Log in

Categories » ‘War’


October 19th, 2016 by


Well folks I turned 76 today (10 19 40) and have finally found my kindred spirit. If I could wake up tomorrow with Mike’s brain I would consider it the same as waking up in heaven. Men such as him should be our Nations leaders, but I guess they are too few and far between. You would do well to emulate him. Although I do not have his intelligence, memory recall, and a host of other abilities, I do have his conclusions. Such as, all men should be willing to die for their freedom from tyranny, and have the ability to recognize it when forced upon him. There is no other way to live a happy life and be a productive citizen. Both of which is something we all should have the opportunity to pursue. If men with morals and intelligence like his were common, there would be no wars, no hunger, no tyranny, no financially destitute,  and all people without his ability would have their needs met from an economy that produced enough employment for everyone. If you doubt my words, compare his articles to any past and especially the present CEO of America INC. Does it not bother you that you are owned, and controlled by some far off Investment Banker who you have never known? Does it not embarrass you to tears to have obtained your present age and have never know these facts, when they have been available from the get go? Are you not humiliated beyond imagination to have been beguiled your entire life into worshiping a non existing government which made you complicit in all this mess. Do you even understand what I am telling you this very moment? In case you are waking up or just pissed off enough by my words that you want to see for your self if it’s all true? You can do that right here!

You Know Something is Wrong When…..: An American Affidavit of Probable Cause (Paperback) by Judge Anna Maria Riezinger & James Clinton Belcher


Buy it and compare it to what you have witnessed, AND IF YOU THINK YOU ARE A CHRISTIAN READ MIKE’S ARTICLE BELOW!



By Michael Gaddy

What is the point of no return? What could possibly happen to an individual that would cause them to abandon all sense of order and seek instead violent and deadly revenge against another human being or group of people, many of whom are personally unknown to the perpetrator(s) of violence? Is this human action a devotion to some fanatical practice of religion or simply a reaction to violent stimuli?

If religious fanaticism is the answer, is it possible such religious fervor exhibited in the acts of the “terrorist” creates in its opponent an overwhelming desire to abandon their professed religion? If we are truly fighting a war against radical Islam, is it OK to abandon the tenets of Christianity, a faith professed by the great majority of the so-called conservatives who support the perpetual war for peace paradigm of our government? If that has actually occurred, have the radical terrorists not already won the war? What else could constitute acceptance of the deaths of hundreds of thousands; many of them civilians, to prosecute wars we know are based on lies hatched in the halls of our own government and nurtured to maturity by a state-owned and controlled media?

This past week I read an email written by a professed man of the cloth writing in support of one of his military heroes who is credited with killing several hundred of our “enemy” as a sniper. His statement was “we can only imagine how many soldier’s lives were saved by this man’s actions.” Unwittingly, this preacher struck at the very core of the issue. To support the actions of a government we personally claim to abhor when it comes to our individual liberty, imaginations must be employed in order to salve our collective conscience as we go about supporting wars perpetrated on government lies, deception and propaganda.

It has been stated facts are the basis for rational thought, therefore supporting wars based on official government prevarication that creates more terrorists than it eliminates requires irrational thought and/or a very healthy imagination. Supporting these wars that make slaves of us and our posterity could only qualify as some form of mental illness. Could this be the exhibition of the Stockholm syndrome on a national scale with the government as kidnapper and the citizens the kidnaped?

Only a people suffering from such an affliction could believe that a people who lose those they love such as those killed in drone strikes on wedding parties could ever embrace the tenets of our government or our faith. It is really hard to accept a “democracy” when the promoters of that form of government killed your family and blew up your country.

Over 70% of the people who died so far in Iraq as the result of our war were civilians. What kind of hate and desire for revenge resides in the relatives of those civilians? Where in our religious beliefs is there any justification for such mass genocide? We euphemistically refer to these deaths as “collateral damage,” while the people in Iraq referred to them as family, friends, and neighbors.

“Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do you even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets,” rings rather hollow, does it not?

The history of America contains similar stories and reactions to the violence of war inflicted on the innocent.

John W. (Old Jack) Hinson just wanted to be left alone. As a farmer in Tennessee, he cared nothing for the war between the North and the South and even opposed secession. He just wanted to get on with his life, enjoy his family and farm his land.

At some point in time, the area around the Hinson farm was occupied by Union forces. Occupation by armed forces in any area is not unlike occupying someone’s home by force. It just doesn’t sit well. The occupiers don’t want to be there and the occupied resent their presence. Perfect ingredients for an act of violence.

Somehow, Hinson’s two teenage sons came to be at odds with the Union soldiers. The reports of the day indicate the soldiers accused the two boys of being bushwhackers. Subsequently, the soldiers killed the two boys, beheaded them and placed their heads on poles near the entrance to their father’s farm. I’m sure the man of the cloth previously mentioned above would defend such action claiming he could only imagine how many Union soldiers lives were saved by this heinous act. After all, were these Union soldiers not wearing the uniform of the same military that now occupies much of the Middle East?

Obviously, Old Jack Hinson was traumatized by the death and beheading of his two sons. His hatred and desire for revenge led him to have a special long-range rifle constructed and he then set out to avenge the death of his sons by becoming a sniper, directing his assaults on the occupying army that had taken the lives of his sons. According to available records, at no time did Hinson engage civilians in his quest for revenge. His preference gravitated to Union officers in uniform.

I’m absolutely positive the US government and Union forces saw Old Jack Hinson as a “terrorist” or “insurgent” as he went about summarily killing more than one hundred Union soldiers and was also credited with single-handedly capturing a Union transport ship. Union Infantry and Cavalry forces and a specially equipped marine task force tried in vain to locate and eliminate Old Jack Hinson, who by all records always operated alone and was able to elude all Union forces for the duration of the war, even though he was near 60 years old at the time.

Occupying forces wearing the uniform of the United States military have created hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties in the wars being prosecuted in the Middle East. If only a small minority of their family and friends have the dedication and resolve of Old Jack Hinson, we have created a whirlwind of violence that will last for decades. Now, many officials in our government, supported by the pleas of plastic talking heads in the media and academia want to bring those people to our country and pay them money when they arrive. Where, indeed, is a better definition of insanity?

It is imperative that we understand that wars for empire, barely concealed by the rhetoric of wars to implement democracy, are in truth unwinnable on any level. As a supposed “Christian” nation we must also come to the realization that blind patriotism and Christianity are totally incompatible.

Perhaps a movie glorifying the exploits of Old Jack Hinson would constitute a beginning of understanding! How many would stand and cheer?

“Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.” ~ James Madison said by many to be the Father of our Constitution (Emphasis added)

“Continual warfare” and freedom cannot exist on the same plane. The last 15 years of continual warfare and the subsequent loss of Liberty and the creation of a police state unequivocally prove Madison’s warning to be true.





October 16th, 2016 by


By Michael Gaddy

*Author’s note: I wrote this article several years ago but find it to be relevant today as well. If our government stays true to form there will soon be another False Flag event in this country to take Ignoramus Americanus’s mind off the fact we are totally broke and this election, which is being turned into a modern-day soap opera (entertainment), has been choreographed by the power cabal known as the military/industrial/international bankers/national security complex. This government has been involved in more conspiracies against its own citizens, including the military than most are aware. Here are some of the most egregious.

“For you see, the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.” ~Benjamin Disraeli

“The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise power from behind the scenes.” ~Justice Felix Frankfurter

“The three aims of the tyrant are, one, the humiliation of his subjects; he knows that a mean-spirited man will not conspire against anybody; two, the creation of mistrust among them; for a tyrant is not to be overthrown until men begin to have confidence in one another — and this is the reason why tyrants are at war with the good; they are under the idea that their power is endangered by them, not only because they will not be ruled despotically, but also because they are too loyal to one another and to other men, and do not inform against one another or against other men — three, the tyrant desires that all his subjects shall be incapable of action, for no one attempts what is impossible and they will not attempt to overthrow a tyranny if they are powerless.” ~Aristotle

I openly admit I do not believe our government or their media lapdogs when it comes to what really happened involving TWA 800, the Oklahoma City Bombing, 9/11, Waco, the shootings in Aurora or Sandy Hook, the bombing in Boston or the bombing at the fertilizer plant in Waco and many other of their False Flag operations.

