our representative in Congress, and at the same time because they all jealously guarded freedom and liberty, the states must also have equal representation. We the people would have the ability to remove – via the ballot box – miscreants and scoundrels, while the state legislatures could recall their U.S. Senators who acted against the best interests of their state. The absolute right of the states to equal representation was wiped out when the Seventeenth Amendment was declared ratified on April 8, 1913. It was not.
The egregious harm done by the U.S. Senate since 1945 could fill several volumes. That body of Congress handles areas that directly affect all of us regardless of political party. During the debate in 2011, for the disaster known as Obamacare, Senator Olympia Snowe [R-ME] stated her constituents wanted Obamacare. Snowe is a progressive socialist. Her vote will have a direct impact on all Texans if our state doesn't nullify, yet Texans could not vote her out of office. Thankfully, Comrade Snowe did not seek re-election in 2012. However, she was replaced by an "independent" who has zero understanding of the Second Amendment, Angus King. His vote will affect my Second Amendment rights and I can't vote him out of office and neither can you unless you live in Maine.
What we've seen with NYC, Colorado and the State of Connecticut isn't gun control. It's a major step towards amending and eventually nullifying the Second Amendment, which no government, state, local or federal has any legal right to do. You couldn't pay me to go to NYC or the State of Connecticut and spend a dime.
Colorado's major population centers like Denver and Boulder were long ago taken over by socialists and communists who call themselves liberals or progressive liberals. They infest the state capitol and governor's mansion like the vermin they are in their quest to destroy freedom and liberty. My husband and I lived in Colorado from 1989 – 1997. Leaving was the best thing we did as I would not want to live there now nor will I go out of my way to spend any money in that state. I hope hunters and all Second Amendment supporters call the governor's office out there and tell John Hickenlooper: no conventions, no vacations, no hunting, no snow skiing, only gasoline along the highway as you pass through.
Kudo's to the sheriff's in that state have who taken up the fight: 37 of 62 Colorado sheriffs to sue over new gun laws
The Outlaw Congress has NO constitutional authority to amend or nullify the Second Amendment, but many of them intend to do just that – both parties:
16 Republicans Vote To Move Forward on Gun Control(senate)
Lamar Alexander (Tenn.) NRA A rated; Kelly Ayotte (N.H.) NRA A rated; Richard Burr (N.C.) NRA A rated; Saxby Chambliss (Ga.) NRA A rated; Tom Coburn (Okla.) NRA A rated; Susan Collins (Maine) NRA C+ rated; Bob Corker (Tenn.) NRA A rated; Jeff Flake (Ariz.) NRA A rated; Lindsey Graham (S.C.) NRA A rated; Dean Heller (Nev.) NRA A rated; John Hoeven (N.D.) NRA A rated; Johnny Isakson (Ga.) NRA A rated; Mark Kirk (Ill.) NRA F rated; John McCain (Ariz.) NRA B+ rated; Pat Toomey (Pa.) NRA A rated; Roger Wicker (Miss.) NRA A+ rated
Won't surprise me if the NRA endorses those same turn coats next time they unlawfully come up for reelection. Probably throw a few bushels of money their way from your donations and membership dues, just like the NRA does for Harry Reid. That's why I do not belong to the NRA.
16 Senate Republicans: We Have to Pass the Gun Control Bill to Find Out What's In It
Sound familiar? Obamacare Is the Perfect $17 Trillion Trojan Horse: "Nancy Pelosi said “We must pass Obamacare to find out what's in it.”
Since 2005, Dr. Edwin Vieira has been trying to get gun owners educated about revitalizing the constitutional militia in the states of the Union which will stop all of the above. Here in Texas, we tried to get our legislature – you know, the "Don't Mess With Texas" bunch – to introduce and pass a bill. Isn't going to happen. There has been zero support for my efforts from any gun groups or private militia in the State of Texas.
Boehner: I Don't Need GOP to Pass Gun Law
No More Mr. Nice Guy
"GOA has been issuing multiple alerts recently because of the imminent danger that is facing us – as the Senate will soon be taking up gun control legislation. Much of the focus has been on the Senate. But if anyone thinks that the House – and specifically Speaker John Boehner – is our fail-safe to killing gun control in the Congress, they had better think again. Speaking on Meet the Press on March 10, Speaker Boehner said that he has "made clear if the Senate acts on gun control legislation, the House will consider it." Quite simply, that means that House Speaker John Boehner will allow the House to consider votes on gun control legislation."
Gun Owners of America recently sent out this alert: The Battle Will Take Longer than We'd Hoped: "We've been fighting these gun control battles for almost 40 years now. And we almost always win. But it's almost always a nail-biter. And so it is on Obama's gun control agenda", etc.
Gun Owners of America: Why won't you mobilize your millions of members to demonstrate at the state capitols by the thousands and demand the constitutional militia be revitalized? Isn't 40 years of fighting the same battle an indication what you're doing hasn't brought about the solution, only more Band Aids? What? You afraid the useful fools in the media will excoriate you for supporting the Second Amendment? "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Non members like me, and I believe, a great majority of Oath Keepers would join you in our respective states.
"Dan Scott. Barely a week ago I heard you rail for two hours about independence. Mr. Hardwick, how many times have I heard you speak of freedom at my father's table? Half the men in this church, including you father, and you, Reverend, are as ardent patriots as I. Will you now, when you are needed most, stop at only words? Is that the sort of men you are? I ask only that you act upon the beliefs of which you have so strongly spoken and in which you so strongly believe." — 17 year old Ann, from the movie, The Patriot
Very well meaning folks don't seem to grasp 'private' militias have no legal authority to do anything other than target practice:
Civilian Militia Expands to 38 States To Protect Constitution
"A citizen militia consisting of law enforcement, military and civilians founded by pro-2nd amendment Police Chief Mark Kessler to protect citizens against an over bearing federal government has now expanded to 38 chapters each in a different state. Formally known as the Constitution Security Force Chief Kessler called upon the creation of a Citizen Reserve force to protect Americans from the ever growing plethora of threats to Life, Liberty and Justice Citizens face from the federal government in the draconian post 9/11 dark times we live in. Chief Kessler proposed legislation to his town of Gilberton, Pennsylvania asserting the right to assert 2nd and 10th amendment rights despite in defiance in any orders coming from the Gestapo thugs in Washington, D.C. taking orders from the notorious Obama regime."
I can only in the strongest possible way urge everyone to read True Vs. False Militia & Why the Difference Matters. Pro Second Amendment advocates, including Police Chief Mark Kessler, must understand the difference and why it's so important.
So, how's ignoring the only real solution working out for gun owners?
Rewarding liars, cheats and thieves — Illegal aliens
The Senate is going to sell us out with another invitation for more millions of illegal aliens to cross the border:
Rubio and Rand Paul's Amnesty Trick Will Lead Conservatives To Their Own Doom!
"America is facing a nation-destroying illegal alien amnesty push from a Congress stocked with high ranking Republicans eager to rubber stamp Obama’s unlawful and unConstitutional amnesty decrees instead of reining the President in from the one party dictatorship he is transitioning America into!
"At the center of this push for Amnesty legislation, some Republicans are acting as a Judas Goat to lead conservatives to their own political doom. Whether you believe their positions are malicious political theater or the result of mistaken beliefs is up to you, but the deadly and destructive results of their actions will be the same if you fall for the Marco Rubio (202-224-3041) and Rand Paul (202-224-4343) amnesty plans. Let me be very clear, Obama’s DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) Amnesty memo is not a law. It is not an Executive Order. It is a memo. America is now under a form of governance by memo.
"So while Republicans like John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, Jeff Flake, Speaker John Boehner, and Eric Cantor rush to rubber stamp Obama’s illegal amnesty memo with actual legislation, they are in fact supporting a new form of authoritarian and dictatorial governance for American citizens. How else can we explain the wide ranging amnesty policies currently being implemented coast to coast, including the release of thousands of illegal aliens from detention centers, including those incarcerated for broader crimes against American citizens, which has no backing in legislation, existing laws, or election outcome other than the race for President?
"States like North Carolina and others that are now giving licenses to illegal aliens, which 77% of Americans oppose according to Rasmussen polling, are responding to Obama’s memo. Not a new law and certainly not an official Executive Order! Did we spend all of that money and time to elect a Congress and Senate that works simply to rubber stamp unlawful decrees from the President instead of representing the American majority that has made it clear they reject any form of amnesty and demand immigration and border enforcement instead?"
Rubio is just another lying politician: Rubio in 2010: I'll never support amnesty – Rarely viewed video includes hard-line pledge against immigration plan
Rubio is one of the stupidly named "gang of eight" senators who are going to sell us out to reward liars, thieves and cheaters. The consequences of this new amnesty will absolutely be the giant nail in our coffin. Illegals will continue to kill this economy, our way of life and those 20+ MILLION will register to vote for the Democratic/Communist Party USA. The Republican Party may as well close their doors. "Gang of Eight": Senators Schumer [DC - Democratic/Communist Party USA], McCain [R}, Durbin [DC], Graham [R], Menendez [DC], Rubio [R], Bennet [DC], and Flake [R]
Senate plan: Deport illegals who arrived after 2011
'People need to have been in the country long enough to have put down some roots'
Wrong. It doesn't matter if they've been here five minutes or 50 years, they have no right to be on U.S. soil. You don't reward liars, cheats and thieves just because they've been doing it a long time. And, no they won't get deported. Members of the Democratic/Communist Party USA and the impostor camped out in the White House will find some way to make sure they stay.
Sen. Jeff Flake: 'We Don't Need a Sealed Border'
Wrong. The destruction by illegal aliens to this country since Ronald Reagan opened the doors to the mass invasion for decades takes your breath away. I'm sure Flake and one very popular Libertarian former judge would get along just fine:
Fox's Judge Napolitano Delights Jon Stewart By Proclaiming 'I'm in Favor of Open Borders'
I know it's true because I just happened to hit the comedy channel while in my hotel room last November. Perhaps someone should remind Napolitano about the 50,000 + Americans who have been slaughtered by illegal aliens since 9/11. About the babies, children and teens raped and/or murdered by illegals. How the terrorists must love him:
Watch this short video: Muslim Terrorists Crossing US/Mexican Border. This is a mainstream network report with documents to back up what they're saying.
Illegal aliens setting fires – border patrol
There is NO way to do background checks on illegals. Not from communist China, Ireland, Guatemala, Mexico or Middle East countries. I can tell you exactly what will happen: Oh, there's not enough money, blah, blah, blah, so we'll fast track them right in time for the 2014 phony elections. Mark my words it's happened in the past and it will happen again.
• Arrested illegals mock TX Border Patrol: 'Obama's gonna let me go'
• Stats Show Surge in Illegal Immigrant Border Traffic Despite DHS Claims
• Illegals Gets Billions In IRS Loophole Tax Fraud Yearly - Vid
• Illegals now flooding U.S. border
• Illegal Border Crossings Double, Border Becomes Less Secure as Beltway Gets Close to Deal on Immigration Reform
• Illegal Border Crossings Double As DC Talks 'Reform'
• Communist Party USA calls for 'street heat' to push amnesty
• Dump 20+ MILLION illegals into Obamacare and the numbers will shoot into the stratosphere:
• Senate Dems Vote To Provide Obamacare To Illegals
• Sex crimes by illegals The ones that haven't been caught are going to be rewarded with amnesty. After one rapes and kills another child, then we'll find out that illegal was here for years.
Tucson Local 2544: ""We will continue to have large groups of illegal aliens chasing Border Patrol agents down so they can be “arrested”, knowing they will be set free and given temporary permission to remain here in the United States (no jail space to keep them locked up until their cases are adjudicated). Once they are set free with a “promise to appear” (wink, wink) 99% of them will disappear and never be heard from again unless they commit some heinous crime. Then, years down the road we will have a new group of politicians and activists screaming about how we need to “bring these people out of the shadows” by giving them amnesty. This is how the merry-go-round works. Proven time and time again over the span of many decades.
"Thank you Secretary Napolitano. Thank you for endangering us. Thank you for cutting our pay 40% to prove a political point. Thank you for making our job even more meaningless. Thank you for releasing thousands of criminal illegal aliens that we risked our lives to arrest and put in jail. Thank you for all your lies about how “secure” the border is so that you can prop up another amnesty program."
Amnesty deal could lead to trillions in new welfare spending
"Senate Budget Committee Republican staff on Thursday released a description of what they claim is a “major flaw” in the immigration reform plan being pushed by the bipartisan “Gang of Eight"–a loophole that will end up being a multi-trillion dollar entitlement spending increase, with the burden falling on American taxpayers. According to what has been publicly reported about the Gang of Eight's forthcoming immigration bill, there appears to be a major flaw that could allow millions of illegal immigrants to access federal welfare benefits and poverty programs,” the GOP Budget Committee staff wrote in a statement to media"
Roughly 11.5 MILLION illegals hold jobs that belong to Americans. 47 MILLION Americans are on food stamps. Good paying construction jobs are being done by illegals for cash under the table while natural born and naturalized Americans in that industry are on food stamps collecting unemployment. Now, we are going to reward those who lie and cheat to steal our jobs?
Rand Paul wants illegals turned into taxpayers. Wrong. You don't reward liars, thieves and cheaters. Rand Paul says we can't deport them. BULL. There is no effort to really crack down on illegals because the shadow government wants seamless borders for the North American Union. The U.S., Canada and Mexico as one region of world government. The major push, Mr. Paul, just in case you missed it, started with NAFTA. Go look at this map. You might also wish to read my column where I explain about the NAU because the traitors are still working it quietly while you're working to put food on the table.
I urge you to keep calling or faxing your U.S. Senatorstarting tomorrow: NO on any gun bills. NO on any "pathway to citizenship" slick marketing. It is amnesty. We want illegals deported, period. Call before you go to work if you live on the West coast. Call on your break or lunch hour, but make those calls and if possible, send a fax. No email. All you get are boiler plate canned replies.
We do NOT need any more traps called immigration "reform." We need enforcement and the states to stop giving perks and free education to illlegals. We need the border sealed and guarded. Tragically for our country, not one of the four border states governors or legislatures have the guts to get the job done. That includes Texas where I live.
Prior to 1913, state legislatures elected two senators to go to Washington, DC to represent the interests of their state and citizens. After the fraud of declaring the Seventeenth Amendment ratified, the mobs now "elect" U.S. Senators who go to Washington, DC and vote for special interests who have bought their favors. They steal the fruits of our labor for all their pet welfare agencies and programs and we have no way to vote them out of office. They vote to keep the grotesque, endless wars in the Middle East funded for nothing. NOT for our freedom.
Like Democratic/Communist Party USA king pin, Chuck Schumer, one of the 'gang of eight". Take the poltroon who "represents" me: "Senator": John Cornyn. There isn't a bill to destroy the Bill of Rights he hasn't loved. Voted yes to extend the abomination called the Patriot Act. Voted yes for indefinite detention of Americans without a trial, NDAA. He's another damn war monger. Votes for every "free" trade bill destroying even more jobs for Americans. He voted for the unconstitutional $700 BILLION (borrowed, more debt on our backs) bank bail outs.