Sure, the easy way out is to believe anything the government says is gospel; that requires very little cognitive discourse and of course the last thing Boobus wants is anything that might require the use of a few cells in the gray matter. Not when there are sports on TV.

There are a multitude of reasons I disbelieve our government and the media when it comes to events such as those named above, but, for brevity’s sake, I will mention only one in this writing. What positive can be said or what integrity granted to a government that willingly leaves its military personnel behind in the hands of the enemy, then, not only makes no attempt to gain their freedom but instead fabricates lies to cover their crimes of omission and discredits those who attempt to reveal the truth? A government that would leave its military personnel behind to face torture and death at the hands of their enemy is totally undeserving of not only trust but even the slightest benefit of the doubt.

This pattern of overwhelming and continuous mendacity relating to our Missing in Action and Prisoners of War began almost 100 years ago in 1920. Shortly after WWI, Russia was in the midst of a terrible famine. Although previously denying they held any American POWs from WWI, when offered food and medicines, the Russians released 100 captive Americans after the first shipment of provisions. Although more food was shipped to Russia, no additional POWs were released. Rather than admit to their lack of diligence in securing the release of those POWs after the war, government officials simply declared there were no more being held; a tactic that would continue for decades.

In 1945, while marching to take Berlin, in large part due to political/military considerations granted to the Soviets by the socialist dominated FDR administration, some 25,000 American POWs were “liberated” into the hands of the Russian Army. Of that 25,000, only 4,165 of our military personnel were actually repatriated from the camp at Reisa. The Russians put the remaining 21,000+ on troop trains and took them into Russia where they were used for slave labor, medical experiments, human guinea pigs and other fates much worse than death on the battlefield. Allied political sources then went to work to alter intelligence reports to cover up these heinous acts. Both FDR and Truman issued directives there would be “no criticism of treatment by the Russians” and “no retaliatory action to Russian failure to cooperate.” (Source: A Chain of Prisoners: from Yalta to Vietnam, by John Brown and Ted Ashworth)

General George Patton knew of this betrayal of American military personnel and is reported to have confronted General Eisenhower at a train station in Germany where the argument became most heated according to an eyewitness. (Source: Bert C. Roosen an interpreter on Eisenhower’s staff) Speculation exists that this may have been the reason for Patton’s assassination. (Source: Target Patton: The Plot to Assassinate General George S. Patton by Robert K. Wilcox) Our political leadership fell all over themselves to assure the Russians were never accused of anything untoward and that millions in Eastern Europe were delivered into their hands at the end of the war.

The release of the information about 21,000+ Americans being left to a terrible fate at the hands of the Russians would have been a death knell to any political aspirations of those covering up these crimes; obviously, Eisenhower would have never been elected to the presidency.

As president, Eisenhower would continue to cover up the fate of those left to the Russians which would later necessitate a similar cover-up of those left to the Chinese and North Koreans during the Korean War. These prisoners too were used for torture, biological and chemical agent experiments as well as mind control operations. Colonel Phil Corso, a member of Eisenhower’s White House staff, would later speak to these cover ups. He would state it became a matter of national policy to ignore all intelligence concerning these acts and to simply deny any POWs were left behind.

Then came Vietnam and the madness and deceit would continue. In 1973, after Operation Homecoming, Dr. Roger Shields of the Department of Defense would tell President Nixon, “Mr. President, we have two missing for every man who came back home.” Nixon ignored the statement and then like those lying bastards before him, issued a statement that “all our POWs are home.”

To completely cover the POW/MIA issue would require a volume of books. The mendacity, prevarication and possible assassinations by our government surrounding this subject is emotionally overwhelming; that is if you care one scintilla about what happens to those we blindly send into the jaws of hell for political expediency after being driven into a patriotic frenzy by the same devils who create False Flag events which take the lives of thousands, many of them innocent children.

Hand me my Tin Foil Hat; I wear it proudly. I do not blindly believe the words of master politicians who have never seen a shot fired in anger and who are more than willing to see their fellow Americans not only die in battle but be used for torture and medical experiments after the wars are “over” for others, all in the name of “national security.” Always remember when they speak of “security” it is always their security and never yours they speak of.

If you feel compelled to believe everything the politicians and the lapdog media tell you about Aurora, Sandy Hook, 9/11, OKC bombing and the Boston Marathon bombing because you lack the courage to face the truth, you have become one of the “splendid dupes” mentioned by Chesterton: “Evil always wins through the strength of its splendid dupes; and there has in all ages been a disastrous alliance between abnormal innocence and abnormal sin.”

I find little truth or consolation in the facts presented by a government who would leave its own military personnel in the hands of its enemies to be tortured and subjected to all forms of heinous experimentation. Perhaps if it had been your brother, sister, father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, or friend who had been left to this fate worse than death by the government you view as trustworthy, you might not blindly believe everything you hear coming from the mouths of politicians and talking heads on the lobotomy box.

“The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media.” ~William Colby, Former Director, CIA.


  • Foot note: In the 1980’s, I was a Board Member with the American Foundation for Accountability of Prisoners of War and Missing in Action based in Arlington, Virginia. (AFFA POW/MIA)


May the Holy Lord of Glory have rewarded all those abandoned soldiers with an eternity of inexplicitly glorious pleasure, and may the souls of our politicians involved in this despicable act be dragged over a bed of burning coals forever.




October 13th, 2016 by



By Michael Gaddy

“Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worse state, an intolerable one.” ~ Thomas Paine

Down through the pages of time, governments have done that which they do best; they transform from necessary evil to intolerable evil. Our country has followed in those footprints and has become as tyrannical as their predecessors . Also, traversing the annals of history are those with uncompromising principles and an unquenchable thirst for freedom and liberty. I truly believe it is genetic. History tells us this unusual breed of man has been referred to most often as Rebels. He is often rebelling against tyranny masquerading as a strong centralized government. Imagine if you will the last scene in the movie Braveheart in which with his dying breath William Wallace screams “Freedom.”

As hard as it is for most folks whose strongest attachments are to the worship of government, this country owes its founding and very existence to a band of Rebels who bore the names of Hancock, Revere, and Adams, among others. Major John Pitcairn of the Royal Marines admonished those brave souls on Lexington Green who had the audacity to challenge the most powerful force on the planet by the name Rebels when he ordered them to “disperse.” Being the stalwart men they were, they refused a direct order from those in charge. Today, the majority of people in this country would condemn the actions of the Rebels as subversive and would have referred to Major Pitcairn as a “hero” who was just doing his duty. After all, he was wearing a government costume!

Then, in 1861, the people of the South rebelled against one of the most evil tyrants in history as they resisted the Yankee invader of their homes and firesides. 94% of those who took up arms to defend their states, families, and homes did not own slaves, yet revisionist court historians have painted them all as racists in order to legitimize their crimes. Ironically, it was the Rebels of the South who embraced the Constitution and Bill of Rights against Lincoln and the Radical Republicans in Congress who were working diligently to destroy them both.

After the surrender of Robert E. Lee on April 9, 1865, the tyrannical government of Lincoln, Charles Sumner, Thaddeus Stevens and William Seward, imposed martial law and the horrors of the Reconstruction Act of 1867 on the people of the South. This epidemic of treason and tyranny would be known as Reconstruction. To ensure the Rebels learned their lesson and future generations would look upon those who dared to resist the forces of a government which had become “an intolerable” evil, the Radical Republicans sent legions of “Carpetbaggers” and other useful idiots into the South to teach these Rebels a lesson. The government “of the people, by the people and for the people” referenced by Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address did “perish from the earth,” at least the earth of the South. (It had long since perished from the earth of the North under Lincoln) The Radical Republicans sent legions of faithful servants into the South to take over the education of the young. The children were commanded to sing songs glorifying the Yankee cause and its servants. The children were also ordered to pray for the Yankee government each day. Just as General Patrick Cleburne had predicted, almost immediately the children of the South were taught “the history of the heroic struggle” was being taught by their enemies, and through “the influences of history and education to regard our gallant dead as traitors, and our maimed veterans as subjects for derision.” This paradigm continues still today.