The Seventeenth Amendment was NOT ratified by enough states and I have the iron-clad, court proof evidence. In February 2011, I had a long face to face talk with Rep. Bryan Hughes in our state legislature. I told him I have been working on this for over 15 years. The states cannot reclaim their sovereignty without representation in the U.S. Senate. He was very enthusiastic about getting rid of the Seventeenth Amendment! I spent so much time and money getting him documents waiting for this new session in January 2013, as well as a few others in our legislature. I wrote not only the working paper, but a bill for our legislature to challenge the Seventeenth Amendment (Click her, item 4).
Guess what? There will be absolutely nothing done by our legislature this session which ends May 27, 2013. Rep. Hughes appears to no longer have any interest in protecting the rights of the state he serves or we the people of Texas. Our legislature doesn't return until Jan. 2015. In the meantime, Comrades Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid will continue voting for bills that are destroying our lives and we can't vote them out of office. Thank you very much, Rep. Hughes. "Don't Mess With Texas" is a joke in my opinion.
The U.S. Senate has played a major role in destroying this constitutional republic from confirmation of Supreme Court Justices, federal judges, treaties, Obamacare and now their major push to nullify the Second Amendment and unleash another wave of illegals invading this country. Both parties are guilty.
So, how's the Seventeenth Amendment working out for you?
I guess Texans don't mind Schumer, Reid, Flake, McCain and the rest of those vultures dictating their lives. I guess Americans in the other 49 states don't mind either, because other than a few lonely voices out there, Americans prefer to fight for Band Aids instead of solutions. Of course, there is no money in the cure, only the treatment. Fill up those campaign war chests for the next fake election while we slide down the razor blade of tyranny.
1. The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 by Max Farrand
1- Tiny Georgia town passes law requiring residents to own a gun as many states consider tougher firearm laws
2- Treason Alert: Dems Try to Move Gun Bill Forward Without Allowing Senators to Read It
3- Senate Aide: Gun Law Wouldn't Have Stopped Newtown Massacre
4- Democrats push bill in Congress to require gun insurance under penalty of fine
5- Act surprised: Connecticut Drafts Gun Law in Secret
6- American labor takes an 'amnesty' hit
© 2013 – NewsWithViews.com and Devvy – All Rights Reserved
Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country. She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn't left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party.
Devvy's regularly posted new columns are on her site at:www.devvy.com. You can also sign up for her free email alerts.
E-mail is: email@example.com
April 12th, 2013 by olddog
Please make sure all your friends in every State see these names. The vote and the bill is a matter of public record.
Over the weekend, we came four votes away from the United States Senate giving our Constitutional rights over to the United Nations. In a 53-46 vote, the senate narrowly passed a measure that will stop the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
The Statement of Purpose from the bill read:
“To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.”
The U.N. Small Arms Treaty, which has been championed by the Obama Administration, would have effectively placed a global ban on the import and export of small firearms. The ban would have affected all private gun owners in the U.S., and had language that would have implemented an international gun registry on all private guns and ammo.
Astonishingly, 46 of our United States Senators were willing to give away our Constitutional rights to a foreign power.
From Senate records- a nay indicates unwillingness to stop the unconstitutional UN treaty:
Here’s the scumbags of the union list.
MAKE SURE YOU SAVE IT! THEY ARE TRAITORS AND SHOULD BE INDICTED AS SUCH.
Baldwin (D-WI), Nay
Baucus (D-MT), Nay
Bennet (D-CO), Nay
Blumenthal (D-CT), Nay
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Brown (D-OH), Nay
Cantwell (D-WA), Nay
Cardin (D-MD), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Casey (D-PA), Nay
Coons (D-DE), Nay
Cowan (D-MA), Nay
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Franken (D-MN), Nay
Gillibrand (D-NY), Nay
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hirono (D-HI), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Nay
Kaine (D-VA), Nay
King (I-ME), Nay
Klobuchar (D-MN), Nay
Landrieu (D-LA), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
Merkley (D-OR), Nay
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Murphy (D-CT), Nay
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Schatz (D-HI), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Nay
Shaheen (D-NH), Nay
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Udall (D-CO), Nay
Udall (D-NM), Nay
Warner (D-VA), Nay
Warren (D-MA), Nay
Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Nay
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Not Voting
HERE’S THE PATRIOTS LIST
Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Ayotte (R-NH), Yea
Barrasso (R-WY), Yea
Begich (D-AK), Yea
Blunt (R-MO), Yea
Boozman (R-AR), Yea
Burr (R-NC), Yea
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Coats (R-IN), Yea
Coburn (R-OK), Yea
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Corker (R-TN), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Cruz (R-TX), Yea
Donnelly (D-IN), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Fischer (R-NE), Yea
Flake (R-AZ), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Hagan (D-NC), Yea
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Heinrich (D-NM), Yea
Heitkamp (D-ND), Yea
Heller (R-NV), Yea
Hoeven (R-ND), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Johanns (R-NE), Yea
Johnson (R-WI), Yea
Kirk (R-IL), Yea
Lee (R-UT), Yea
Manchin (D-WV), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Moran (R-KS), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Paul (R-KY), Yea
Portman (R-OH), Yea
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
Risch (R-ID), Yea
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rubio (R-FL), Yea
Scott (R-SC), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Tester (D-MT), Yea
Thune (R-SD), Yea
Toomey (R-PA), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Wicker (R-MS), Yea
GOA: The Battle Will Take Longer than We’d Hoped
Posted by: The Publisher on: April 11 2013 • Categorized in: To Keep and Bear Arms
But there’s still a very good chance we can win!
“Gun Owners of America [has] been pressing lawmakers who may have wavered on this emotional issue of background checks.” – CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, April 10, 2013
We’ve been fighting these gun control battles for almost 40 years now. And we almost always win. But it’s almost always a nail-biter.
And so it is on Obama’s gun control agenda.
We’d hoped that we could stop the gun control bribe-o-thon early (and risk-free) by blocking the motion to proceed to the package. But thanks to sell-outs like Pennsylvania’s one-term senator, Pat Toomey, we’re going to have to take a different battle position and defeat the package at a later stage.
The Senate today overcame the Paul-Cruz-Lee filibuster and voted to move to proceed to Harry Reid’s gun control bill (S. 649). Where Reid needed 60 votes, the tally was 68-31. Click here to see if your Senator sold you out by voting to “move to proceed” to the bill.
Republican defectors who voted anti-gun were: Alexander (TN), Ayotte (NH), Burr (NC), Chambliss (GA), Collins (ME), Corker (TN), Coburn (OK), Flake (AZ), Isakson (GA), McCain (AZ), Heller (NV), Hoeven (ND), Kirk (IL), Graham (SC), Toomey (PA) and Wicker (MS).
So, here’s where we are. Right after the Senate proceeded to the gun control bill, Harry Reid used his privileged recognition to put a bunch of amendments in place. In Senate parlance, they are referred to as an “amendment tree;” and they contain the universal registry bill, the Feinstein gun ban, and the magazine ban. These will be voted on in upcoming days.
As for the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer universal registry bill, don’t believe the press’ efforts to sugar-coat it. If you have ever had an “Internet … posting” on (or related to) your gun, you can sell it only by going to a dealer and filling out a 4473 and getting the government’s approval. Only a cave man would be exempt.
And once you have a 4473? Well, the ATF is going from dealer to dealer, copying the information on these forms, and feeding it into a database. But, says Toomey, he’s against universal registries. This is where it would have helped if Toomey had consulted someone who knew something about guns.
Registration and violation of privacy.
First of all, Toomey’s anti-registry language prohibits photocopying the 4473′s, but it doesn’t prohibit going into the FFL with a laptop and copying all the information. Second, ATF takes the position that the data it’s accumulating in a database is not a “registry,” so Toomey’s ban does no good. Third, guess what the sanction is for violation of Toomey’s anti-registry language? Answer: Eric Holder has to choose to prosecute himself and his own department.
But this isn’t the only bad thing about Toomey-Manchin-Schumer.
Section 107 of the sell-out also waives any federal privacy prohibitions under HIPAA to sending the names of Americans with PTSD, ADHD, and post partem depression to the gun ban database. But that’s not all.
Believe in Jesus, hand in your guns?
Because private shrinks will be able to add patients names into a federal database of the mentally ill – without due process – you will be at their mercy.
As Red State editor, Erick Erickson says, “Activist mental health providers will probably be overly aggressive in adding people to the list. Give it five years in liberal areas and people who believe in the physical resurrection of Christ will probably get automatic entry onto the list.”
And as for veterans? Toomey-Manchin-Schumer reinforces the proposition that bureaucrats in the Department of Veterans Affairs can take away veterans’ rights without any due process. If a veteran has $30,000 to spend getting back the rights Toomey-Manchin-Schumer wrongly took from him, the sell-out creates yet another redundant money-trap for restoration of rights that shouldn’t have been taken away in the first place.
Repealing gun owner protections.
What if you want to travel across the country? McClure-Volkmer allowed you to do that with an unloaded gun in the trunk (18 U.S.C. 926A). But, under the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer sell-out, unless you can “demonstrate,” to the satisfaction of the New York police (1) where you came from, (2) where you’re going, (3) that you’re legally entitled to possess the gun in the place you can from, and (4) that you’re legally entitled to possess the gun in the place you’re going, they will arrest you in New York.
The Toomey-Manchin-Schumer (Charles Schumer, Carries Concealed) sell-out creates a Biden-like commission to insure that the cries for gun control continue. http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=10104
Like sprinkles on a pile of dung, Toomey and Schumer steal some of the proposals we drafted and try to use them to get us to buy onto gun control. But it won’t work.
The gun movement is united against this disgusting pile of gun control.
Here is the new battlefield. Because of the Senate rules, many of the upcoming gun control votes will need 60 (out of 100 votes) to move forward. That will almost certainly be the case with the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer proposal. And because the entire Second amendment movement – GOA, NRA, etc. – is against the Toomey language, it virtually ensures his amendment will fail.
And if Toomey-Manchin-Schumer doesn’t pass, then Reid probably won’t have enough votes to overcome a second filibuster on the bill – as it would contain the original anti-gun language sponsored by Reid and Schumer. This all but guarantees that the legislation would die, as Republicans and a half-a-dozen Democrat Senators would then team up to keep the bill from getting the required 60 votes.
One last question or thought: Did we waste our time supporting the Paul-Cruz-Lee filibuster and fighting the motion to proceed? No, because we forced Obama to fire most of his ammunition, as he dragged his human props around Washington in an effort to exploit them for political gain.
If Obama had been able to wait to play this card until Toomey-Manchin-Schumer came up for a vote, that vote would be a lot harder for us to win.
But Obama has already played this card for his “they deserve a vote” theme. Okay, they’re getting their vote. But by the time we reach the vote on cloture on Toomey-Manchin-Schumer, Obama’s exploitation of the victims of Newtown will begin to be realized for the cynical exploitative political ploy that it is. And he will be less able to shift gears and use the victims for the theme “They deserve a ‘yes’ vote.”
Second Amendment Hypocrites: Senators Schumer and Feinstein Pack Heat
By Jim Kouri, CPP
A recent poll conducted by the National Association of Chiefs of Police indicated that almost 64 percent of police commanders and sheriffs favor a law allowing private citizens to carry concealed firearms for protection. Almost 73 percent said that citizens should not be restricted from purchasing more than one weapon, and 96 percent say they believe criminals obtain firearms from illegal sources.
Unfortunately most states – especially those called Blue States due to their Liberal-leanings – continue to prohibit private citizens from carrying concealed handguns.
At the same time, there are outspoken opponents of gun ownership, such as Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Diane Feinstein (D-CA), who are carrying concealed weapons, according to WABC Radio's Mark Levin. Levin, a recognized constitutional expert, heads the Landmark Legal Foundation. The LLF's goal is to protect American's from unreasonable and illegal government intrusions and violations of the US Constitution, including the Second Amendment.
The mainstream news media have been aware that several antigun proponents are carrying concealed firearms but have failed to expose this hypocrisy. This writer's efforts to discover how many other anti-gunners are also packing heat – a right they wish to deny other citizens – met with limited results.
Not only does Schumer carry a handgun, the New York City Police Department also provides armed escorts for the good senator. In fact, the Government Accounting Office — the investigative arm of the US Congress — slammed Schumer's use of police resources for personal protection. It's clear that Schumer believes he's special. He wishes to ban private citizens' ownership of firearms, while he enjoys layers of protection.
"No wonder Chuckie Schumer shoots his mouth off so much – he's able to protect himself," says a 25-year police veteran.
Also, a check of Pistol License records shows that Senator Schumer possesses an "unrestricted" pistol permit, a rarity in New York City. Licenses are distributed in different categories in the Big Apple: Target Permits allow only use of a firearm at a licensed firing range; Premises Permits allow weapons to be kept in a home or apartment; Restricted Permits allow the gunowner to carry their firearms concealed but only within the purview of their job (security, jewelers, armored car guards, etc.). So it's evident that Senator Schumer has two sets of rules — one for Americans and one for himself.
And then we have Senator Diane Feinstein on the Left Coast who possesses something more rare than a conservative Republican in San Francisco – an unrestricted concealed weapons permit. Apparently without shame, she participated in a citywide gun turn-in program that was intended to create some kind of statue from the donated guns that were to be melted down. One of her police body guards let it slip that she contributed a cheap model for the meltdown, while retaining her .357 magnum revolver for her own personal self-defense.
Hypocrisy is not limited to politicians when it comes to the Second Amendment. For Example, well-known Washington-based columnist, Carl Rowan, often wrote about the ills of firearms ownership. Until, that is, he shot and wounded a teenager who trespassed on his property. The white teenaged boy claimed he wanted to try Rowan's swimming pool. Rowan, an African-American, retaliated with deadly force using a firearm. That's when the news came out that Carl Rowan, gun-control advocate, actually possessed a license to own firearms.
Another example is the loudmouth entertainer, Rosie O'Donnell, who once ran roughshod over conservative actor Tom Selleck because of his stance supporting the Second Amendment. Although Ms. O'Donnell doesn't carry a gun, she has three armed bodyguards who protect her, her wife and her children, something the vast majority of hardworking Americans could never afford. Isn't it comforting to know all these Liberals are looking out for us?
~ About the Author ~
Jim Kouri is a certified protection professional, writer, commentator and contributing editor for Chief of Police Magazine. A former chief at a housing project in New York City's Washington Heights district – dubbed Crack City – he serves as Fifth-Vice President of the National Association of Chiefs of Police. He possesses over 25 years of law enforcement and security experience and writes a regular column for KingNewsMedia.Com. He's the author of Crime Talk: Conversations with America's Top Crimefighters and Assume The Position: Police Science for Novelists, Screenwriters and Journalists, and his magazine articles appear in many publications. He's a frequent guest on many TV and radio stations including Fox News, CNN, CBS, ABC, CNBC, and others.
April 10th, 2013 by olddog
If I had the opportunity to address the parents of the Sandy Hook School shooting, and the supporters of more gun control laws, the first thing I would do is ask them
WHAT PART OF “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?
Has your grief completely over-powered your mind? Do you not see how much authority the federal government has stolen from the people already? Do you really want the federal government to have the last word on the people being able to defend their country from a tyrannical federal government? Are you blind to the loss of liberty that has already occurred in America?