The Yankees also sent new ministers to the churches throughout the South during Reconstruction to preach the Yankee sermons and to pray for the Yankee cause and to teach the people to repent from their Rebel proclivities.

Senator Charles Sumner, in eulogizing Lincoln, said the Gettysburg Address was itself more important than the battle itself. Others eulogized Lincoln as “Of the noblest personage,” comparing him to Jesus Christ. But, I believe a more accurate assessment of Lincoln and the Gettysburg Address came years later from H. L. Mencken when he wrote,

“The Gettysburg speech is at once the shortest and the most famous oration in American history. Put beside it, all the whoopings of the Websters, Sumners and Everetts seem gaudy and silly. It is eloquence brought to a pellucid and almost child-like perfection—the highest emotion reduced to one graceful and irresistible gesture. Nothing else precisely like it is to be found in the whole range of oratory. Lincoln himself never even remotely approached it. It is genuinely stupendous.

But let us not forget that it is oratory, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it! Put it into the cold words of everyday! The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination — “that government of the people, by the people, for the people,” should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in that battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves. What was the practical effect of the battle of Gettysburg? What else than the destruction of the old sovereignty of the States, i. e., of the people of the States? The Confederates went into battle an absolutely free people; they came out with their freedom subject to the supervision and vote of the rest of the country—and for nearly twenty years that vote was so effective that they enjoyed scarcely any freedom at all. Am I the first American to note the fundamental nonsensicality of the Gettysburg address? If so, I plead my aesthetic joy in it in amelioration of the sacrilege.”

Yes, Mencken too was a Rebel, albeit a literary one. He had the vision to see through the veils of civic religion and hypocrisy and to write the truth.

So, how does a government morph from a necessary evil created to protect the rights of the individual to an intolerable one of totalitarian proportions? It requires a majority of the people to accept a world in which their government becomes a proxy religion. It must especially envelop those who claim to be Christian as well as those who call themselves humanitarians and those who are considered, according to Tolstoy, as “nice and kind.”  Tolstoy speaks of this paradigm as a problem in psychology. He states to get these people to “commit the most heinous crimes without feeling any guilt” these “good Christian folk” must be made into governors, superintendents, officers or policemen.” By becoming servants of the government, these people can completely ignore their blatant acts of hypocrisy. By accepting “something that goes by the name of government service” this allows these pillars of the community to treat people of other countries and their own fellow citizens “like inanimate objects, precluding any humane or brotherly relationships, and, secondly ensures that people working for this government service must be so interdependent that responsibility for any consequences of the way they treat people never devolves on any of them individually.”

Tolstoy nails it. What better example than the “law enforcement” officer who enforces unconstitutional, immoral laws on his fellow man, taking their lives if they resist while claiming “I don’t make the laws, I just enforce them.” And “if you have a problem with that take it up with the courts.” Therefore he/she can then claim to be good “public servants” while completely ignoring their responsibilities to society which was included in their sacred oath to “uphold and defend” our rights against “all enemies foreign or domestic.” How many of them will then assume the mantle of Christian, humanitarian or a nice and kind neighbor? Of course, judges and prosecutors will use the very same excuse when taking people’s money and freedom, claiming, of course, they too do not “make the laws.”

Then for the politicians who also deviously refer to themselves as public servants. My life’s experience has taught me the most dangerous of these are those who claim to be Christians. A great example, other than George W. Bush, who claimed God told him to invade Iraq which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, has to be a current candidate for Vice President named Mike Pence. First of all, he demanded the government aid the destruction of religious liberties in Indiana reference the demands of homosexual activists and corporate bullies. His support for Common Core flies in the face of those who oppose that program on principle. Also having taken a sacred oath to uphold and defend our Constitution and Bill of Rights, Pence voted for the Patriot Act on several occasions and also voted as a globalist instead of a representative of the people who elected him. He consistently voted to fund the UN and the Import-Export Bank, both of which destroy our country’s sovereignty. Most revealing, this professing Christian, voted to veto an amendment to the Defense Appropriations Act that would have blocked Obama from illegally and unconstitutionally detaining American citizens without due process. Probably the most truthful thing Pence has said during the campaign is that he would model his vice presidency after Dick Cheney. Rebels throughout this country should be cringing inside knowing that if elected this man will be a “heartbeat” away from the presidency. But the majority of the species Ignoramus Americanus will judge him not by his record but how well he does debating a socialist clown by the name of Kaine. No true Rebel will ever vote for the lesser of evils, knowing full well evil can not be quantified and evil in any amount is the destruction of all he holds dear.

Rebels are the outcasts of a society as revealed by Tolstoy, but throughout history, Rebels have stood firmly for liberty and freedom and have stood steadfast on those principles in the face of monumental opposition. Undoubtedly, that is why they and their symbols are seen as apostate to those who embrace government as their god.

I stand as a proud and unreconstructed Rebel defending the principles of Liberty. Where do you stand?

Let them call me Rebel and welcome, I feel no concern from it; but I should suffer the misery of devils were I to make a whore of my soul by swearing allegiance to one whose character is that of a sottish, stupid, stubborn, worthless, brutish man.” ~ Thomas Paine, The Crisis.




Let it be known; THIS Old Hoosier would cut off both his legs with a rusty saw, if he gained the writing ability of this giant of a man. ATTABOY MIKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The PUKES who support this putrid excuse of a government are among the dumbest Homo Sapiens alive.


Dear Vladimir: It’s Not Us!

October 7th, 2016 by


12-21-2015 3-19-06 PMBy Anna Von Reitz

We are going to say some things that you, Mr. President, are already aware of. We say them because the American People are tragically unaware of these facts and they need to know:

American foreign trade and foreign policy have been controlled by Britain for 227 years.

This is one of the results of the original states contracting for “essential government services” from the United States, which is a British-controlled corporation headquartered in the foreign international enclave known as the District of Columbia.

Most Americans have never read the Definitive Treaty of Peace, Paris, 1783, which shows that King George remained the “prince” and “Arch-Treasurer” of the “United States”. Most Americans have never read the actual Constitution and grasped the fact that this agreement gave Britain control of American Trade and Foreign Policy.

We can now see why we have been kept at nearly constant war for most of our history: Britain has used us as its Bully Boy to cause trouble and engage in war for profit throughout the rest of the world, just as it is trying to do now in the Middle East.

As a spider at the center of its web, Britain pulls the strings and through its agencies—the United States and British Crown– wrecks havoc calculated to fill its coffers with no risk and no exposure to itself. 

While directing a US foreign policy that is plainly self-destructive and insane from the American standpoint, Queen Elizabeth pretends to have clean hands and so does the Lord Mayor of London— but the historical documents and the facts are the facts.

All the trouble we are having in the Mideast is caused by Britain, not America.

And it always has been.

The Americans want free access to the Persian Gulf, unmolested by anyone, for the purposes of Free Trade.  And that is the only legitimate interest America has in the Middle East.

We trust that the EU is competent to solve its own gas and oil supply problems with no assistance from us. 

They could embrace and use free energy technology to solve a great many dependency problems.  They could use LNG and ship in supplies and develop storage capacities like Japan and China.  They could direct their re-investment capital to their already existing oil development projects in the North Sea.

Instead, British Intelligence is working to influence the outcome of US elections and trying to start WWIII.  Their recent exposure of CIA false flag activities is especially ironic, since British Intelligence controls the CIA and mandates all its actions. 

If you dig deep enough, it is always Britain at the bottom of the dog pile, causing war and destruction for the entire rest of the world. 

They have never been willing to live on their own talents and resources and have chosen to be parasites instead.  They have built their successive empires on fraud and human enslavement and legal chicanery.  They have never given up feudalism.  They have never given up colonialism. 

Most recently, they have moved their financial operations to China, with the result that 800 loyal Chinese Generals have been purged, and Russia and the “United States” are being pitted against each other at every turn while China sits smug and brags about all the gold it suddenly has. 

And nobody questions this?   

Britain disrespects the Constitutional agreements it has with the Americans on one hand, and on the other, abuses American trust.  They have used us as the front-men for British aggression and self-interest for generations,. They have deliberately confused their own puppet, the United States, with America and the American People, so as to blame us for their treachery and wrong-doing.   

Let everyone always remember that the “United States” is not America.

Let us also plainly state before God and everyone, that Britain and its corporate shadow government doing business as the “United States” is a problem for the entire world, including the Americans.

This time, if anyone goes to war, let’s make sure we get the real culprits and address the actual problem once and for all, instead of stupidly bashing each other for their benefit.

Rumors are circulating of a “tactical nuclear exchange” between the British-controlled United States and Russia.  Let us observe that there is no such thing as a tactical nuclear exchange and that if such a thing happened, it would rapidly spread to global destruction–and that destruction would be the result of British meddling, guile, and greed. 

Instead of targeting the hapless Americans whose worst sin is gullibility, please focus your fire power on Britain?  And ask your Chinese allies about their new Best Friends? 

If the Earth is to be destroyed in a firestorm of nuclear bombs unleashed because of the endless dishonesty and greed of British commercial interests, at least let’s all have the satisfaction of taking the actual perpetrators down with us? 

See this article and over 300 others on Anna’s website here:www.annavonreitz.com


Dear President Putin,

If you are goaded into nuking the free States of America, please make sure the first one get’s OBUMA! The State Nationals are not your enemy, they are just ignorant of their real status and have been brain washed all their life. Patriotic lies have been a powerful tool to involve us in one war after another, while the Banking Cartel laughs their ass off counting their profits.        

10 13 11 flagbar

All the Ways You Can Comply and Still Die During An Encounter with Police

October 4th, 2016 by




By John W. Whitehead
October 03, 2016

Police are specialists in violence. They are armed, trained, and authorized to use force. With varying degrees of subtlety, this colors their every action. Like the possibility of arrest, the threat of violence is implicit in every police encounter. Violence, as well as the law, is what they represent.”—Author Kristian Williams

How do you protect yourself from flying fists, choking hands, disabling electrified darts and killing bullets?

How do you defend yourself against individuals who have been indoctrinated into believing that they are superior to you, that their word is law, and that they have the power to take your life?

Most of all, how can you maintain the illusion of freedom when daily, Americans are being shot, stripped, searched, choked, beaten and tasered by police for little more than daring to frown, smile, question, challenge an order or just exist?

The short answer: you can’t.

Now for the long answer, which is far more complicated but still leaves us feeling hopeless, helpless and vulnerable to the fears, moods and misguided training of every cop on the beat.

If you ask police and their enablers what Americans should do to stay alive during encounters with law enforcement, they will tell you to comply (or die).

It doesn’t matter where you live—big city or small town—it’s the same scenario being played out over and over again in which Americans are being brainwashed into believing that anyone who wears a government uniform—soldier, police officer, prison guard—must be obeyed without question, while government agents, hyped up on their own authority and the power of their uniform, ride roughshod over the rights of the citizenry.

For example, a local law enforcement agency in Virginia has started handing out a guide—developed in cooperation with a group of African American pastors—on how to interact with police. The purpose of this government resource, according to the police, is to make sure citizens feel “comfortable” and know what to do when interacting with police in order to “promote public safety and respectful interaction.”

Curiously, nowhere in the “Guide to Interacting with Police” is there any mention of the Constitution, or the rights of the citizenry, other than the right to remain silent.

In fact, the primary point stressed throughout the bilingual guide aimed at “building trust and cooperation,” is that citizens should comply, cooperate, obey, not resist, not argue, not make threatening gestures or statements, avoid sudden movements, and submit to a search of their person and belongings.

The problem, of course, is what to do when compliance is not enough.

I’m not talking about the number of individuals—especially young people—who are being shot and killed by police for having a look-alike gun in their possession, such as a BB gun. I’m not even talking about people who have been shot for brandishing weapons at police, such as scissors.

I’m talking about the growing numbers of unarmed people are who being shot and killed for just standing a certain way, or moving a certain way, or holding something—anything—that police could misinterpret to be a gun, or igniting some trigger-centric fear in a police officer’s mind that has nothing to do with an actual threat to their safety.

Killed for standing in a “shooting stance.” In California, police opened fire on and killed a mentally challenged—unarmed—black man within minutes of arriving on the scene, allegedly because he removed a vape smoking device from his pocket and took a “shooting stance.”

Killed for holding a cell phone. Police in Arizona shot a man who was running away from U.S. Marshals after he refused to drop an object that turned out to be a cellphone.

Killed for behaving oddly and holding a baseball bat. Responding to a domestic disturbance call, Chicago police shot and killed 19-year-old college student Quintonio LeGrier who had reportedly been experiencing mental health problems and was carrying a baseball bat around the apartment where he and his father lived.

Killed for opening the front door. Bettie Jones, who lived on the floor below LeGrier, was also fatally shot—this time, accidentally—when she attempted to open the front door for police.

Killed for being a child in a car pursued by police. Jeremy David Mardis, six years old and autistic, died after being shot multiple times by Louisiana police in the head and torso. Police opened fire on the car—driven by Jeremy’s father, Chris Few, who was also shot—and then allegedly lied, claiming that they were attempting to deliver an outstanding warrant, that Few resisted arrest, that he shot at police (no gun was found), and that he tried to ram his car into a police cruiser. Body camera footage refuted the police’s claims.

Killed for attacking police with a metal spoon. In Alabama, police shot and killed a 50-year-old man who reportedly charged a police officer while holding “a large metal spoon in a threatening manner.”

Killed for running in an aggressive manner holding a tree branch. Georgia police shot and killed a 47-year-old man wearing only shorts and tennis shoes who, when first encountered, was sitting in the woods against a tree, only to start running towards police holding a stick in an “aggressive manner.

Killed for crawling around naked. Atlanta police shot and killed an unarmed man who was reported to have been “acting deranged, knocking on doors, crawling around on the ground naked.” Police fired two shots at the man after he reportedly starting running towards them.

Killed for hunching over in a defensive posture. Responding to a domestic trouble call, multiple officers with the Baltimore County police forced their way inside a home where, fearing for their safety and the safety of others,” three officers opened fire on an unarmed 41-year-old man who was hunched over in a defensive posture. The man was killed in front of his two young daughters and their mother.

Killed because a police officer accidentally pulled out his gun instead of his taser. An Oklahoma man suspected of trying to sell an illegal handgun was shot and killed after a 73-year-old reserve deputy inadvertently fired his gun instead of his taser. “Oh! I shot him! I’m sorry!” the deputy cried out.

Killed for wearing dark pants and a basketball jersey. Donnell Thompson, a mentally disabled 27-year-old described as gentle and shy, was shot and killed after police—searching for a carjacking suspect reportedly wearing similar clothing—encountered him lying motionless in a neighborhood yard. Police “only” opened fire with an M4 rifle after Thompson first failed to respond to their flash bang grenades and then started running after being hit by foam bullets.

Killed for telling police you lawfully own a firearm and have a conceal-and-carry permit. Philando Castile was shot and killed during a routine traffic stop allegedly over a broken tail light. As he was reaching for his license and registration, Castile explained to police that he had a  conceal-and-carry permit. That’s all it took for police to shoot Castile four times in the presence of his girlfriend and her 4-year-old daughter.

Killed for leaving anywhere at all when a police officer pulls up. Deravis Caine Rogers was killed after starting to drive away from an apartment complex right around the same time as a police officer pulled up. Despite the fact that the police officer had no reason to believe Rogers was a threat or was suspected of any illegal activity, the officer fired into Rogers’ passenger side window.