Are you willing to watch your country descend into another civil war because of your personal grief? Do you really believe the government’s firepower will defeat the majority of the people who will fight them to a stand still? Do you really want the politicians to be afraid to come out of hiding for the rest of their life? Don’t you understand that this tragedy was most likely a black opps. operation by your government to stimulate the dull and ignorant into believing gun control will prevent future loss of life? Don’t you understand that this is going to result in an attempt to disarm the people and leave them helpless to defend themselves and their families, as has been done so many times by other governments? Were your children’s lives worth more than the hundreds of thousands of lives’ that will be lost when the government tries to disarm America? Is a nation of managed servants what you really want? Have you no idea what life will be like when the government is no longer afraid of the people? In the first place, why were your children in a public school if it is not because of your manipulated word view? Do you not see what public education has done to this country? My dear grieving parents, why do you want the government to continue manipulating the minds of innocent children, when the cause of liberty is being destroyed there? Have you forgotten how your minds were manipulated in public education? Why were you so trusting of an organization that has failed it’s stated purpose for generations? Was it because it is the cheapest baby sitting service available? If public education is the safest place to have your children protected, why is it not working? Did a gun destroy the mind of some whacko, and convince him to murder little children? Dear parents, why did you not know you were sending your children into a dangerous environment? Why are you unaware that the social manipulation in public schools is directly responsible for creating uncontrollable rage in the minds of many children? Why didn’t you, like most observant parents, notice a change in your child’s attitude after the first year of public education? Did you think that change was a normal thing in children? Why are you so anxious to place the blame of your failure on a man made object, when that object is the most indispensible tool left to protect our nation?
Why have you abandoned the principle, that adherence to a set of immutable principle’s is the only way to control governments world over? Why do you put your confidence in humanity’s ability to adapt to new challenges, over time-tested methods of controlling excessive permissiveness, and excessive control? Why do you not see the limitations placed on humanity by excessive government control?
If public education made you so smart, why are you so intellectually limited, that you believe more government control will make life better, or safer?
Why are you so willing to give up the freedom that so many Americans died to preserve? Is it because you hate guns, or is it because you are afraid to defend freedom? In the first place, why would you hate guns when they have been the only thing that our past Americans had to gain their freedom? How can you be so ignorant to believe any nation would be safe without guns? Do you really believe a defenseless nation would be a safer nation? Why are you ignorant of the fact that freedom of choice is the only way to identify those who have lost self-control, or have evil natures and plan to do more evil? Have the lies you were taught in public education and the media industry convinced you that the world would be a safer place if the governments were unconstrained like ours presently is?
Why are you unaware of and not infuriated over, the governments claims that your children really belonged to the government, and you were held responsible for them? Why are you so willing to let an unconstrained government rule this nation, or why do you think it will not be unconstrained if you want it to control your every minute of life? How can you believe the government will feel responsible to us, if we let it rule our very existence?
Let me remind you that, better/smarter men than you, declared that, the right of the people to be armed SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, and your personal tragedy is not sufficient reason to change that. If you want the loss of your dead children lives to be remembered forever, let their loss be the reason the government forever honors our God given right to remain armed. Self-defense is a God given right, and having guns is how we preserve it. Unconstrained governance, and government-controlled education, are the greatest evils the world has ever known.
In closing, let it be known that you are now responsible to the whole world for making it cognizant of the real reason for the consistent loss of liberty, and the rise of submissiveness in the people. It is because the government is hiding and protecting the International Investment Bankers who are really controlling our governments and taking control of the world’s resources. Since you have been manipulated into believing it is permissible for the government to manipulate the minds of our children into preemptive wars being an acceptable excuse to kill innocent children and their parents, why don’t you support the complete elimination of these Bankers forever, and protecting the lives of billions of people in the future? That, my dear parents is what will immortalize the loss of your children! Make your terrible loss the reason for the return of sanity, and self-responsibility, in the whole world. Killing the banksters would be like removing a thorn from an infected wound. The whole world would heal.
If anyone thinks this article is obscenely insensitive towards people suffering inconsolable grief, let it be known that governments all over the world, including America, and throughout history have murdered millions of people in order to establish governance by force, and if that does not offend you, then go to hell. Mass murder is always relative to the numbers involved, and hundreds of thousands of Americans dying defending their freedom is by far much worse than twenty children dying for no other reason than pleasing a putrid media industry. If you simply cannot accept the government’s involvement in this tragedy, you have not been paying attention to their modus operandi. Direct your rage where it belongs, and demand the end of central banking by the international banking cartel. They are the rotten bastards, who profit from and proliferate human depravity.
April 8th, 2013 by olddog
By Pastor Roger Anghis
April 7, 2013
We have been bombarded over the last few months with information as to the enemies that are a threat to the United States. Those that are paying attention don’t have to be told who the enemy is. Those that are not informed have to be told. Rush Limbaugh calls them uninformed voters. For the most part they look for the (D) after the name when voting and pay no attention to the character of the man/woman nor the platform behind that name.
The Department of Justice has declared that any person that believes that the government should operate according to the Constitution, as they have sworn to do, are probably terrorist. This may sound off the wall but they are training police, firefighters and employees of Department of Homeland Security that those that support what our Founding Fathers fought and died for are the biggest threat to America’s security. Here is a quote from a recent article concerning a DOJ training manual.
“A leaked training manual used in the State and Local Anti-Terrorism Training (SLATT) program for law enforcement and funded by the Department of Justice lists political bumper stickers expressing opposition to the United Nations and support for the bill of rights as indications of terrorist activity.
The presentation documents, leaked to the Public Intelligence website, are entitled Terrorism Training For Law Enforcement and are marked “law enforcement sensitive.” The program is funded by grants from the Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Assistance.
Slides for the presentation depict the kind of behavior that law enforcement officials should be wary of in spotting potential terrorists during highway patrols.
One of the slides – entitled “Fourth Amendment Issues” – notes that “a suspicious map located on the passenger seat” could warrant further investigation as a potential indicator of terrorism.
Another slide entitled “General Right Wing Extremist” – depicts suspicious bumper stickers that should warrant further investigation by cops conducting traffic stops.
The bumper stickers read, “Know Your Rights Or Lose Them,” and “If You Love Your Country, the U.N. Is Not Your Friend!,” and “Get US Out Of the United Nations”.
Under the category of “Special-Interest/Single Issue Terrorism,” the slide characterizes people who hold political opinions that “represent a fairly popular point of view” as terrorists. Anti-abortion activists are also listed as terrorists under this category.
Another slide lists people who are “antigenetic engineering” as terrorists. Presumably, that includes people who are concerned about a new study which found that rats fed with genetically-engineered Monsanto corn suffered premature deaths.” [Source Link].
In 2001 a FEMA training program called Christians terrorists. Called the Founding Fathers terrorists. You can see a video here. The opposition for the Patriot Act is continuing to grow because it violates so many aspects of our Constitution. I am not the biggest fan of Senator Rand Paul as his stance on the NDAA which violates our 1st, 2nd, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th and 14th Amendments as well as parts of the Constitution itself and immigration, I believe, are in direct violation of so many of our Constitutional rights and the laws of America that they are almost too many to discuss, but he has opposed many provisions of the Patriot Act. In a letter to his colleagues on February 15, 2011 he stated: “My main objection to the PATRIOT Act is that searches that should require a judge’s warrant are performed with a letter from an FBI agent—a National Security Letter (“NSL”).
I object to these warrantless searches being performed on United States citizens.
I object to the 200,000 NSL searches that have been performed without a judge’s warrant.
I object to over 2 million searches of bank records, called Suspicious Activity Reports, performed on U.S. citizens without a judge’s warrant.
Congress instead hastily passed a long-standing wish list of power grabs like warrantless searches and roving wiretaps. The government greatly expanded its own power, ignoring obvious answers in favor of the permanent expansion of a police state.
Other provisions of the PATRIOT Act previously made permanent and not scheduled to expire present even greater concerns. These include the use and abuse by the FBI of so-called National Security Letters. These secret demand letters, which allow the government to obtain financial records and other sensitive information held by Internet Service Providers, banks, credit companies, and telephone carriers—all without appropriate judicial oversight—also impose a gag order on recipients.” [Source Link]
These are all legitimate concerns about the violations they pose to an American’s constitutional rights. If you are not a citizen, that is another story as I do not believe that a non-citizen should have the same rights as an American citizen.
When you look at how our government is reacting to an American’s concern about the deterioration of our rights granted by our Constitution, it is the government that is now the biggest threat to our national security. If you are a pro-gun supporter, you are considered a national security threat. If you are pro-life you are considered a national security threat.
If you don’t support the U.S.’s involvement with the UN you are considered a national security threat. If you support traditional marriage you are considered a national security threat. And now the latest from Big Sis, Janet Napalitano, if you are a veteran you are considered a national security threat and there have been pieces of legislation introduced to Congress to disarm our veterans.
The movement within the federal government to restrict our gun rights which has been supported by virtually ever Democrat in every State is growing ever stronger. Senator Harry Reid is proposing legislation to tax Americans that exercise their 2nd Amendment rights. Another Democrat has introduced legislation to fine a gun owner $10,000 for not carrying liability insurance to cover the cost of the damage done by someone who steals their gun and commits a crime. That is effectively making one of the victims of a crime pay for the crime. I would like to see how our Constitution supports that. Our 4th Amendment guarantees that we cannot be charged without ‘probable cause’. Owning a gun that was stolen is not ‘probable cause’.
The US has agreed to the UN Arms Treaty which calls for the disarming of anyone over the age of 55 because, as the report states: . “And as we do, our reflexes diminish, our senses become impaired and our cognitive skills weaken … Therefore, as we enter our twilight years – clinically speaking, age 50 and above [Global life expectancy is only 67 years] – science tells us that we are in no shape to be handling or using a deadly weapon.” [Source Link]
Here is another violation of our 4th Amendment that DHS now has the right to do: Department of Homeland Security Can Seize Gold, Silver, Guns in Safety Deposit Boxes According to in-house memos now circulating, the DHS has issued orders to banks across America which announce to them that “under the Patriot Act” the DHS has the absolute right to seize, without any warrant whatsoever, any and all customer bank accounts, to make “periodic and unannounced” visits to any bank to open and inspect the contents of “selected safe deposit boxes.”
Further, the DHS “shall, at the discretion of the agent supervising the search, remove, photograph or seize as evidence” any of the following items “bar gold, gold coins, firearms of any kind unless manufactured prior to 1878, documents such as passports or foreign bank account records, pornography or any material that, in the opinion of the agent, shall be deemed of to be of a contraband nature.” [Source Link] Along with this it is also illegal for the bank to inform anyone who’s safety deposit box has been viewed or the contents been onsti! Who is the enemy of America?
Looking very briefly at what is happening in our schools we see not education but outright indoctrination. Just recently at John Hopkins University a pro-life group wanted to organize, however the University refused to allow them that right. The Student Government Association at Johns Hopkins University compared pro-life students to white supremacists and denied them official club status at the school. White Supremacist? For being pro-life? This is indoctrination for the global agenda where population control is number one. [Source Link]
Here is another case where a 15 year old was harrased so bad by his teacher for being a Republican that he had to transfer to another school. Even after complaining to the school official, nothing was ever done to the teacher. This is not education but indoctrination into the left’s political ideology. [Source Link]
Information is out now about the ‘Underware Bomber’ that he was actually an operative for the CIA! Why has it taken over three years for this information to come out. [Source Link]
Our members of Congress have sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the laws of this nation. Most have never read the Constitution and could care less about the restrictions that it imposes. When the fed’s and some States began imposing gun laws that are in direct violation of our onstitutionally protected 2nd Amendment rights many sheriffs declared that they would not enforce the laws that violate the 2nd Amendment. In Texas Democrats have introduct legislation that would have these sheriffs removed from office if they uphold the oath they swore. [Source Link]
In Colorado they have 30 elected sheriffs and all of them testified before the Colorado Senate Judiciary Committee and stated that the 8 laws they were debating were all violations of the Constitution and our 2nd Amendment rights and they could not and would not enforce any of them. Two Democrat State legislators proposed a bill that would hold up a pay raise they have been waiting for, for over seven years to be withheld until they do violate their oath to uphold the Constitution. Kudos to the people of Colorado as they have started recall petitions for 4 Democrats that voted for these guns restrictions. Two have been granted and are now collecting signatures and two are in the process of approval.
When you look at all of this, and this is just scratching the surface of what is going on, it is not the average American citizen that is a threat to our national security, the ones who demand that we operate by the Constitution, the ones who demand we be left free to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights, the ones who demand that America support the institution of traditional marriage, the ones who demand that we support a pro-life position.
But maybe the biggest problem with our government is We the People. Congress has a 9% approval rating yet we returned 90% of Congress to Washington! Abraham Lincoln once said “Now more than ever before, the people of the United States are responsible, for the Character of Their Congress. If That Body be Ignorant Reckless and Corrupt, it is Because the People Tolerate Ignorance Recklessness and Corruption”. We the People have tolerated those that wish to destroy America. That is the only reason that we are in the shape that we are in.
I see it as the government’s complete abandonment of the ideals and principles given to us by our Founders that is a threat to our national security. They have become the threat to our freedoms and rights and we must recognize this and use our election process to correct the problems that we ourselves have created by not paying attention to whom we put into office. The choice is ours. Thomas Paine stated “It is the duty of the Patriot to protect his country from its government.”
This statement by Samuel Adams is just as meaningful for today’s generation as it is for his generation: “The liberties of our country, the freedom of our Constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men.”
Daniel Webster also warned us about complacency: “Hold on, my friends, to the Constitution and to the Republic for which it stands. Miracles do not cluster and what has happened once in 6,000 years may not happen again. Hold on to the Constitution!”
The battle is ours. Do you hear the call to war?
© 2013 Roger Anghis – All Rights Reserved
Pastor Roger Anghis is the Founder of RestoreFreeSpeech.org, an organization designed to draw attention to the need of returning free speech rights to churches that was restricted in 1954.President of The Damascus Project,TheDamascusProject.org, which has a stated purpose of teaching pastors and lay people the need of the churches involvement in the political arena and to teach the historical role of Christianity in the politics of the United States. Married-37 years, 3 children, three grandchildren.Web site: RestoreFreeSpeech.orgE-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
The battle is ours. Do you hear the call to war?
WELL, DO YOU?
Have you not yet realized that our government is a rogue government, hell bent on merging America into a U.N. dominated one world government? ARE YOU SO AFRAID TO FIGHT FOR YOUR FREEDOM THAT YOU WILL ACCEPT THE PRESENT TREASON IN OUR GOVERNMENT? If you are, when the SHTF you better be prepared to answer to your patriotic neighbors, because they won’t have much concern for your welfare.
“It is the duty of the Patriot to protect his country from its government.”
AND YOU CANNOT DO THAT WITHOUT KNOWING WHICH SIDE IS RIGHT AND WHICH SIDE IS WRONG.
YOUR FIRST AND MOST IMPORTANT OBLIGATION IS TO BECOME, AND STAY INFORMED.
April 5th, 2013 by olddog
By Anthony Gregory
Finally, some sanity, and from a somewhat unexpected source. The ACLU is concerned about the civil liberties implications of the new Harry Reid Senate bill to establish so-called “universal background checks” for firearms purchases. The organization has tended toward silence on gun rights, but at least now it recognizes aspects of the problem with this terrible proposal.
Ever since Sandy Hook, the Obama administration and its progressive choir have demanded a new Assault Weapons Ban (AWB). Now it looks like that plan is toast. California Senator Dianne Feinstein blames gun owners and the NRA, and in a sense we should have expected all along that this proposal would get nowhere. Such a ban would mostly target “semi-automatic” rifles—which, despite all the hysterics, simply refers to any standard rifle that fires one round each time the trigger is pulled—that happen to have esthetic elements like the pistol grip that do not in fact add to the weapons’ lethality. This is the nonsensical standard used to ban some classes of weapons instrumentally identical to the ones banned in 1994.
The first AWB devastated the Democrats politically, and probably contributed as much as anything to the Republicans’ crushing victory in the 1994 congressional elections after forty years in the legislative minority. It also hurt Al Gore in his run against George W. Bush in 2000. The ban generally prohibited ordinary but scary looking rifles, which are used in about two percent of violent crimes committed with firearms. The law did not apply to, say, most of the weapons used at the Columbine school massacre in 1999. But it did interfere with Americans’ basic right to own what we can fairly call the modern version of the musket. Millions of Americans own such weapons like the AR-15, the most popular rifle and one targeted by the Democrats’ proposal for a new, robust AWB. These weapons are used for hunting, sport, and self-defense. They are not, despite all the misinformation to the contrary, repeating, military-style rifles.
In any event, the unpopularity of an AWB always doomed this proposal, especially under a Democratic president as distrusted on the right as Obama. The Republicans have the House and too many Democrats in the Senate are loyal to their gun-owning constituents.
So this whole time, the real threat to our firearms freedom has been these less debated, peripheral proposals—proposals that strip people the state deems “mentally ill” of the right to bear arms, proposals that violate the civil rights of released convicts, proposals to increase penalties for violations of current law, and, as disturbing as anything, proposals to institute “universal background checks.”
The gun restrictionists have pointed to polls showing more than 90% approval of such background checks, including among a vast majority of conservatives, Republicans, and gunowners. Liberty is always attacked on the margins, and most Americans don’t go to gun shows and so don’t see the big deal. Surely the state should know who is armed. Surely we don’t want people buying and selling guns freely.
But, in fact, universal background checks are arguably even more tyrannical than banning whole classes of weapons. Why should the government know who is armed? Why shouldn’t people be allowed to freely buy and sell private property without government permission? Half of Americans see background checks as the first step toward full registration then confiscation. Many fear that the new law would create records of these deals that would not immediately be destroyed, which could form databases or enable government in further nefarious purposes. The progressives have tended to regard any of these worries as paranoia, but it looks like the ACLU is now among the paranoid.
There is no need to discuss pure hypotheticals. There have been gun confiscations in the United States. After the Civil War, officials conducted confiscations to disarm American Indians and blacks became the target in the Jim Crow South. Confiscations followed Hurricane Katrina, along with the rest of the government’s martial law response. Since many gun controllers openly say they want a total ban of certain kinds of firearms, or all firearms, why wouldn’t gunowners fear that registration will lead to confiscation? The U.S. president promised that he would not take away Americans’ rifles, then went ahead and proceeded to propose to do just that. Add all of this to the database growth, the warrantless wiretapping, the domestic surveillance drones, the frightening executive power grabs concerning detention, interrogation, and executions, and the overall militarization of policing that has unfolded thanks to the wars on drugs and terror, and it seems fairly appropriate that in the age of Bush and Obama, civil libertarians of all stripes would resist the drive toward universal background checks or anything with such an Orwellian name as that.
This whole matter should also remind us of the interlocking nature of personal liberties. Abolishing the Second Amendment necessarily means abolishing the Fourth as well. Just ask the millions of black and Hispanic young men stopped and frisked in New York City in the name of gun control and with the purpose, as the police commissioner reportedly put it, to “instill fear” of police in these demographic groups. It is the violations of privacy that concern the ACLU, but anyone jealous of her security in her papers, persons, and effects should recoil at the thought of the state collecting these records.
Of course, it should go without saying that when it comes to criminal enterprise, universal background checks are unenforceable. In a country with as many guns as there are people, criminals and the state will always get the weapons they want. Firearms are easier to manufacture than many illegal drugs, and we see how well the state has stamped those out. The rapid developments in 3-D printing makes it even crazier that we’d still be talking about gun control as anything but a threat to the liberty of the law abiding.
The AWB looks defeated for now, but perhaps that was always known to be inevitable by our cynical civilian disarmament fetishists in Washington, DC. Perhaps the real goal was to get what could be gotten now—the beginnings of a national database of every lawful gun owner. The so-called gun show loophole—the freedom of owners to sell firearms to one another with few encumbrances—is a pocket of liberty. Closing this loophole would be a tragedy. We can only hope that civil libertarians across the spectrum ban together to challenge this march to erode these core freedoms.
For those few of you who have the balls to make your opinion public, I have assembled a warning notice for you to print and post on your doors, or make a yard sign.
WELCOME TO MY HOME
THIS DOOR IS LOCKED
FOR YOUR PROTECTION
KICK IT DOWN AND
YOU WILL DIE!
April 2nd, 2013 by olddog
By Lisa Guliani, Serendipity [Originally published in Babel Magazine in 2002]
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” — Preamble of the original “organic” Constitution.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident. That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” — Excerpt from the Declaration of Independence of the original thirteen united states of America, July 4, 1776.
Fourth of July 2002 has come and gone, and Americans honored the holiday with a renewed patriotic fervor that reminded me of the Bicentennial celebrations of 1976. As is customary, traditional fireworks displays took center stage and scores of people turned out to witness the dazzling show in the summer sky. With mixed feelings, I sat with friends on a crowded Pennsylvania sidewalk beneath a glittering, mesmerizing explosion of color, pondering the keen sense of sadness and betrayal that overwhelmed my spirit. Looking around at the huge crowds gathered for the annual events, I thought silently, “We are not free.” In truth, we have not been a free people for a very long time.
We celebrate this day in honor of our “independence”. We call ourselves a free people in a land of liberty. Our anthems proudly sing the praises of this nation, and we raise our voices, wave our flags and join in song — but how many Americans realize they are not free? This is a myth perpetuated by the powers-that-be in order to avoid any major civil unrest, and to keep us all living under the thumb of a militaristic corporate Big Brother within the illusions that have been created for us. The truth of the matter is this: what freedom has not been stolen from us, we have surrendered willingly through our silence and ignorance. As Americans, most of us have no idea how our freedoms are maintained — or lost. Apparently, our ancestors didn’t have a good grasp of this either. It is sad, but it is also very true.
Don’t point to that beloved parchment, the Constitution, as a symbol of your enduring freedom. It is representative of a form of government which seemingly no longer exists in this country today. The Constitution has been thrown out the window, the Republic shoved aside and replaced with a democracy. The thing is; most people in this country remain unaware that this is so because they simply do not know the truth — what lies beyond the myths. Your so-called government is not going to tell you, either.
To even begin to understand what has happened to the Republic, we must look backward in time to the period following the Civil War. We must go back to the year 1871, which was the beginning of the decline of the Republic. When we examine what happened during that time in our history, we begin to piece together this troubling, perplexing puzzle that is “America” — only then should we answer as to whether we are indeed a “free” people or not.
So, let’s roll backward into the past for a moment. It is time we learned what they didn’t teach us in school. It is far more interesting than what they DID tell us. I think you’ll stay awake for this lesson.
The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. I refer you to the “Acts of the Forty-First Congress,” Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: “An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia.” This is also known as the “Act of 1871.” What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.
What??? How could they do that? Moreover, WHY would they do that? To explain, let’s look at the circumstances of those days. The Act of 1871 was passed at a vulnerable time in America. Our nation was essentially bankrupt — weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War. The Civil War itself was nothing more than a calculated “front” for some pretty fancy footwork by corporate backroom players. It was a strategic maneuver by European interests (the international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the neck (and the coffers) of America.
The Congress realized our country was in dire financial straits, so they cut a deal with the international bankers — (in those days, the Rothschilds of London were dipping their fingers into everyone’s pie) thereby incurring a DEBT to said bankers. If we think about banks, we know they do not just lend us money out of the goodness of their hearts. A bank will not do anything for you unless it is entirely in their best interest to do so. There has to be some sort of collateral or some string attached which puts you and me (the borrower) into a subservient position. This was true back in 1871 as well. The conniving international bankers were not about to lend our floundering nation any money without some serious stipulations. So, they devised a brilliant way of getting their foot in the door of the United States (a prize they had coveted for some time, but had been unable to grasp thanks to our Founding Fathers, who despised them and held them in check), and thus, the Act of 1871 was passed.
In essence, this Act formed the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Note the capitalization, because it is important. This corporation, owned by foreign interests, moved right in and shoved the original “organic” version of the Constitution into a dusty corner. With the “Act of 1871,” our Constitution was defaced in the sense that the title was block-capitalized and the word “for” was changed to the word “of” in the title. The original Constitution drafted by the Founding Fathers, was written in this manner:
“The Constitution for the united states of America.”
The altered version reads: “THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA”. It is the corporate constitution. It is NOT the same document you might think it is. The corporate constitution operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it is the same parchment that governs the Republic. It absolutely is not.
Capitalization — an insignificant change? Not when one is referring to the context of a legal document, it isn’t. Such minor alterations have had major impacts on each subsequent generation born in this country. What the Congress did with the passage of the Act of 1871 was create an entirely new document, a constitution for the government of the District of Columbia. The kind of government THEY created was a corporation. The new, altered Constitution serves as the constitution of the corporation, and not that of America. Think about that for a moment.
Incidentally, this corporate constitution does not benefit the Republic. It serves only to benefit the corporation. It does nothing good for you or me — and it operates outside of the original Constitution. Instead of absolute rights guaranteed under the “organic” Constitution, we now have “relative” rights or privileges. One example of this is the Sovereign’s right to travel, which has been transformed under corporate government policy into a “privilege” which we must be licensed to engage in. This operates outside of the original Constitution.
So, Congress committed TREASON against the People, who were considered Sovereign under the Declaration of Independence and the organic Constitution. When we consider the word “Sovereign,” we must think about what the word means.
According to Webster’s Dictionary, “sovereign” is defined as:
1. chief or highest; supreme.
2. Supreme in power, superior in position to all others.
3. Independent of, and unlimited by, any other, possessing or entitled to, original and independent authority or jurisdiction.
In other words, our government was created by and for “sovereigns” — the free citizens who were deemed the highest authority. Only the People can be sovereign — remember that. Government cannot be sovereign. We can also look to the Declaration of Independence, where we read: “government is subject to the consent of the governed” — that’s supposed to be us, the sovereigns. Do you feel like a sovereign nowadays? I don’t.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist or a constitutional historian to figure out that this is not what is happening in our country today. Government in these times is NOT subject to the consent of the governed. Rather, the governed are subject to the whim and greed of the corporation, which has stretched its tentacles beyond the ten-mile-square parcel of land known as the District of Columbia — encroaching into every state of the Republic. Mind you, the corporation has NO jurisdiction outside of the District of Columbia. THEY just want you to think it does.
You see, you are presumed to know the law. This is ironic because as a people, we are taught basically nothing about the law in school. We are made to memorize obscure factoids and paragraphs here and there, such as the Preamble, and they gloss over the Bill of Rights. But we are not told about the law. Nor do our corporate government schools delve into the Constitution in any great depth. After all, they were put into place to indoctrinate and dumb down the masses — not to teach us anything. We were not told that we were sold-out to foreign interests and made beneficiaries of the debt incurred by Congress to the international bankers. For generations, American citizens have had the bulk of their earnings confiscated to pay on a massive debt that they, as a People, did not incur. There are many, many things the People have not been told. How do you feel about being made a beneficiary of somebody else’s massive debt without your knowledge or consent? Are we gonna keep going along with this??
When you hear some individuals say that the Constitution is null and void, think about how our government has transformed over time from a municipal or service-oriented entity to a corporate or profit-oriented entity. We are living under the myth that this is lawful, but it is not. We are being ruled by a “de facto,” or unlawful, form of government — the corporate body of the death-mongers — The Controllers.
With the passage of the Act of 1871, a series of subtle and overt deceptions were set in motion — all in conjunction and collusion with the Congress, who knowingly and deliberately sold the People down the river. Did they tell you this in government school? I doubt it. They were too busy drumming the fictional version of history into your brain — and mine. By failing to disclose what THEY did to the American People, the people became ignorant of what was happening. Over time, the Republic took it on the chin to the point of a knockdown. With the surrender of their gold in 1933, the People essentially surrendered their law. I don’t suppose you were taught THAT in school either. That’s because our REAL history is hidden from us. This is the way Roman Civil Law works — and our form of governance today is based upon Roman Civil Law and Admiralty/Maritime Law — better known as the “Divine Right of Kings” and “Law of the Seas”, respectively. This explains a lot. Roman Civil Law was fully established in the original colonies even before our nation began and is also known as private international law.
The government which was created for the District of Columbia via the Act of 1871 operates under Private International Law, and not Common Law, which was the law of the Constitutional Republic. This is very important to note since it impacts all Americans in concrete ways. You must recognize that private international law is only applicable within the District of Columbia and NOT in the other states of the Union. The various arms of the corporation are known as “departments” such as the Judiciary, Justice and Treasury. You recognize those names? Yes, you do! But they are not what you assume them to be. These “departments” all belong to the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. They do NOT belong to you and me under the corporate constitution and its various amendments that operate outside of the Constitutional Republic.
I refer you to the UNITED STATES CODE (note the capitalization, indicating the corporation, not the Republic) Title 28 3002 (15) (A) (B) (C). It is stated unequivocally that the UNITED STATES is a corporation. Realize, too, that the corporation is not a separate and distinct entity from the government. It IS the government. YOUR government. This is extremely important. I refer to this as the “corporate empire of the UNITED STATES,” which operates under Roman Civil Law outside of the Constitution. How do you like being ruled by a cheesy, sleazy corporation? You’ll ask your Congressperson about this, you say? HA!!
Congress is fully aware of this deception. You must be made aware that the members of Congress do NOT work for you and me. Rather, they work for the Corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Is this really any surprise to you? This is why we can’t get them to do anything on our behalf or to answer to us — as in the case with the illegal income tax — among many other things. Contrary to popular belief, they are NOT our civil servants. They do NOT work for us. They are the servants of the corporate government and carry out its bidding. Period.
The great number of committees and sub-committees that the Congress has created all work together like a multi-headed monster to oversee the various corporate “departments.” And, you should know that every single one of these that operates outside the District of Columbia is in violation of the law. The corporate government of the UNITED STATES has no jurisdiction or authority in ANY state of the Republic beyond the District of Columbia. Let this sink into your brain for a minute. Ask yourself, “Could this deception REALLY have occurred without the full knowledge and complicity of the Congress?” Do you think it happened by accident? You are deceiving yourself if you do. There are no accidents or coincidences. It is time to confront the truth and awaken from ignorance.