Killed for driving while deaf. In North Carolina, a state trooper shot and killed 29-year-old Daniel K. Harris—who was deaf—after Harris initially failed to pull over during a traffic stop.

Killed for being homeless. Los Angeles police shot an unarmed homeless man after he failed to stop riding his bicycle and then proceeded to run from police.

Killed for being old and brandishing a shoehorn. John Wrana, a 95-year-old World War II veteran, lived in an assisted living center, used a walker to get around, and was shot and killed by police who mistook the shoehorn in his hand for a 2-foot-long machete and fired multiple beanbag rounds from a shotgun at close range.

Killed for having your car break down on the road. Terence Crutcher, unarmed and black, was shot and killed by Oklahoma police after his car broke down on the side of the road. Crutcher was shot in the back while walking towards his car with his hands up.

Killed for holding a garden hose. California police were ordered to pay $6.5 million after they opened fire on a man holding a garden hose, believing it to be a gun. Douglas Zerby was shot 12 times and pronounced dead on the scene.

Shot seven times for peeing outdoors. Eighteen-year-old Keivon Young was shot seven times by police from behind while urinating outdoors. Young was just zipping up his pants when he heard a commotion behind him and then found himself struck by a hail of bullets from two undercover cops. Allegedly officers mistook Young—5’4,” 135 lbs., and guilty of nothing more than taking a leak outdoors—for a 6’ tall, 200 lb. murder suspect whom they later apprehended. Young was charged with felony resisting arrest and two counts of assaulting a peace officer.

Now you can make all kinds of excuses to justify these shootings, and in fact that’s exactly what you’ll hear from politicians, police unions, law enforcement officials and individuals who are more than happy to march in lockstep with the police. However, to suggest that a good citizen is a compliant citizen and that obedience will save us from the police state is not only recklessly irresponsible, but it is also deluded and out of touch with reality, because in the American police state, compliance is no longer enough.

Frankly, as these incidents make clear, the only truly compliant, submissive and obedient citizen in a police state is a dead one.

If you’re starting to feel somewhat overwhelmed, intimidated and fearful for your life and your property, you should be.

As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, “we the people” are now at the mercy of law enforcement officers who have almost absolute discretion to decide who is a threat, what constitutes resistance, and how harshly they can deal with the citizens they were appointed to “serve and protect.”

Sad, isn’t it, how quickly we have gone from a nation of laws—where the least among us had just as much right to be treated with dignity and respect as the next person (in principle, at least)—to a nation of law enforcers (revenue collectors with weapons) who treat us all like suspects and criminals?

WC: 1798

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His book Battlefield America: The War on the American People (SelectBooks, 2015) is available online at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org. Publication Guidelines / Reprint Permission: John W. Whitehead’s weekly commentaries are available for publication to newspapers and web publications at no charge. Please contact staff@rutherford.org to obtain reprint permission.


The REAL Cost of the War of Terror

September 23rd, 2016 by


CLICK HERE for the YouTube version of this video

by James Corbett
We all know by now that the real terrorists (the politicians in the suits and ties and the banksters that pull their strings) are waging their war of terror on multiple fronts for multiple reasons.

Domestically, it rallies the population around the flag, keeping the flock in check. At the same time it justifies the build up of the police state control grid to catch the thought criminals who resist.

It also writes a blank check for the illegal wars of aggression abroad. Simply place your terrorist boogeyman in the square of the chessboard you’re looking to occupy and — hey presto! — you’ve got yourself an excuse to invade. (Even if you “accidentally” end up supporting them, right Uncle Sam?)

But of course the politicians, their string pullers and their fellow travelers benefit from the war of terror in a more straightforward sense. They get to use the terror scares that they themselves create to drum up billions upon billions in the name of fighting the boogeymen.

We’ve all heard of the $640 toilet seat and other ridiculous examples of Pentagon “overspending,” but these stories tend to trivialize the abuses by the military-defense contractors whose entire industry is built on providing overpriced solutions to made up problems. After all, the Pentagon itself just admitted it could cut $2 billion from its budget by shutting down some of the needless bases and defense facilities that have been built around the globe in the name of the American empire.

But $2 billion is chump change.

In the 15 years since 9/11, $1 trillion has been spent building up the police state in the American “homeland” itself.

Meanwhile, the Defense Department has been spending over $600 billion per year maintaining the American military in the post-9/11 era. $4 to $6 trillion of that was spent on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars alone, the most expensive wars in US history.

Combined defense spending, including Homeland Security, DoD, State Department, defense related debt interest and other defense costs, has reached the highest levels in modern history over the past decade. From a Cold War era high in the 1980s of $3500 for every man, woman and child in the United States to a 1990s low of $2500, that figure has since breached $4000. Just look at the chart; it isn’t hard to see exactly when the trend reversed and the good times began to flow for the military-industrial contractors: It was 9/11, the birthday of the war of terror and the new era of homeland security.

There are other numbers we could throw in here:

The billions upon billions in military aid sent to the co-perpetrators of the war of terror, including the $38 billion that has been promised Israel over the next 10 years.

The $1.5 trillion joke known as the F-35 fighter jet.

The $6.5 trillion of “year-end adjustments” in the ongoing, never-ending saga of the Pentagon’s missing trillions.

But we have to be careful not to fall into the psychopaths’ trap. The real costs of the war of terror cannot be measured in dollars and cents. They are not tallied in a ledger. They are not about money at all.

The real cost is paid in blood. The blood of a million dead Iraqis. The blood of the hundreds of thousands murdered men, women and children in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The blood that is being shed right now in Syria, in Libya, in Yemen, and in all of the countries that have crossed through the crosshairs of the NATO, American and Israeli terrorists.

It’s measured in the devastation of towns and cities that once bustled with life. In the families torn apart by drone bombings. In the havoc of the hundreds of thousands forced to flee their homes, leave their families and their homeland and their former life behind as everything they knew is torn to shreds.

It’s measured in the blood of the servicemen and women themselves. Lied to, propagandized and indoctrinated their entire lives, given a ticket out of grinding poverty by the military, shot up with experimental vaccines and shoved into the meat grinder for tour of duty after tour of duty. And then, upon returning home, left to rot in rundown hospitals and ignored by the glad-handing politicians and their military-industrial cronies as a suicide epidemic gradually thins their ranks.

This is the true cost of the war of terror, and it is incalculable. And none of it, absolutely none of it, will come to an end until the public stops believing the false narrative of the war of terror and the lies that have brought it about.

Much like Santa Claus and the Easter bunny, the real terrorists can only survive if you believe in them.


Just remember everyone of those scumbags you voted for are laughing all the way to the bank!

5-10-2016 8-55-33 AM

Me and Walter Cronkite

September 20th, 2016 by


12-21-2015 3-19-06 PM

By Anna Von Reitz,

We got a real television (not the hopelessly grainy eyeball model) when I was four years old.  This black and white picture was also grainy, but you could see the faces clearly.  One of the first faces I became familiar with as a toddler and young child was Walter Cronkite

While other four year-olds were watching Huckleberry Hound and Mighty Mouse with religious devotion, I watched Walter. Every night.  Without fail.  I’d put on my Dale Evans cowgirl hat and red leather cowboy boots and mount my hobby horse sitting in front of the television and watch with morbid fascination.

I remember the Nixon v. Kennedy Debates and there aren’t too many people my age who have a clear recollection of that.

Like many Americans, I loved Walter. He had such a comforting voice and his dark, serious, but often gently amused eyes seemed to be looking straight into mine on many important occasions.

Of course, I trusted Walter.  Who didn’t?  So it came as a terrible shock to learn that he was lying to me!  Yes, Walter Cronkite was lying about all sorts of things and when I first discovered that, well, it was worse than learning the truth about Santa Claus.  Much worse.

It was worse because Santa was just a fictional character. Walter Cronkite was real. 

And he was lying about what happened to President Kennedy. 

Any fool, even a seven year-old, knew what happened in Dallas that day in November,1963.  Anyone who saw the television footage of the assassination knew what direction the bullet was coming from and nobody needed the Warren Commission to tell us any more lies about it.