Your legislators will not apprise you of this information. You are presumed to know the law. THEY know you don’t know the law, or your history for that matter, because this information has not been taught to you. No concerted effort has been made to inform you. As a Sovereign, you are entitled to full disclosure of the facts. As a slave, you are entitled to nothing other than what the corporation decides to “give” you — at a price. Be wary of accepting so-called “benefits” of the corporation of the UNITED STATES. Aren’t you enslaved enough already?
I said (above) that you are presumed to know the law. Still, it matters not if you don’t in the eyes of the corporation. Ignorance of the law is not considered an excuse. It is your responsibility and your obligation as an American to learn about the law and how it applies to you. THEY count on the fact that most people are too uninterested or distracted or lazy to do so. The People have been mentally conditioned to allow the alleged government to do their thinking for them. We need to turn that around if we are to save our Republic before it is too late.
The UNITED STATES government is basically a corporate instrument of the international bankers. This means YOU are owned by the corporation from birth to death. The corporate UNITED STATES also holds ownership of all your assets, your property, and even your children. Does this sound untrue? Think long and hard about all those bills you pay, all those various taxes and fines and licenses you must pay for. Yes, they’ve got you by the pockets. Actually, they’ve had you by the ass for as long as you’ve been alive. In your heart, you know it’s true. Don’t believe any of this? Read up on the 14th Amendment. Check out how “free” you really are.
With the Act of 1871 and subsequent legislation such as the purportedly ratified 14th Amendment, our once-great nation of Sovereigns has been subverted from a Republic to a democracy. As is the case under Roman Civil Law, our ignorance of the facts has led to our silence. Our silence has been construed as our consent to become beneficiaries of a debt we did not incur. The Sovereign People have been deceived for hundreds of years into thinking they remain free and independent, when in actuality we continue to be slaves and servants of the corporation.
Treason was committed against the People in 1871 by the Congress. This could have been corrected through the decades by some honest men (assuming there were some), but it was not, mainly due to lust for money and power. Nothing new there. Are we to forgive and justify this crime against the People? You have lost more freedom than you may realize due to corporate infiltration of the so-called government. We will lose more unless we turn away from a democracy that is the direct road to disaster — and restore our Constitutional Republic.
In an upcoming article, we’ll take a closer look at the purportedly ratified 14th Amendment and how we became “property” of the corporation and enslaved by our silence.
I am saddened to think about the brave men and women who were killed in all the wars and conflicts instigated by the Controllers. These courageous souls fought for the preservation of ideals they believed to be true — not for the likes of a corporation. Do you believe that any one of the individuals who have been killed as a result of war would have willingly fought if they knew the full truth? Do you think one person would have laid down his life for a corporation? I think not. If the People had known long ago to what extent their trust had been betrayed, I wonder how long it would have taken for another Revolution. What we need is a Revolution in THOUGHT. We change our thinking and we change our world.
Will we ever restore the Republic? That is a question I cannot answer yet. I hope, and most of all — pray — that WE, the Sovereign People, will work together in a spirit of cooperation to make it happen in this lifetime. I know I will give it my best shot — come what may. Our children deserve their rightful legacy — the liberty our ancestors fought so hard to give to us. Will we remain silent telling ourselves we are free, and perpetuate the MYTH? Or, do we stand as One Sovereign People, and take back what has been stolen from the house of our Republic?
Something to think about — it’s called freedom.
My heartfelt thanks goes out to the following people for their gracious and generous assistance in researching this subject: Ken S. of American Revolution II Online News, Paul Walker of RMN News, Bob Taft, Stanooch, and Willy Whitten — true Patriots, one and all.
This is not the first time I have published this article, and it won’t be the last until I receive information proving it is false. Why? Simply because it is the very best, or most believable explanation of how our government is not obeying the Constitution (for) the United States. I have had some very honorable people refuse to study this with an open mind, and endured insults of not being patriotic, but all of my complaints are really directed at the Corporate Government who is in de facto charge of our country. When the day comes that we have a de jure government installed, I will respect it as mush as anyone. When someone comes along with an intelligent reason for all three branches of government not doing their job, and getting away with it, then, I will listen with an open mind. These traitors must have some kind of protection, or they would have been prosecuted long before now. Until they are, I accept the above article as the most plausible reason for their actions. AND ACTIONS DO SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS. When one studies the Original Constitution, the Federalist papers, The Declaration of Independence, and other documents of the early history of America, one would conclude that it would be impossible for this country to be run the way it is, and has been, without the politicians being tarred and feathered. OR better yet, burned at the stake. The present laws we are living under, are proof positive we are not being governed by our original constitution.
I can understand and believe that some politicians could be elected who were not really qualified, and some could have bought their position, but for the whole damn bunch to disregard the constitution means there is a reason for it, and they feel protected by it.
March 31st, 2013 by olddog
March 30, 2013
Since the unspeakable horror in Newtown, CT, last December, the lackeys who serve the ruling elite have stepped up efforts to ban specific types of weapons. There has never been any question the desired goal is to disarm we the people because the Second Amendment is the only thing standing between us and those who wish to rule us with an iron fist.
Efforts to nullify the Second Amendment have been stepped up with the usual cast of clowns releasing more flatulence than a massive herd of cattle:
• Rev. Jackson: Some 'Anti-American People' Arming Themselves in U.S.Have 'Confederate Ideology'
• Michael Moore: ‘Calm Down, White People, and Put Away Your Guns’
• Politico Reporter: LaPierre Is ‘Tired, Old White Guy That Is Clinging on to Something of the Past’ (Another empty-headed female)
• Belafonte blasts 'white America' for black gun crimes -NAACP forum used to attack 2nd Amendment 'carnage' in cities
Al Sharpton: “People Do Not Have The Right To Unregulated Rights In This Country”
"Sharpton and other black leaders were meeting and then held a press conference. In that press conference, Sharpton said, “Absolutely, I mean if you look at the Second Amendment it was that you would have militia to protect yourself in case the government came and attacked citizens. First of all, if the government were to come to disarm you, you would not be able to use an automatic weapon to defend yourself. Let's be serious. We're in a world of drones now so the Second Amendment would not help you in that area. It is absurd to try to cite that.”
What's absurd is that buffoon speaking on an issue he knows nothing about.
Then, we have victims of mind melt; their brain has been softened by the relentless propaganda dished out to Americans on a daily basis for decades:
Des Moines Register publishes gun-ban column advocating deadly violence against NRA, GOP leaders
"In a column that appeared after the shooting with the headline "Kaul: Nation needs a new agenda on guns," he proposed a new liberal agenda: repeal the Second Amendment, declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal, and well, make violent threats to Republican leaders and NRA members. The Des Moines Register published this junk on December 29.
"I would tie Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, our esteemed Republican leaders, to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around a parking lot until they saw the light on gun control," he wrote. Is that a threatening James Byrd reference? "And if that didn't work, I’d adopt radical measures," he continued. This was how he spelled out the other agenda items, which included killing NRA members who wouldn't surrender their arms:" (Rest at link above)
Naturally, Butch Napolitano's thugs from the Department of Fatherland Security ignored promoting the murder of NRA members.
Over the past few years, great effort has been made to reach out to sheriffs across the country as the tyranny coming out of the Outlaw Congress and various unconstitutional agencies continue to terrorize Americans over things like raw milk. Actually, Jack McLamb's association, Police & Military Against The New World Order, has been at it for more than a decade. Jack is a former police officer himself; a real gentleman. Former sheriff, Richard Mack, has been out there working hard, reaching out to sheriffs around the country.
They have been very successful. So successful, in fact, the carnival barker WH press secretary, Jay Carney, spewed this vomit with a straight face:
"CNSNews.com asked, “There have been 381 sheriffs that have signed on saying they would not enforce gun laws they believed were unconstitutional. Would the administration have a problem if local law enforcement did not enforce whatever gun package were to pass?”
"Carney responded that he had not seen the list of sheriffs. “I think as a general proposition we think that people ought to follow the law,” Carney told CNSNews.com. “As an absolute matter of fact in my view, and I think many other constitutional experts, there's not a single measure in this package of proposals the president has put forward that in anyway violates the Constitution. In fact, they reflect the president's commitment to our Second Amendment rights.”
I sincerely appreciate the work of Jack, Richard and all the sheriffs in this country who have stepped forward to show their support for the Second Amendment. However, the word sheriff appears no where in the U.S. Constitution making that office vulnerable to politicians who react with hysterical emotion instead of reason and logic.
Delaware leads nationwide move to strip county sheriffs of power
Law would fire sheriffs for defying gun control measures – Texas:
"The first effort emerged in Texas. Legislation proposed by Dallas Democratic Rep. Yvonne Davis would remove any sheriff or law enforcement officer who refuses to enforce state or federal laws. What's more, it would remove any elected or appointed law enforcement officer for simply stating or signing any document stating that they will not obey federal orders. A gun lobbyist told Secrets, "Beware because once something like this is introduced in one state, it will be followed very quickly in several other states."
The bill is H.B. 2127. Pray tell, Ms. Davis – just how do you intend to remove any sheriff in this state? They are elected by the people. One can hope that since our state legislature is controlled by Republicans, both houses, with a Republican governor, that bill won't stand a chance. Texans might want to call their state rep and tell him/her you're outraged Ms. Davis has introduced such a bill.
It's not just a nationwide effort to limit their power, but to abolish the office of sheriff altogether. Mark my words, it's coming.
Then, there are the imbeciles who have zero understanding of the meaning of the Second Amendment:
Utah Governor: "Utah Will Adhere to the Law" and Obey Federal Gun Laws
"As courageous state legislators enlist in the fight to repel the federal government's assault on the Second Amendment, the governor of one western state is telling a liberty-minded state representative to stand down. Governor Gary Herbert of Utah recently called a pro-gun rights bill sponsored by a Utah state representative “an exaggeration” and encouraged the lawmaker to “adhere to the law.” This is not the level of support citizens of the Beehive State would expect from the man they elected to lead their state."
Since 2005, Dr. Edwin Vieira has been trying to educate gun owners and lawmakers about the constitutional militia. I've been trying, but running into a brick wall from individuals who simply ignore the history of the militia and the true meaning of the Second Amendment. Responses I get from private militia members here and in other states is "we don't need the stinking state". Such geniuses. I hate to break it to you fellas, but as "private" militias, you have zero legal authority to do anything other than target practice.
Last summer I wrote four working papers and one bill for our state legislature. One of the working papers is to reconstitute the constitutional militia. They were given to members of the legislature. Did I get any support from the militia groups in Texas? Not one that I'm aware of; after all, "We don't need the state."
Our legislature is going to do nothing about a constitutional sound money bill, Agenda 21, revitalizing the constitutional militia or the Seventeenth Amendment. I sent every Republican (they control both houses) a letter directing them to those working papers and the one bill I wrote .I included Dr. Vieria's nine page presentation to the Montana banking committee on a constitutional sound money bill. It cost me about $350.00 for the printing and postage. I might as well have burned the money and not wasted my time. Despite efforts to get the word out to active groups here in Texas, few did anything in contacting state legislators and senators to get three bills written; I wrote one with the working paper. Because there was no pressure, those four issues will not be addressed by our legislature this session. Our legislature goes out of session May 27, 2013, until January 6, 2015. By then it will be too late. Don't Mess With Texas is nothing but empty words.
I'll say it again: militias around the country are doing great work in planning and preparing for disasters to help first responders. They are responsible, patriotic folks. But, there is a difference between the constitutional militia and private ones:
Are you doing your constitutional duty for "homeland security"?
"All this is no merely quaint story-telling about men attired in knee-britches and three-cornered hats, or the anachronistic and academic stuff of Colonial re-enactors and museums at Lexington and Concord. This is what "the Militia of the several States" actually were, codified in every relevant statute of every Colony and independent State throughout a period of almost 150 years prior to ratification of the Constitution. And therefore this is what "the Militia of the several States" still are, because that term incorporated in the Constitution must be interpreted in light of its historical antecedents as known to the Founding Fathers, and continue to be given the selfsame construction until the Constitution is amended (which, with the assistance of Providence, in this particular it never will be). See Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189, 206 (1920). The only possible difference to be countenanced today actually amounts to an expansion: Now, with the legal emancipation of women, "the Militia of the several States" arguably includes all able-bodied females, who might be called to serve in some capacities in the most critical, last-ditch situations of State and National defense, freeing men for more arduous duties.
"So, constitutionally YOU very likely–indeed, almost surely–are a member of "the Militia of the several States" in the State in which you live. And, if so, the Constitution imposes a duty on YOU to keep and bear arms in the Militia for the defense of your State and Nation, because that is the meaning of the Militia: the people in arms, and therefore the people with arms. And, most importantly, their own arms: their own private property in their own personal possession.
"Moreover, because the duty to keep and bear arms is of constitutional stature, each individual enjoys an absolute constitutional right as against every level, department, or branch of government–National, State, and local–to fulfill that duty. Inasmuch as the Constitution requires all of We the People eligible for the Militia to possess their own private arms in their capacity as a governmental institution, then on no account, for no reason, and by the application of no power can any level of government disarm any of them. Indeed, to argue that any other branch of government may disarm the one branch of government that the Constitution specifically requires to be armed is so illogical as to verge on insanity."
Private militia have no power despite the nasty, patronizing emails I get from men:
"Although some of these private “militias” claim “common law” as their basis, they cannot stand on such a foundation. For “common law” had nothing whatsoever to do with the formation and operation of the Militia in any of the Colonies or independent States prior to ratification of the Constitution. All of those Militia were the products of charters or statutes. And in none of them did judges or sheriffs play any directing role. Under the Constitution, therefore, the same pattern must obtain today. As wholly private organizations with no legal authority peculiar to themselves—for certainly not a single one of them has been empowered by a State statute to participate in the activities they have taken upon themselves—these “militias” are necessarily not parts of the government of any State or Locality."
"The Militia of the Several States" Guarantee the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
"Although the Constitution recognizes "the Militia of the several States" as State institutions, the States themselves cannot dispense with the Militia, in whole or material part, because the Constitution presupposes the permanence of the Militia, and the Constitution is "the supreme Law of the Land", which all State officials "shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support". Article VI, Clauses 2 and 3…..
"The Constitution reserves to the States "the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress". Article I, Section 8, Clause 16. If Congress fails to "prescribe[ ]" such "discipline", and in all cases where any Congressionally mandated "discipline" does not apply, the States do not need Congress's permission to administer their Militia as they may judge to be necessary and proper. Prior to ratification of the Constitution, the States' powers over their Militia were plenary. The Constitution delegated to Congress certain limited powers with respect to the Militia–which powers, if Congress properly exercises them, are "the supreme Law of the Land" that supersede conflicting State laws. Article VI, Clause 2. Otherwise, the States retain a concurrent power to enact laws to govern their Militia. Amendment X."
Sadly, even state lawmakers don't understand the true militia:
South Carolina Unorganized Militia And Assault Weapons to Repel Federal Tyranny
"As a warning shot over the bow, South Carolina is poised to take action to protect the rights of its citizens. Congratulations, you are a member of South Carolina's “unorganized militia.” Now that you know that, state Sen. Tom Corbin, R-Greenville, wants to make sure you have access to guns in case the governor ever calls on you to defend the state. Corbin has proposed a new state law — unanimously approved Wednesday by a Senate subcommittee — that would guarantee all members of the unorganized militia “shall have the right, at his own expense, to acquire, possess, keep, and bear all firearms that could be legally acquired or possessed by a citizen of South Carolina as of December 31, 2012.”
"Translated that means — barring an almost certain constitutional challenge if the proposal becomes law — you can buy an assault weapon, regardless of whether the federal government bans them, as President Barack Obama and others have proposed. The proposed law is based on a state law, dating back to 1881, that refers to an “unorganized militia” made up of “all able bodied persons over 17 years of age.”
Would Sen. Corbin please tell me where in the Second Amendment it says unorganized militia? "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." While I appreciate Sen. Corbin's effort, it doesn't solve the problem of the current push to ban certain weapons. This latest is just another incremental step.
Ted Nugent took some actor named Jim Carrey to the woodshed over an anti-Second Amendment video he apparently made. But, why hasn't Ted Nugent stepped up to the plate to support revitalizing the constitutional militia? His voice would activate a whole lot of gun owners.
Keep sending your money to the NRA. But remember this: Wayne LaPierre talks the big talk, but without the NRA's big money, Harry Reid can't keep getting reelected. Wayne LaPierre is a friend of Comrade Reid: Video: NRA’s Wayne Lapierre Praises Anti-Gun Harry Reid. Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas. Harry Reid has treaded carefully regarding the so-called assault weapons ban. Like any hooker on a street corner, he knows where his next buck comes from – your membership dues.
Getting Gun Owners' Information Is the NRA's Business. "It kind of makes you wonder if there isn't someone in the NRA's membership department who fantasizes about how much easier their job would be if there really was a national gun registry."
Oath Keepers are doing a bang up job in trying to educate Americans, gun owners or not, about the constitutional militia: Oath Keepers group issues nationwide call to support militia documentary. I don't know how many of their members have been working as some of us tried here in Texas to revitalize the militia in their respective states.
For the life of me, I still cannot fathom why a fine organization like Gun Owners of America hasn't mobilized their millions of members to work towards the only real solution to stopping gun control. GOA has a full page of all of Dr. Edwin Vieira's militia columns here. If they put out a special mailing to their millions of members outlining a game plan for the state houses, just think of what could happen!
I say this to the gun owners in this country who continue to ignore the only real solution: You keep fighting this war with an unloaded gun and you're going to continue to lose.
If gun owners think for one minute this push to disarm us is going away, you're in denial. Throwing money at "conservatives" in the Outlaw Congress or signing petitions to get some bill passed in the Outlaw Congress to "protect our Second Amendment rights" has done NOTHING to stop what's going on. Throwing more money at the NRA or other gun groups to stop the never ending legislation in state houses and the Outlaw Congress has done NOTHING to stop what's going on. Remember the old saying: Doing the same thing over and over again is a form of insanity.
If gun owners in this country don't stand up as a whole and go after their state legislatures, we will continue to see this: Court deals blow to NRA, Second Amendment in gun case
If gun owners in this country really wanted to stop the constant attack on the Second Amendment, they would have rallies at their state capitol with thousands demanding their legislature revitalize the constitutional militia. If you don't think that will do the trick, let me remind folks about how the patriots of Tennessee defeated the effort to enact a state sales tax:
Tennesseans stage tax revolt – Massive revolt at state Capitol stops new income-tax plan (June 2000)
"As protesters began to gather outside the legislative chambers Monday evening, several legislators were taken away by ambulance and hospitalized for blood pressure and heart problems as tensions rose and tempers flared. By Tuesday morning, tax protesters were brandishing signs reading, “Let's send them all to the ER!”
"Trouble began brewing Friday evening as the state income tax proposal emerged from a legislative conference committee considering the state budget after local news shows had already aired. Legislators supporting the income tax had hoped that a vote would be taken on the proposal Saturday morning to avoid giving anti-tax groups time to mount a repeat of the tax revolt that occurred last November, when an earlier income-tax measure died as taxpayers besieged legislative offices with tens of thousands of calls and e-mails every hour. But the hopes of income-tax supporters were dashed when two of Nashville’s competing talk radio stations, WLAC and WTN, joined forces and served as the catalyst for opposition to the legislative proposal."
I hope you read the full article. It's also how we, led by Jodi Waters out in California, beat the biggest oil companies in the world over the MTBE gasoline additive disaster. It is no longer in any gasoline in the country. We took our angry voices to the state house and we won.
The patriots of Tennessee won. How about gun owners in this country? More donations, petitions, endless lawsuits or raising hell at your state capitol until your legislators "get it"? Put up or shut up as they say.
City looks to make gun ownership mandatory
Several columns by Dr. Edwin Vieira on the constitutional militia free on audio.
President George Washington Structured The Militia
System To Prevent Treason And Tyranny By Public Officials.
Gun Control, the Dick Act of 1902, Bills of Attainder and Ex Post Facto Laws
'Our civilian-military face-off' (Sacramento Bee, November 30, 1997).
"Bill of Rights No Obstacle for the [Marine] Corps.
© 2013 – NewsWithViews.com and Devvy – All Rights Reserved
Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold.
Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country. She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn't left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party.
Devvy's regularly posted new columns are on her site at:www.devvy.com. You can also sign up for her free email alerts.
E-mail is: email@example.com
March 30th, 2013 by olddog
By Tom Burghardt
One indelible sign of state capture by pirate corporations and the financial jackals holding sway on Wall Street and the City of London is the ease with which former “regulators” slip into plum positions with the firms whom they supposedly “regulated” as “public servants.”
While the drone kill-crazy Obama regime has done yeoman’s work cementing in place extra-constitutional policies first enacted by the Bush gang–only to exceed Bushist depredations by a whole order of magnitude–kool-aid sipping “progressives” and troglodytic “conservatives” have given the president a free pass when it comes to policing the financial criminals who blew up the world economy.
But when it comes to US spy agencies probing and sweeping up your financial information, well, the sky’s the limit!
As Reuters reported last week, the administration “is drawing up plans” to give securocrats “full access to a massive database that contains financial data on American citizens and others who bank in the country, according to a Treasury Department document.”
That Treasury plan would give secret state apparatchiks, including those ensconced at CIA, NSA and the Pentagon free reign to rummage through the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network’s (FinCEN) massive database of “suspicious activity reports” routinely filed by “banks, securities dealers, casinos and money and wire transfer agencies.” The FBI and DHS already have full access to that database under the Orwellian USA Patriot Act.
Under the proposal, FinCen data will be linked “with a computer network used by US defense and law enforcement agencies to share classified information called the Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System,” according to Reuters.
And since requirements for filing SARs are “so strict,” banks often “over-report,” this “raises the possibility that the financial details of ordinary citizens could wind up in the hands of spy agencies,” where it will live in perpetuity, “criminal evidence, ready for use in a trial,” as Cryptohippie famously warned.
Got that? While Wall Street drug banks are handled with care because of the “collateral consequences” that might result from a criminal referral for laundering billions of narco-dollars, the average citizen’s financial data will be fair game.
Which brings us back to Obama’s anemic regulatory regime and the “sheriffs” eager to do the bankster’s bidding.
Wall Street’s Choice
As one of the filthiest dens of corruption in Washington, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is in a league of its own.
In late January, when the president announced he was nominating former federal prosecutor Mary Jo White to lead the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), The New York Times, as they are wont to do, proclaimed that the “White House delivered a strong message to Wall Street.”
A rather ironic assertion considering the tens of millions of dollars “earned” defending Wall Street criminals by Debevoise & Plimpton partner Mary Jo and her millionaire lawyer husband John, a partner at the white shoe corporate litigation shop Cravath, Swaine & Moore, as Above the Law disclosed.
Keep in mind that White will soon lead an agency that for years covered-up financial crimes by routinely shredding tens of thousands of case files on everything from insider trading, securities fraud, market manipulation and the Madoff and Stanford Ponzi schemes, as a 2011 Rolling Stone investigation disclosed.
As I reported nearly three years ago during my investigation into now-convicted fraudster Allen Stanford’s ties to the CIA over his role in laundering oceans of cash for the Agency’s narcotrafficking assets, the SEC’s Fort Worth office “stood down” multiple probes “at the request of another federal agency,” which regional head of enforcement Stephen J. Korotash “declined to name.”
Indeed, a 2010 report by the SEC’s Office of the Inspector General found that another “former head of Enforcement in Fort Worth,” Spencer C. Barasch, “played a significant role in multiple decisions over the years to quash investigations of Stanford,” and sought to represent the dodgy banker “on three separate occasions after he left the Commission, and in fact represented Stanford briefly in 2006 before he was informed by the SEC Ethics Office that it was improper to do so.”
Barasch eventually paid a $50,000 fine for ethics violations and “moved on.”
Despite the SEC’s documented history of sleaze and lax enforcement of rules that would earn the average citizen a one-way ticket to the slammer, on March 19 the Senate Banking Committee approved White’s nomination by a vote of 21-1; the lone dissenter was Sherrod Brown (D-OH). A vote by the full Senate could come as early as next week and she is expected to be confirmed easily.
As a former US Attorney for the Southern District in New York (1993-2002), White has been described by corporate media as a “tough as nails” prosecutor for her role in bringing down Mafia wise guy John Gotti and for running to ground criminal mastermind Ramzi Yousef, the architect of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. (For a gripping account of how the FBI and US prosecutor’s office botched that investigation and “foamed the runway” for the mass murder of 3,000 people on 9/11, readers should train their sights on Peter Lance’s exposé, 1000 Years for Revenge).
White’s record when it came to holding financial criminals to account however, was even more dubious; in fact, for more than a decade she’s defended them.
Times’ stenographers dialed back their glowing encomiums for the Obama nominee, writing that “translating that message into action will not be easy, given the complexities of the market and Wall Street’s aggressive nature.”
As reliable hands on the financial beat, Dealbook reporters routinely trumpet everything from the Justice Department’s sweetheart deal with drug money laundering and terrorist coddling banking giant HSBC to kissing Jamie Dimon’s hem over billions of JPMorgan Chase losses last year in what were euphemistically described as a “bad bet on derivatives.”
In the January puff-piece, reporters Ben Protess and Benjamin Weiser outdid themselves, claiming that with the White nomination “the president showed a renewed resolve to hold Wall Street accountable for wrongdoing.”
However, a less than laudatory piece published by Bloomberg News took those fatuous claims to task. Financial columnist Jonathan Weil observed that while “The Securities and Exchange Commission couldn’t get Ken Lewis on any securities-law violations after he helped drive Bank of America Corp. into the ground as its chief executive officer,” the agency “is poised to get his attorney as its new chairman–and Morgan Stanley’s, too.”
But hey, it’s not like the SEC is chock-a-block with conflicts of interest, right? Well, if a bracing read is what the doctor ordered, then turn your attention to a damning study released last month by the Project on Government Oversight (POGO). Entitled, Dangerous Liaisons: Revolving Door at SEC Creates Risk of Regulatory Capture, author Michael Smallberg takes us on a 60-page tour of insider dealing and corruption that would make a Roman emperor blush.
According to Smallberg: “Between 2001 and 2010, more than 400 SEC alumni filed nearly 2,000 disclosure statements saying they planned to represent employers or clients before the agency. These alumni have represented companies during SEC investigations, lobbied the agency on proposed regulations, obtained waivers to soften the blow of enforcement actions, and helped clients win exemptions from federal law. On the other side of the revolving door, when industry veterans join the SEC, they may be in a position to oversee their former employers or clients, or may be forced to recuse themselves from working on crucial agency issues.”
Talk about an agency blind in both eyes by design!
A Counsel with ‘Juice’
One of the more egregious cases which came to light was SEC’s handling of a 2005 insider trading case involving former agency enforcement head, Linda Thomsen, White and her client, Morgan Stanley CEO John Mack.
Before her tenure as the agency’s chief enforcement officer, Thomsen was in private practice at the powerhouse New York law firm, Davis, Polk & Wardell. During the capitalist financial meltdown, the company represented upstanding corporate citizens such as AIG, Freddie Mack, Lehman Brothers and drug-tainted Citigroup. Bulking up a stable of attorneys well-versed in regulatory matters, the firm has hired other former SEC officials, including Commissioner Annette Nazareth and Linda Thomsen.
Before sailing off to greener shores at Davis, Polk, Nazareth’s claim to fame was standing up a voluntary “supervisory regime” for the largest “investment bank holding companies” who “policed” themselves by cratering the economy and costing taxpayers trillions in bailouts.
That program, the Consolidated Supervised Entity was scrapped in 2008. Why? According to a press release by then SEC head Christopher Cox (no slouch himself when it came to defending his corporatist masters): “The last six months have made it abundantly clear that voluntary regulation does not work. When Congress passed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, it created a significant regulatory gap by failing to give to the SEC or any agency the authority to regulate large investment bank holding companies, like Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, and Bear Stearns.” (emphasis added)
A “gap” large enough to fly a fleet 747s through and still have enough wiggle room to launch a dozen Saturn 5s into deep space!
And that insider trading case?
According to Matt Taibbi’s Rolling Stone investigation, in September 2004 SEC investigator Gary Aguirre was tasked to look into an insider trading complaint against “a hedge-fund megastar named Art Samberg. One day, with no advance research or discussion, Samberg had suddenly started buying up huge quantities of shares in a firm called Heller Financial.”
Samberg was the founder of the multibillion dollar hedge fund, Pequot Capital Management, a firm which invested in a multitude of private and public equities and what are known as “distressed securities.” These are investment instruments held by firms or government entities (paging Fannie Mae!) that are either in default, under bankruptcy protection or will soon be heading south. The most common securities of this type are bonds and bank debt (think residential mortgage backed securities and other toxic assets). Since the financial crisis, a booming market in distressed securities have earned savvy hedge fund mangers billions in fees as they seek influence with regulators over how that debt is restructured.
And since “influence” in Washington and the “juice” that comes with it on Wall Street is the name of the game, well, you get the picture.
“‘It was as if Art Samberg woke up one morning and a voice from the heavens told him to start buying Heller,’ Aguirre recalls. ‘And he wasn’t just buying shares–there were some days when he was trying to buy three times as many shares as were being traded that day.’ A few weeks later, Heller was bought by General Electric–and Samberg pocketed $18 million.”
“After some digging,” Taibbi wrote, “Aguirre found himself focusing on one suspect as the likely source who had tipped Samberg off: John Mack, a close friend of Samberg’s who had just stepped down as president of Morgan Stanley.”
According to Taibbi, “Mack flew to Switzerland to interview for a top job at Credit Suisse First Boston. Among the investment bank’s clients, as it happened, was a firm called Heller Financial. We don’t know for sure what Mack learned on his Swiss trip; years later, Mack would claim that he had thrown away his notes about the meetings.”
Rather conveniently, one might say.
In any event after returning from his Swiss Alps sojourn, in a classic case of “you scratch my back” Samberg cut his buddy Mack into a deal with a tech firm called Lucent, “a favor that netted him [Mack] more than $10 million.” Shortly thereafter, “Samberg began buying-up every Heller share in sight, right before it was snapped up by GE.”
An insider trading case worthy of further scrutiny, right? But when Aguirre told his boss [Robert Hanson] that he intended to interview Mack and the other principals, “things started getting weird.” Taibbi noted that Aguirre’s boss told the investigator that Mack “had powerful political connections.”