We didn’t need the scapegoat, Lee Harvey Oswald.  We didn’t need Jack Ruby doing his final mafia hit. 

LBJ and his cronies killed JFK to make way for the war profiteering of Vietnam, the seduction of the States with “federal block grants”, to spool up the reign of the oil industry, and keep the central banks happy.

And there was Walter Cronkite, speaking in his calm, deliberate, serious, caring way, lying through his teeth about what was perfectly obvious to the naked eye. I was confused.  Heart-broken.  Severely disillusioned.  I was seven and one of my heroes was revealed to be a fraud.

So when 911 happened, the first words out of my mouth were, “Where is this Techni-Color Hollywood – quality newsfeed coming from?”

If 911 wasn’t a set-up, we’d be seeing jiggling shots taken by astonished tourists from three blocks away, grainy security camera footage from banks and hotels up and down the street—–but no, we saw 911 happen from every possible angle, in high definition color.  It was a set-up.  It was obviously a set-up.  Just like the Kennedy murder.

And just like the Kennedy murder, Bush assigned a “Blue Ribbon Committee” to white wash it and come up with fanciful excuses for it, and because the American People have trusted what they thought of as “their government” instead of their foreign vendors, they choked it down.  They were confused. They were patriotic.  They didn’t know what to think.

Well, I am telling you what the evidence shows.

The private, mostly foreign-owned governmental services corporation run by G.W. Bush and Dick Cheney murdered 3,000 innocent people from around the world with malice aforethought.  Their pals collected billions of dollars of insurance money instead of having to pay for the demolition of asbestos polluted office buildings.  Tons of gold bullion were stolen to pay for quasi-military black ops, mostly in support of the oil industry in the Mideast and the whole crappola war and take over in Iraq.  And hundreds of millions of records proving that the “government” corporation defrauded Americans were destroyed.

So you see, I knew 911 was a fraud and a false-flag and a set up from the first moments of news coverage I saw, and I didn’t need any scientific evidence, no thermite residue, no architectural and engineering analysis.  All I needed was the memory of Walter Cronkite shining me on about the Kennedy murder, and the fact that the 911 event was covered from all angles by professional movie crews.

I already told you all about why I stopped watching television news altogether (except for the weather report) in 1989 but let’s repeat.  I did a little experiment and kept track of how many stories had to do with sex and how many had to do with death and how many had to do with sex and death, both.  And I concluded that the actual useful news accounted for only about 5% of what was presented as “news” every night —- mostly the weather report. 

So my advice to everyone is — don’t believe a word the talking heads say and don’t be surprised or disappointed when Tom Brokaw admits that he doesn’t know a thing about the news stories he is parroting.  Journalism in this country died with the gag-orders imposed by the federal government corporation during World War II and ever since, with very, very rare exceptions that always result in lost careers—we have lived with a government controlled news media that is essentially just a giant propaganda machine designed to scare us and sell stuff to us by turns.

Turn the knob, push the button—- “Off!” — and start looking with your own eyes and listening with your own ears. It’s the only way you are ever going to know what is going on.

See this article and over 300 others on Anna’s website here:www.annavonreitz.com


American’s where is your natural instinct? You should not have to be told that your early education was a surreptitious preparation for loving your enemies in Government, and hating all others. You should not have to be told that wars are insane, and no one ever wins a war, They are just the result of your indoctrination when you volunteer to be killed protecting something that never existed. You are like the man who killed his best friend for telling him his wife had been a whore for as long as he could remember, and had proof. He simply could not stop loving her because of all the years he had been with her had made him feel good about his self. Patriotism is a fool’s excuse for his ignorance. History will tell you there has never been a good government anywhere; ever! Turn off that stupid box and read!!!

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

Patriots vs. Politicians

September 2nd, 2016 by


By Tom DeWeese

Many of the younger generation must be truly bewildered over the emotions older Americans display when expressing love, devotion, respect and reverence for our country. A tear in the eye for a patriotic song… a hand over the heart as the national anthem plays… a salute to the flag as it passes in a parade. Why would we older folks do that?

What frame of reference could younger Americans possibly have? Patriotism, nationalism – even American citizenship are taboo in today’s school curriculum. Globalism, diversity, and political correctness trump real history, sound economics, and science. Communism is just another economic system. The Founding Fathers are simply old, dead slave-owning white guys. The UN’s Declaration on Human Rights trumps the Declaration of Independence.

Where are the heroes for today’s young people to admire? Principled leaders who understood the roots of America’s greatness now are replaced by blow-dried sound-byte kings whose professional campaign staffs understand only how to maneuver a special interest group or a voting block.

How can young people make decisions in the voting booth? Who can they choose? Are there any candidates who offer anything other than meaningless gibberish? If today’s young people could learn some of the history that brings the older generation a sense of pride then they could be helped to understand that ordinary people in history knew that there were life principles worth sacrificing or even dying for. Perhaps they could help demand a better future for themselves.

Here are three little known examples from three separate eras of our nation’s history which demonstrate how Americans once thought. They are examples of how we as a nation once stood proud, ready to defend ideals to the death if necessary. And these examples clearly show why the rest of the world understood that such unwavering devotion to those ideals meant our word was true. Our steadfast principles of freedom clearly showed the rest of the world that America offered the human race something different, something wonderful. Our unmatched freedoms meant that Americans were more secure, more prosperous and happier than any people in history.

Perhaps, through the following  examples, today’s young Americans will understand that the tear in an eye or the hand over a heart expressed by the older generation wasn’t for a flag or a song. That show of emotion is really for the brave actions taken by the men and women which resulted in making the flags and the songs symbols of freedom.

Thomas Nelson, Jr.

Thomas Nelson, Jr. was born and raised in a wealthy family in Yorktown, Virginia. Educated in England, he was elected to the House of Burgesses in 1761. He loved everything British and was proud to be a British subject. That is until King George decided that his American subjects were good for little more than a revenue source to pay for his wars with France. The King imposed the hated Stamp Act on the American colonies and Nelson became a dedicated opponent. He believed he had rights to his own hard-earned money and he believed it was wrong to impose the tax when he had virtually no say in the matter. Such was the foundation of the American Revolution. It mattered.

Soon Nelson was elected to represent Virginia in the Continental Congress where he became one of fifty-six men to sign the Declaration of Independence. By adding his name to the bottom of the document he pledged his life, fortune and sacred honor. In other words Nelson and his fifty-five colleagues gambled everything in exchange for the ability to live their lives in freedom.

Thomas Nelson, Jr. backed up that pledge by becoming a brigadier general in George Washington’s army. But he did more than just fight. He used his own fortune to help Washington fund the army. His money helped make payrolls for the men who needed it for their families back home. His contributions to help keep the army on the battlefield would have equaled $2 million today.

Finally, in the last battle of the war Nelson found himself commanding troops outside his own hometown of Yorktown. As Washington laid siege to the British-held town, Nelson watched as a cannon battery continually missed an important target. It was British General Cornwallis’ command post. Nelson inquired of the troops why they weren’t shooting at the house. “Because,” they said, “it’s your house.” Nelson said, “give me the torch.” He then fired the first cannon aimed at his own home and gave the order for the other cannon to fire at the target as well. The home was destroyed. Not long after, Cornwallis surrendered and the United States was born.

For his service, Nelson died a pauper as his health and fortune were wrecked by the war. Thomas Nelson, Jr. made the sacrifice because he believed freedom was more important than comfort and material wealth. He was not alone as almost all signers of the Declaration of Independence met similar fates. Some died in the war effort. Many lost their fortunes. Some even lost their “sacred honor.” They did it so that future generations might live a better life.

Francis Scott Key

Most young people today think of the Star Spangled Banner as simply a hard song to sing before sporting events. To them, its curious words about bombs bursting in air and flags flying just sound like a Fourth of July party. Where’s the beer? Play ball.

But the words mean much more. The song’s lyrics are actually a testimony to sacrifice, death and courage. Francis Scott Key personally witnessed the events described in the song and wrote what he saw as it was happening.