Indeed he did. Like other Wall Street banksters, Mack had been a fundraising “Ranger” for the 2004 George W. Bush campaign, and when it became clear that a new product line needed to be rolled out, Mack crossed party lines and backed Hillary Clinton’s ill-starred 2008 bid for the Oval Office.
How’s that for clubby “bipartisanship”!
A 2007 report (large PDF file) published by the Senate Finance Committee titled The Firing of an SEC Attorney and the Investigation of Pequot Management, disclosed that “at least three experienced SEC officials believed in the summer of 2005 that questioning John Mack was an appropriate next step in the Pequot Investigation.”
Indeed, Senate investigators revealed that “the most significant aspect” of Mack’s 2006 SEC testimony (after the statute of limitations for prosecution had expired) “is his acknowledgement that he went to Switzerland to discuss becoming CSFB’s CEO from July 26-28, 2001.”
“In view of the fact that Mack also spoke with Samberg immediately upon his return to the United States on July 29, 2001,” Senate staff disclosed, “the trading day before Samberg began heavily betting on Heller Financial stock, and on the same night Mack was permitted into a lucrative deal, there was more than a sufficient basis to justify taking Mack’s testimony in the summer of 2005.”
After first being given the go-ahead to interview Mack, “Aguirre’s direct line of supervisors” including Hanson, Mark Kreitman and Paul Berger, got cold feet. Unfortunately for Aguirre, this came after he had briefed attorneys at Mary Jo White’s old stomping ground and “criminal authorities in the Southern District opened their own investigations” into dubious deals between Samberg and Mack.
At that point, Senate investigators averred, “his supervisors’ attitudes shifted dramatically,” that is, “when officials from Morgan Stanley began contacting the SEC to learn about the potential impact of the investigation on its prospective CEO, John Mack.” Only then did Hanson warn Aguirre that “it would be difficult to subpoena John Mack because of his ‘powerful political connections’.”
Aguirre told Senate investigators that “in a face-to-face meeting” with his boss, “Hanson said it would be very difficult to get permission to question Mack because of Mack’s ‘powerful political connections’.”
Hanson however, denied everything and said during his Senate testimony “That doesn’t sound like something I would say.”
“As a general matter,” Hanson testified, “I try to alert folk above me about significant developments in investigations that may trigger calls and the like so that they are not caught flat footed. I also think that Paul [Berger] and Linda [Thomsen] would want to know if and when we are planning to take Mack’s testimony so that they can anticipate the response, which may include press calls that will likely follow. Mack’s counsel will have ‘juice’ as I described last night–meaning that they will reach out to Paul and Linda (and possibly others).”
And who was Mack’s “juiced” attorney? Why none other than Mary Jo White!
Unbeknownst to Aguirre, his supervisors were trading emails about his imminent firing from the agency. “With no knowledge of those emails,” Senate investigators disclosed that Aguirre wrote Hanson again stating, that “before and after the Mack decision, you have told [me] several times that the problem in taking Mack’s exam is his political clout, e.g., all the people that Mary Jo White can contact with a phone call.”
At the same time that Aguirre was seeking to subpoena Mack’s testimony, Morgan Stanley’s board hired Debevoise & Plimpton to vet their soon-to-be reinstalled CEO. “Only two days after being retained,” the Senate reported, “White did what the SEC did not do until more than a year later. She questioned John Mack: ‘The other thing that I did for the board to gather what information I could on that time frame was to interview John Mack himself,’” White told investigators.
But she did more than that, demonstrating she indeed had plenty of “juice.”
“That evening,” the Senate disclosed, “White sent Thomsen an e-mail message marked ‘URGENT’ and asked that Thomsen return the call ‘this evening.’ Aguirre complained that the next day White delivered the e-mails that he had subpoenaed from Morgan Stanley directly to Linda Thomsen.”
“On June 27,” Aguirre testified, “I learned that Mack-Samberg emails, which I had subpoenaed from Morgan Stanley, had been delivered directly to the Director of Enforcement, Linda Thomsen. Neither I nor other staff had heard of this happening before. Indeed, the subpoena explicitly stated that the documents were to be delivered to me.”
Evidence reviewed by the Senate Finance Committee “suggests that the reluctance to question Mack represents a much more subtle and pervasive problem than an individual partisan political favor. SEC officials were overly deferential to Mack–not because of his politics–but because he was an ‘industry captain’ who could hire influential counsel to represent him.”
“In a shocking move that was later singled out by Senate investigators,” Taibbi wrote, “the director actually appeared to reassure White, dismissing the case against Mack as ‘smoke’ rather than ‘fire’.”
“Aguirre didn’t stand a chance,” Taibbi noted. “A month after he complained to his supervisors that he was being blocked from interviewing Mack, he was summarily fired, without notice. The case against Mack was immediately dropped: all depositions canceled, no further subpoenas issued. ‘It all happened so fast, I needed a seat belt,’ recalls Aguirre, who had just received a stellar performance review from his bosses. The SEC eventually paid Aguirre a settlement of $755,000 for wrongful dismissal.”
It gets better.
In a subsequent piece, Taibbi followed-up and discovered “not only did the SEC ultimately delay the interview of Mack until after the statute of limitations had expired, and not only did the agency demand an investigation into possible alternative sources for Samberg’s tip (what Aguirre jokes was like ‘O.J.’s search for the real killers’), but the SEC official who had quashed the Mack investigation, Paul Berger, took a lucrative job working for Morgan Stanley’s law firm, Debevoise and Plimpton, just nine months after Aguirre was fired.”
As it turned out, at the exact moment that Aguirre’s investigation was being sabotaged, Senate investigators “uncovered an email to Berger from another SEC official, Lawrence West, who was also interviewing with Debevoise and Plimpton at the time.”
“The e-mail was dated September 8, 2005 and addressed to Paul Berger with the subject line, ‘Debevoise.’ The body of the message read, ‘Mary Jo [White] just called. I mentioned your interest’.”
Taibbi observed: “So Berger was passing notes in class to Mary Jo White about wanting to work for Morgan Stanley’s law firm while he was in the middle of quashing an investigation into a major insider trading case involving the CEO of the bank. After the case dies, Berger later gets the multimillion-dollar posting and the circle is closed.”
In later testimony to the Inspector General into Debevoise & Plimpton’s eventual hiring of Berger by a firm that boasts on their web site that she leads a “team” which “includes eleven former Assistant US Attorneys,” White’s comments on whether Berger was considered too “aggressive” in prosecuting Wall Street criminals is all-too-revealing.
“You always have a spectrum on the aggressiveness scale for government types and was this an issue that was beyond real commitment to the job and the mission and bringing cases,” White affirmed, “which is a positive thing in the government, to a point. Or was it a broader issue that could leave resentment in the business community or in the legal community that would hamper his ability to function well in the private sector?”
“It’s certainly strange that White has to qualify the idea that bringing cases is a positive thing in a government official–that bringing cases is a ‘positive thing . . . to a point’,” Taibbi noted. “Can anyone imagine the future head of the DEA saying something like, ‘For a prosecutor, bringing drug cases is a positive, to a point’?”
And what about Linda Thomsen? In 2008, the SEC’s inspector general, H. David Kotz, urged disciplinary action against her over her role in Aguirre’s squashed investigation of Samberg and Mack. While Samberg was eventually forced out of business, barred from working as an investment adviser and paid a $28 million fine for his shenanigans, Thomsen landed on her feet.
After refusing to answer relevant questions in 2009 before the House Committee on Financial Services probe into the SEC’s failure to investigate the Bernie Madoff Ponzi scheme, due to a “collective desire to preserve the integrity of the investigative and prosecution processes” mind you, Thomsen resigned and rejoined Davis, Polk and Wardell.
Later that year, Kotz released a report to Congress of the IG’s investigation into a “Senior Officer” who provided “inside information” to a “former official.” As it turns out that “Senior Officer” was Linda Thomsen and that “official” was her former boss Stephen Cutler who had jumped ship and joined JPMorgan Chase.
According to The New York Times, “Kotz said his office has concluded its well-publicized investigation into whether the SEC’s enforcement director, Linda Chatman Thomsen, inappropriately provided inside information to her former boss, Stephen Cutler, now the general counsel of JPMorgan Chase, amid the bank’s negotiations to buy Bear Stearns in March 2008.”
“The inquiry,” the Times reported, “which began in response to an anonymous tip, confirmed that Mr. Cutler sought assurances from Ms. Thomsen before the takeover that JPMorgan would not be sued for prior actions by Bear Stearns.”
And who was representing JPMorgan Chase in the wake of the Bear Stearns collapse? If you guessed Mary Jo White, you’d be right again.
Less than three years later, during Senate Banking Committee confirmation hearings, White told the panel that “the American people will be my client, and I will work as zealously as possible on behalf of them.”
But when questioned by Sherrod Brown (D-OH) whether or not White agreed with US Attorney General Eric Holder’s statement which affirmed that “federal prosecutors are instructed . . . to look at . . . collateral consequences” should a financial institution or its officers be criminally charged, White agreed.
In a follow-up question, Brown wondered whether there is “a two-tiered system where we exempt the biggest banks because they have the most employees and shareholders who could be affected by criminal prosecution?”
White’s answer pretty much sums up everything that’s bent about Washington’s culture of impunity when it comes to the Wall Street crimes: “It’s a factor that prosecutors are directed to consider.”
“I do think the deferred prosecution instrument,” White asserted, “has been used a great deal on a number of companies, [and] was designed to be tough in terms of monetary sanctions, monitors–everything but the charge itself that might cause what the prosecutor might consider to be negative and undesirable collateral consequences to the public interest.”
But what about harsher sanctions such as stripped assets, handcuffs and a jail cell for drug money laundering and securities scamming banksters, punishments that might actually deter corporate crime?
Tom Burghardt is a researcher and activist based in the San Francisco Bay Area. In addition to publishing in Covert Action Quarterly and Global Research, he is a Contributing Editor with Cyrano’s Journal Today. His articles can be read on Dissident Voice, Pacific Free Press, Uncommon Thought Journal, and the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks. He is the editor of Police State America: U.S. Military “Civil Disturbance” Planning, distributed by AK Press and has contributed to the new book from Global Research, The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century.
Copyright © 2013 Global Research
March 29th, 2013 by olddog
Edward J. Erler
California State University,
EDWARD J. ERLER is professor of political science at California State University, San Bernardino. He earned his B.A. from San Jose State University and his M.A. and Ph.D. in government from the Claremont Graduate School. He has published numerous articles on constitutional topics in journals such as Interpretation, the Notre Dame Journal of Law, and the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy. He was a member of the California Advisory Commission on Civil Rights from 1988-2006 and served on the California Constitutional Revision Commission in 1996. He is the author of The American Polity and co-author of The Founders on Citizenship and Immigration.
The following is adapted from a lecture delivered on February 13, 2013, at Hillsdale College’s Kirby Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship in Washington, D.C.
We are currently mired in a frantic debate about the rights of gun owners. One example should suffice to prove that the debate has become hysterical: Second Amendment supporters, one prominent but less than articulate member of Congress alleges, have become “enablers of mass murder.”
Special animus has been directed against so-called assault rifles. These are semi-automatic, not automatic weapons the latter have been illegal under federal law since the 1930s because they do not require a trigger pull for every round fired. Some semi-automatic firearms, to be sure, can be fitted with large-capacity magazines. But what inspires the ire of gun control advocates seems to be their menacing look, somehow they don’t appear fit for polite society. No law-abiding citizen could possibly need such a weapon, we are told after all, how many rounds from a high-powered rifle are needed to kill a deer? And we are assured that these weapons are not well-adapted for self-defense that only the military and the police need to have them.
Now it’s undeniable, Senator Dianne Feinstein to the contrary notwithstanding, that semi-automatic weapons such as the AR-15 are extremely well-adapted for home defense especially against a crime that is becoming more and more popular among criminals, the home invasion. Over the past two decades, gun ownership has increased dramatically at the same time that crime rates have decreased. Combine this with the fact that most gun crimes are committed with stolen or illegally obtained weapons, and the formula to decrease crime is clear: Increase the number of responsible gun owners and prosecute to the greatest extent possible under the law those who commit gun-related crimes or possess weapons illegally.
Consider also that assault rifles are rarely used by criminals, because they are neither easily portable nor easily concealed. In Chicago, the murder capital of America a city with draconian gun laws pistols are the weapon of choice, even for gang-related executions. But of course there are the horrible exceptions the mass shootings in recent years and certainly we must keep assault weapons with high-capacity magazines out of the hands of people who are prone to commit such atrocities.
The shooters in Arizona, Colorado, and Newtown were mentally ill persons who, by all accounts, should have been incarcerated. Even the Los Angeles Times admits that “there is a connection between mental illness and mass murder.” But the same progressives who advocate gun control also oppose the involuntary incarceration of mentally ill people who, in the case of these mass shootings, posed obvious dangers to society before they committed their horrendous acts of violence. From the point of view of the progressives who oppose involuntary incarceration of the mentally ill you can thank the ACLU and like-minded organizations it is better to disarm the entire population, and deprive them of their constitutional freedoms, than to incarcerate a few mentally ill persons who are prone to engage in violent crimes.
And we must be clear the Second Amendment is not about assault weapons, hunting, or sport shooting. It is about something more fundamental. It reaches to the heart of constitutional principles it reaches to first principles. A favorite refrain of thoughtful political writers during America’s founding era held that a frequent recurrence to first principles was an indispensable means of preserving free government and so it is.
The Whole People Are the Militia
The Second Amendment reads as follows: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The immediate impetus for the amendment has never been in dispute. Many of the revolutionary generation believed standing armies were dangerous to liberty. Militias made up of citizen-soldiers, they reasoned, were more suitable to the character of republican government. Expressing a widely held view, Elbridge Gerry remarked in the debate over the first militia bill in 1789 that “whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia.”
The Second Amendment is unique among the amendments in the Bill of Rights, in that it contains a preface explaining the reason for the right protected: Militias are necessary for the security of a free state. We cannot read the words “free State” here as a reference to the several states that make up the Union. The frequent use of the phrase “free State” in the founding era makes it abundantly clear that it means a non-tyrannical or non-despotic state. Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), rightly remarked that the term and its “close variations” were “terms of art in 18th-century political discourse, meaning a free country or free polity.”
The principal constitutional debate leading up to the Heller decision was about whether the right to “keep and bear arms” was an individual right or a collective right conditioned upon service in the militia. As a general matter, of course, the idea of collective rights was unknown to the Framers of the Constitution and this consideration alone should have been decisive. We have James Madison’s own testimony that the provisions of the Bill of Rights “relate [first] . . . to private rights.”
The notion of collective rights is wholly the invention of the Progressive founders of the administrative state, who were engaged in a self-conscious effort to supplant the principles of limited government embodied in the Constitution. For these Progressives, what Madison and other Founders called the “rights of human nature” were merely a delusion characteristic of the 18th century. Science, they held, has proven that there is no permanent human nature that there are only evolving social conditions. As a result, they regarded what the Founders called the “rights of human nature” as an enemy of collective welfare, which should always take precedence over the rights of individuals. For Progressives then and now, the welfare of the people not liberty is the primary object of government, and government should always be in the hands of experts. This is the real origin of today’s gun control hysteria, the idea that professional police forces and the military have rendered the armed citizen superfluous; that no individual should be responsible for the defense of himself and his family, but should leave it to the experts. The idea of individual responsibilities, along with that of individual rights, is in fact incompatible with the Progressive vision of the common welfare.
This way of thinking was wholly alien to America’s founding generation, for whom government existed for the purpose of securing individual rights. And it was always understood that a necessary component of every such right was a correspondent responsibility. Madison frequently stated that all “just and free government” is derived from social compact, the idea embodied in the Declaration of Independence, which notes that the “just powers” of government are derived “from the consent of the governed.” Social compact, wrote Madison, “contemplates a certain number of individuals as meeting and agreeing to form one political society, in order that the rights, the safety, and the interests of each may be under the safeguard of the whole.” The rights to be protected by the political society are not created by government, they exist by nature although governments are necessary to secure them. Thus political society exists to secure the equal protection of the equal rights of all who consent to be governed. This is the original understanding of what we know today as “equal protection of the laws”, the equal protection of equal rights.
Each person who consents to become a member of civil society thus enjoys the equal protection of his own rights, while at the same time incurring the obligation to protect the rights of his fellow citizens. In the first instance, then, the people are a militia, formed for the mutual protection of equal rights. This makes it impossible to mistake both the meaning and the vital importance of the Second Amendment: The whole people are the militia, and disarming the people dissolves their moral and political existence.
Arms and Sovereignty
The Preamble to the Constitution stipulates that, “We the people . . . do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States.” It is important to note that the people establish the Constitution; the Constitution does not establish the people. When, then, did “we the people” become a people? Clearly, Americans became a people upon the adoption of its first principles of government in the Declaration of Independence, which describes the people both in their political capacity, as “one people,” and in their moral capacity, as a “good people.” In establishing the Constitution, then, the people executed a second contract, this time with government. In this contract, the people delegate power to the government to be exercised for their benefit. But the Declaration specifies that only the “just powers” are delegated. The government is to be a limited government, confined to the exercise of those powers that are fairly inferred from the specific grant of powers.
Furthermore, the Declaration specifies that when government becomes destructive of the ends for which it is established the “Safety and Happiness” of the people then “it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.” This is what has become known as the right of revolution, an essential ingredient of the social compact and a right which is always reserved to the people. The people can never cede or delegate this ultimate expression of sovereign power. Thus, in a very important sense, the right of revolution (or even its threat) is the right that guarantees every other right. And if the people have this right as an indefeasible aspect of their sovereignty, then, by necessity, the people also have a right to the means to revolution. Only an armed people are a sovereign people, and only an armed people are a free people, the people are indeed a militia.
The Declaration also contains an important prudential lesson with respect to the right to revolution: “Prudence . . . will dictate,” it cautions, “that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes.” It is only after “a long train of abuses and usurpations pursuing invariably the same Object,” and when that object “evinces a design to reduce [the People] to absolute Despotism,” that “it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” Here the Declaration identifies the right of revolution, not only as a right of the people, but as a duty as well indeed, it is the only duty mentioned in the Declaration.
The prudential lessons of the Declaration are no less important than its assertion of natural rights. The prospect of the dissolution of government is almost too horrible to contemplate, and must be approached with the utmost circumspection. As long as the courts are operating, free and fair elections are proceeding, and the ordinary processes of government hold out the prospect that, whatever momentary inconveniences or dislocations the people experience can be corrected, then they do not represent a long train of abuses and usurpations and should be tolerated. But we cannot remind ourselves too often of the oft-repeated refrain of the Founders: Rights and liberties are best secured when there is a “frequent recurrence to first principles.”
The Current Legal Debate
In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court handed down a decision that for the first time held unambiguously that the Second Amendment guaranteed an individual the right to keep and bear arms for purposes of self-defense. Writing for the majority, Justice Scalia quoted Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England, a work well known to the Founders. Blackstone referred to “the natural right of resistance and self-preservation,” which necessarily entailed “the right of having and using arms for self-preservation and defense.” Throughout his opinion, Justice Scalia rightly insisted that the Second Amendment recognized rights that pre-existed the Constitution. But Justice Scalia was wrong to imply that Second Amendment rights were codified from the common law, they were in fact, “natural rights,” deriving their status from the “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.”
In his Heller dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens boldly asserted that “there is no indication that the Framers of the Amendment intended to enshrine the common-law right of self-defense in the Constitution.” In a perverse way, Justice Stevens was correct for the same reason Justice Scalia was wrong: What the Framers did was to recognize the natural right of self-defense. Like the right to revolution, the right to self-defense or self-preservation can never be ceded to government. In the words of James Wilson a signer of the Declaration, a member of the Constitutional Convention, and an early justice of the Supreme Court“ the great natural law of self-preservation . . . cannot be repealed, or superseded, or suspended by any human institution.”
Justice Stevens, however, concluded that because there is no clause in the Constitution explicitly recognizing the common law right of self-defense, it is not a constitutional right and therefore cannot authorize individual possession of weapons. What Justice Stevens apparently doesn’t realize is that the Constitution as a whole is a recognition of the “the great natural law of self-preservation,” both for the people and for individuals. Whenever government is unwilling or unable to fulfill the ends for which it exists the safety and happiness of the people the right of action devolves upon the people, whether it is the right of revolution or the individual’s right to defend person and property.
Justice Scalia noted that those who argued for a collective-rights interpretation of the Second Amendment have the impossible task of showing that the rights protected by the Second Amendment are collective rights, whereas every other right protected by the Bill of Rights is an individual right. It is true that the Second Amendment states that “the people” have the right to keep and bear arms. But other amendments refer to the rights of “the people” as well. The Fourth Amendment, for example, guarantees “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizure.” But there seems to be universal agreement that Fourth Amendment rights belong to individuals.
And what of the First Amendment’s protection of “the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances?” Justice Stevens argues that these rights are collective rights. After all, he avers, “they contemplate collective actions.” It is true, the Justice concedes, that the right to assemble is an individual right, but “its concern is with action engaged in by members of a group, rather than any single individual.” And the right to petition government for a redress of grievances is similarly, he says, “a right that can be exercised by individuals,” even though “it is primarily collective in nature.” Its collective nature, he explains, means that “if they are to be effective, petitions must involve groups of individuals acting in concert.” Even though individuals may petition government for redress, it is more “effective” if done in concert with others, even though “concert” is not necessary to the existence or the exercise of the right.
With respect to assembly, Justice Stevens argues, there cannot be an assembly of one. An “assembly” is a collection of individual rights holders who have united for common action, or to promote a common cause. But who could argue that the manner in which the assemblage takes place, or the form that it takes, significantly qualifies or limits the possession or exercise of the right? We might as well argue that freedom of speech is a collective right because freedom of speech is most effectively exercised when there are auditors; or that freedom of the press is a collective right because it is most effectively exercised when there are readers. Justice Stevens’ argument is thus fanciful, not to say frivolous.
The Court in Heller did indicate, however, that there could be some reasonable restrictions on gun ownership. “Longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill,” for example, will continue to meet constitutional muster. Laws that forbid “carrying firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings” are also reasonable regulations, as are “conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.” The prohibition on “dangerous and unusual weapons” including automatic firearms fall outside Second Amendment guarantees as well.
But the Heller decision is clear that handgun possession for self-defense is absolutely protected by the Second Amendment. Can handguns be carried outside the home as part of “the inherent right of self-defense?” The Court indicated that handguns can be prohibited in “sensitive places,” but not every place outside the home is sensitive. And if carrying weapons in a non-sensitive area is protected by the Second Amendment, can there be restrictions on concealed carrying? These are all questions that will have to be worked out in the future, if not by legislation, then by extensive litigation.
The Supreme Court took a further important step in securing Second Amendment rights in McDonald v. Chicago (2010), ruling that these rights as articulated in Heller were fundamental rights, and thus binding on the states through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. We have to remember; however, that both of these cases were decided by narrow, 5-4 majorities, and that new appointments of more progressive-minded justices to the Court could easily bring about a reversal.
For the moment, Second Amendment rights seem safe, but in the long term a political defense will be a more effective strategy. As Abraham Lincoln once remarked, “Whoever moulds public sentiment, goes deeper than he who enacts statutes, or pronounces judicial decisions.” Shaping and informing public sentiments, public opinion is political work, and thus it is to politics that we must ultimately resort.
All of the underlined text above is just claiming that the constitution is malatable, in the hands of public and political opinion, which is BULL S.! It’s an attempt to gain control of week minds and form a majority of idiots.
In the current climate of public opinion, Congress will have little appetite for passing an assault gun ban. More likely, it will be satisfied with passing legislation aimed at gun trafficking and tightening background checks. We must remember, however, President Obama’s pledge: “If Congress won’t act then I will.” He has already issued 23 gun-related executive orders, and some of them are rather curious. One of them notes that there is nothing in the Affordable Care Act that prevents doctors from asking patients about guns in the home; another directs “the Centers for Disease Control to research the cause and prevention of gun violence.” MORE B. S.!
The President’s power to act through executive orders is as extensive as it is ill-defined. Congress routinely delegates power to executive branch agencies, and the courts accord great deference to agency rule-making powers, often interpreting ambiguous legislative language or even legislative silence as a delegation of power to the executive. Such delegation provokes fundamental questions concerning the separation of powers and the rule of law. Many have argued that it is the price we have to pay for the modern administrative state that the separation of powers and the rule of law have been rendered superfluous by the development of this state. Some of the boldest proponents of this view confidently insist that the triumph of the administrative state has propelled us into a post-constitutional era where the Constitution no longer matters. TOTAL B.S.!
The Gun Control Act of 1968 gives the President the discretion to ban guns he deems not suitable for sporting purposes. Would the President be bold enough or reckless enough to issue an executive order banning the domestic manufacture and sale of assault rifles? Might he argue that these weapons have no possible civilian use and should be restricted to the military, and that his power as commander-in-chief authorizes him so to act? Or perhaps sometime in the near future he will receive a report from the Centers for Disease Control that gun violence has become a national health epidemic, with a recommendation that he declare a national health emergency and order the confiscation of all assault weapons. Congress could pass legislation to defeat such an executive order; but could a divided Congress muster the votes? and in any case, the President could resort to his veto power. Individuals would have to resort to the courts; but as of yet, we have had no ruling that assault weapons are not one of the exceptions that can be banned or regulated under Heller. We could make the case that assault rifles are useful for self-defense and home defense; but could we make the case that they are essential? Would the courts hold that the government had to demonstrate a compelling interest for a ban on assault rifles, as it almost certainly would have to do if handguns were at issue?
Are these simply wild speculations? Perhaps, probably! But they are part of the duty we have as citizens to engage in a frequent recurrence to first principles!
Copyright © 2011 Hillsdale College. The opinions expressed in Imprimis are not necessarily the views of Hillsdale College. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided the following credit line is used: “Reprinted by permission from Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College.” SUBSCRIPTION FREE UPON REQUEST. ISSN 0277-8432. Imprimis trademark registered in U.S. Patent and Trade Office #1563325.
March 20th, 2013 by olddog
WOW!!!! Mike Gaddy has really nailed it in his words below. This should be required reading in every newsroom (all shifts), in every classroom (all grades), in every church (all denominations) and in every government council meeting (city/town/county/state/). After the first reading it then needs to be repeated three more times so they can't ignore it. Then all the newspapers need to publish it on the front pages of every edition for at least one week.
The problem is we have so many Diane Feinsteins who sit and tell those who are trying to educate them that they are IGNORANT. Feinstein thinks she is EDUCATED but all she is is indoctrinated and there is a BIG difference in the two words. She avoided Cruz' question and played the VICTIM game.
“I’m not a sixth grader,” said responded. “Senator, I’ve been on this committee for 20 years. I was a mayor for nine years. I walked in, I saw people shot. I’ve looked at bodies that have been shot with these weapons. I’ve seen the bullets that implode. In Sandy Hook, youngsters were dismembered. Look, there are other weapons.”
Please, read over what Mike Gaddy has written here – share it with everyone you can. Send it to your critters in office and ask them for a written response. see how many you get. (don't hold your breath).
Thanks to Barb for sending this to WGEN
From: Michael Gaddy [ mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 5:53 PM
To: Michael Gaddy
Subject: Rebel Redneck Quotes and Thought for today 3/19/13“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” ~Declaration of Independence
How much of a list does an intelligent person need to see that our government considers all of us who cherish our Constitution; our Bill of Rights and our Liberty as its mortal enemy? Let’s start with just five.
1. Drones to monitor our every activity and even take our lives if the president deems it appropriate.
2. FEMA Camps being prepared to confine those who dare oppose their masters.
3. The very real threat of gun confiscation.
4. Patriot Act and National Defense Authorization Act provisions that declare those who oppose corrupt and tyrannical government to be terrorists.
5. The Department of Homeland Security (how much more Nazi can it sound) has declared Constitutionalists, Veterans and most White folks in general as potential terrorists, while our tax dollars are being given to al-Qaeda operatives; yes, the same people our government claims was responsible for 9/11.
As can clearly be read from our Declaration of Independence, our government was created to secure our unalienable rights, not to be our masters; steal our money; take our land and water rights; close our Public Lands; manage our resources; write unconstitutional regulations and enforce them as law, or to provide money, weapons and aid and comfort to the enemy they claim attacked our country on 9/11.
No sane person would ever submit to becoming a slave to another; to having their personal property taken for the greater good; their children and grandchildren used as slaves and cannon fodder for the empire or to never having dominion over their own lives.
When even the ignorant realize they are about to become slaves, they will resist; violently if necessary. Those who seek to be our masters know this, that alone is their reason for seeking to control our means of resistance. There is no other logical reason for the gun control measures currently on the books and for those currently in the various stages of legislation. Only thieves and tyrants seek an unarmed populace.
Our Founders were faced with similar circumstances in the 18th Century but many were still unconvinced they should resist what others saw as inevitable. Jefferson put it this way:
“Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.”
Perhaps it is time we real Americans ask ourselves this very simple question: how much more evil can be visited up those who wish to be free; how much more will we deem sufferable before we decide to right ourselves? How much more of our hard earned money can we give to the monster that has become our government? How many more roads will we allow to be closed on our public lands? How much more water and land will we cede to the government while hard working farmers and ranchers are forced to give up their lifestyle and livelihood? How many more of our children will we allow to be sacrificed to the god of war in order to improve the financial bottom line of the members of the Military/Industrial/Congressional Complex?
What was the answer our Founders arrived at when looking down the double barrels of tyranny and despotism, one that was in actuality much less draconian than what we face from our own government today? Let us turn again to the words of Thomas Jefferson.
“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
Are we too blind to see the object of the abuses and usurpations being visited on “We the People” by today’s political tyrants, or just cowards? Will we shirk the duty to ourselves and our posterity to establish a better government; to create one that exists to protect our rights, not to take them?
How much more will we endure before we realize it is not the Sage Grouse, the Spotted Owl, the Snail Darter or the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher that is an endangered species, but instead it is the American Farmer/Rancher, our American way of life and Liberty itself that is on the brink of extinction?
"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a brave and scarce man, hated and scorned. When the cause succeeds, however, the timid join him…for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." Mark Twain
Galatians 4:16 Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?
Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless.
Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.