Key was an attorney who lived in Washington, D.C. during the War of 1812. Again the United States was at war with Great Britain. The British had never really gotten over losing the American colonies. In the 20 years since Cornwallis had surrendered at Yorktown, they had continually harassed American ships on the high seas. The U.S. tried diplomacy to solve the problems as the country sought to freely and honestly trade with both England and France. Peace was the goal of the young nation.

But American ships seeking trade with Europe faced blockades by the British, who dominated the seas with their vast fleet, the largest in the world. In addition to preventing trade, the British claimed the right to take their sailors off the American ships. The problem was, they also took American sailors, making them serve against their will on British ships. Finally, the Americans had enough. Diplomacy wasn’t working. American lives and freedoms were being threatened. So the U.S. Government declared war on the British, again.
It didn’t go well for the Americans. The British used their vast sea power to attack the United States. First the fleet sailed up the Hudson River to control New York. They launched an attack on New Orleans, gaining control of the Mississippi. And then they sailed up the Chesapeake, into the Potomac to invade Washington D.C. With little resistance, the British ransacked the Capital city, burning buildings, including the White House. First Lady Dolly Madison was able to escape with little more than the Declaration of Independence. As the Americans were forced to flee, the British fleet set its sights on the next target, one of the nation’s most prosperous cities, Baltimore – just a short trip up the Chesapeake. It was meant to be the final victory before reestablishing the Americans as British subjects.

Meanwhile, as the ships wreaked havoc from the sea, British troops were on the ground in countless towns and villages, arresting American citizens and putting them in makeshift jails or on prison ships. The Americans were not happy having these occupying troops in their communities and tried to fight back. In the small community of Upper Marlborough, Maryland two drunken British soldiers were arrested by Dr. William Beanes and thrown into jail. One escaped, caught up to his unit and reported what had happened. The British returned to the town, released their soldier and arrested Dr. Beanes.

Enter Francis Scott Key. The people of Upper Marlborough enlisted Key to help free Dr. Beanes who was now being held in the hold of a prison ship in Baltimore harbor. Key was allowed on the ship and taken to the prison hold. There he found the ship packed with American prisoners, including Beanes. Key met with Rear Admiral Sir George Cockburn to negotiate a prisoner exchange in hopes of freeing all of the Americas. At first Cockburn agreed and Key went below to tell the men they would soon be released.

As the two men met on the deck of the ship, Cockburn told him that, yes the men would soon be released, but not through a prisoner exchange. They would be released, he said, because the war will be over. Then Cockburn pointed down the bay where Key saw hundreds of British ships sailing toward them. “That,” said Cockburn, “is the entire British fleet. They are coming here to take Fort McHenry.” The fort was the last strong hold of the Americans and it protected Baltimore. Its fall would assure the final British victory and the end of the United States.

Key was held on the ship, unable to leave until the battle was over. The bombardment began at dusk in a deafening roar of cannon fire from a hundred ships which stayed outside the range of Fort McHenry’s guns. As the fleet opened fire on the fort, the men held in chains below deck wanted to know what was happening. Key reported what he saw throughout the battle.

Waving from the fort was a large American flag. As night began to fall, the bombs from the British fleet burst through the air. The last thing anyone could see in the twilight’s last gleaming was the flag defiantly flying over the fort. Throughout the night the prisoners called out, “is it still flying.” No matter how many bombs seemed to hit the flag, it continued to fly. Finally, in frustration, the British fleet trained all of its guns on the flag, determined to bring it and the American’s defiance down in a heap. Still it flew.

In the morning the guns stopped. In the dawn’s early light all saw that the flag still flew and the fort remained in American hands. Eventually, the fleet sailed away. Key was released. According to some reports, Key rushed to the fort and there he saw what had happened. The flagpole, say the reports, had been hit numerous times. Some have reported that around the base of the flag were numerous bodies of American soldiers and citizens. Throughout the night, it is said, they had sacrificed themselves to keep the flag waving. As the flagpole splintered from the direct hits it suffered, men rushed out and held up the flag, becoming human flagpoles. One by one, as each was cut down by the bombs bursting in air, another rushed out to take his place.

The nation survived and America became a shining symbol to the world as the land of the free. And the men of Fort McHenry proved it was also the home of the brave.

William Barret Travis

In the winter and early spring of 1836, war raged throughout what is now the State of Texas. Mexico, led by General Santa Anna wanted to control the territory. Santa Anna was a pompous, brutal dictator who had terrorized the citizens, murdering at will, and taking property at his whim. The Texans wanted to be free of him. In a recent battle they had managed to free the town of San Antonio of his rule. Now he wanted it back.

So, Santa Anna began a march on San Antonio with more that 1,000 troops, determined to prove that resistance to his rule was futile. On February 23rd, about 145 Texans under the command of William Barret Travis rushed into a mission called the Alamo. Soon they were surrounded. Travis put out a call for reinforcements, saying, “I am besieged by a thousand or more Mexicans… I have sustained a continual bombardment and cannonade for 24 hours… The enemy has demanded a surrender at discretion, otherwise the garrison are to be put to the sword if the fort is taken.”

Over the following two weeks, the Mexican forces continually strengthened to over 2,000. Answering Travis’s call, a few reinforcements for the Texans were able to break through the lines and build the garrison to 189. Famed frontiersman and former Congressman Davy Crockett arrived with 15 good men from Tennessee. Another famous frontiersman, Jim Bowie was there. There were 30 volunteers from South Carolina, ready to fight with their native son, Travis. More than 81 volunteers were from different countries including England, Scotland, Germany, Ireland and various U.S. states.

Finally, as it became apparent that no large group of reinforcements would be able to come to their aid, Travis called a meeting of the men and told them they were free to leave and save themselves. He took out his sword and drew a line in the sand. He said, if you choose to stay, cross that line. To a man they crossed, determined to stay and fight the Santa Anna tyranny.

After constant bombardment from the Mexican guns, the men inside the Alamo heard a certain bugle signal. It was the command to Santa Anna’s troops to charge and take no prisoners. The men in the Alamo fought to the last man. Travis was one of the first to fall, on the north wall where the main assault occurred. He was 26. Jim Bowie, ill on a stretcher, was killed in a small room on the south side. He was 41. And Davy Crockett’s body was found in a small fort on the west side, surrounded by a pile of dead Mexicans. He was 50 years old.

189 Texans died that day but they took 600 Mexicans with them. The Alamo had fallen, but their courage allowed Texas General Sam Houston the time he needed to raise an army and meet Santa Anna only forty six days later. As Houston’s men charged, they shouted, “Remember the Alamo.” The battle lasted only 18 minutes. The Texans killed 630 of Santa Anna’s men, and captured 730, literally destroying his army. The next day, General Santa Anna was captured, disguised as a peasant. His rule was finished and Texas had won its independence, because 189 heroes had offered their lives in a belief that preserving freedom was more important than living life under tyranny.

Making Sense Of It All

American history is full of stories of sacrifice and heroism in the name of preserving freedom. They were called patriots and they didn’t sacrifice to build the power of government, or to enrich the pockets of a select power elite or to promote one group over another. They did it so they could live their lives in peace, unencumbered and left alone.

Today, our young people are taught in government classrooms that these ideals are old fashioned, quaint and, in many cases just plain wrong. Patriotism is racism, we’re told by modern scholars. Property ownership is selfish, a social injustice. Children are taught that our free society is the root of the Earth’s destruction and must be dismantled through a tightly controlled, organized global village. The Constitution, say some the scholars, is a living document, changeable on a whim. The Declaration of Independence, which Dolly Madison risked everything to save, is just a “war document from the Revolution.” Nothing more.

Yesterday’s patriots have been replaced by politicians who pander to special interests, as they fill their pockets with money in exchange for deals, privilege and power. A foreign policy based on honest trade, avoiding “entangling alliances,” has been replaced with our military meddling in over one hundred countries, as we impose economic and personal values where they aren’t wanted. America today is guilty of the very same kind of “nation building” we fought King George to end. Now America finds itself hated and non-respected, assuring American citizens are unsafe on every street corner in the world.


America needs leadership which understands and reveres our roots and the history it took to mold this nation. But who can our young people look to for such ideas? Who among the politicians and self-appointed leaders of our nation would make such sacrifices? Who among them would even advocate such an attitude?

Would Hillary Clinton stand on the front lines in defense of this nation and order her own home destroyed for freedom’s sake? Would Barack Obama stand on the North wall and fight to the death to stop an invasion of the country? Of course not. In fact, both of these “leaders” have actually thrown open the door of Fortress America and are calling for those very descendents of the original invaders of the Alamo to “come on over.” William Travis would have shot them.

Today, instead of statesmen who serve our country out of love and loyalty for its ideals; or leaders who deal with other nations under the guideline of “does it serve the just interest of the United States”, we have politicians looking for a deal. Will it sound good to a certain voter block? Will it make me look good on television? Can I get a leg up on the other candidates if I propose this?

Today’s politicians such as Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders propose vast policy programs costing billions of dollars with no concern of where the money is coming from. They grab private land, displace families and regulate private business out of existence in the name of social justice. Meanwhile, House Speaker John Boehner, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, the ones we count on to stand in defense of our Constitutional system, join right in, refusing to take action to even slow down the growth and cost of these massive government schemes.

What are the real issues on the minds of the American public? Too-high taxes; ever-creeping government intrusion in our lives; unprotected borders; over 60% say they want us out of the UN; growing corporate power; reduced standard of living; the fall of the dollar and less buying power; massive government debt; high energy prices. These issues affect every single American and we want someone to speak for us.

Yet not one of these issues is being addressed by most of the candidates for president. Instead we have great debates on the so called “War on Women,” racial disparity, and whether or not Donald Trump is too mean to run for president. Each of these issues is a hot button for specific special interest groups which are piling money into campaign coffers. The average American could care less about any of them, yet these are the debates of the day while the real issues are ignored.

Instead of addressing real issues, political campaigns have become little more than an exercise in character assassination of opponents in an attempt to get a leg up in the public. The mainstream news media has become the lap dog for the big government ideology.

These politicians would never be trusted on the front lines next to the heroes of the Alamo or Thomas Nelson, Jr. None would ever inspire a single lyric by Key. And they are not worthy of being elected to lead the country these heroes helped create.


But there are still patriots in our nation who are fighting a desperate fight to preserve our freedoms. Some are just citizens who see the wrongs and take local action to fight them. They show up at city council and county commission meetings to express their opposition to policies that affect property and taxes and quality of life. They work tirelessly, producing materials, working in political campaigns, and getting in front of microphones wherever they can. Though just an unorganized, unfunded rag tag band, these freedom fighters are beginning to make an impact and the big government forces are starting to nervously take notice.

Some of the best I’ve had the privilege to work with – to name just a tiny few, include Sheriff Richard Mack, who travels the nation teaching county sheriffs that they are the first line of defense against an oppressive central government. KrisAnne Hall, who travels over 265 days a year to teach Americans the power and justice of the Constitution. Pastor Chuck Baldwin, whose writings demand we think with common sense. And John Anthony, who is one of the very best in teaching local residents how to deal with invading planners as they attempt to transform our communities into socialist utopias.

Others decide to take the big step of running for office. Perhaps they were just local activists to start with, but decided that the cause needed elected representatives that can really make a difference from the inside. In the past couple of years, barely a week goes by without my hearing from new, dedicated representatives who ask me what they can do to take effective action to stop the growing tyranny.

Again, I’ve had the great privilege to not only work with some of these great patriots, but to call them my friend. One of the very first to stand, unwavering against the massive growth and corruption of local government is Carroll County, Maryland Commissioner Richard Rothschild. Even as he is attacked in the news media and falsely labeled a danger to the future of his community, he stands, many times alone, for the principles of freedom. As powerful forces work to remove him, he stands, like Travis on the wall, and refuses to back down.

In the state legislature of Washington stands Representative Matt Shea. In one of the most liberal states in the Union, Rep. Shea has organized a Freedom Team of legislators to fight for limited government and the ideals of freedom. In the past two sessions they have introduced over 100 bills, all aimed at limiting the size, cost, reach and power of government. They have managed to pass about thirty of these into law. Matt Shea and Richard Rothschild are the models for us all. And they are unwavering patriots.

There are many others, in every state, who are beginning to make their efforts felt in the cause to preserve freedom. They understand that private property ownership is the key to prosperity. They had seen that the more powerful the government control, the more corruption, and that it is government itself that must be controlled. And they are becoming a growing force. Their courage is an inspiration.

Matt Shea would order the destruction of his own home if it meant one American would be free. Richard Rothschild would stand on that wall of the Alamo to the last. He already has in our modern day fight. And Kris Anne Hall would sing the glory of the heroes of Fort McHenry. She does it every day.

As your children seek to understand why we older folks get a tear in our eye and a swell of pride in hearts as we hear the songs and see the flags flying – symbols of the incredible sacrifice so many suffered just to defend our freedom – they need look no further than these modern day heroes. Patriots still exist among us and they are still fighting the same tyranny as our Founders, and for the same reasons. We should all stand together so that our children and our children’s children will have a life of their own choosing. It’s that simple.


When I hear or read the word patriot, I remember the time when I felt like Tom has described above, but now that I am no longer ignorant of how Americans have been brain washed and the atrocities we have committed in the name of patriotism, I feel sorry for those who still feel compelled to follow the orders of psychopaths. Take this to the bank folks, the only people who deserve to die are the ones you are worshipping, and their Masters; the International Investment Central Banking Cartel. THEY ARE THE SCUM OF THE EARTH!  Of course I do justify murder as in self defense, and any intelligent and informed person would conclude that the very people who we are allowing to establish our laws and enforce them are also our enemies. And the only loyalty they have is to the Cartel. Where do you think all the billions of dollars go too besides these bastards who pretend to be our leaders? It cost the Cartel huge amounts of money to have so many loyal employees. If you are a cop, you’re so ignorant you don’t even know who you are really WORKING FOR. Read and learn folks, before you commit your life to tyrants. All of your good intentions are proof you are brain washed. In reality, the America we loved so much was a damn lie. It’s the biggest con in history. It’s like loving a wife who is a whore behind your back. While you work your ass off to give her all the things she wants, she’s screwing your friends and salting the money away. Good intentions without knowledge is like a limp dick.

10 13 11 flagbar


August 9th, 2016 by


3-27-2016 1-48-28 PM

Olddog says, this is Mike’s Masterpiece

By Michael Gaddy

Any semi-conscious individual with a modicum of intelligence would advise anyone caught up in an abusive relationship of any kind to sever all ties to the opprobrious partner. Yet, almost to a person, these same people would readily inform you that secession by a state is unlawful and should be met with the appropriate force and violence to prohibit such an irresponsible act on the part of a state and its sovereign people, regardless of the proclaimed reasons for the separation.

One of the most critical subjects which our founders faced both in the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 and the subsequent state ratification conventions was where did sovereignty reside, was it with the people, the states or the newly proposed government? In the vernacular of today, who would be the boss of whom?

It is of significant import that one view the wording of the Treaty of Paris when discussing this topic. In Article 1, the United States was acknowledged to be 13 “free, sovereign and independent states.”

But, where does the “ultimate sovereignty” sit in residence? Is it with the federal government, the state governments or with the people? Most of the colonists understood the belief in Great Britain, prevalent since 1640, that the ultimate sovereignty resided in Parliament. This concept is confirmed in the words of Sir William Blackstone in his description of Parliament, “the place where that absolute despotic power which in all governments reside somewhere, is intrusted by the constitutions of these kingdoms. The power and jurisdiction of Parliament” was so “transcendent and absolute that it cannot be confined… True it is that what Parliament doth, no authority upon Earth can undo.” Using this same paradigm, the majority of people in this country today, especially cops and judges, believe that our central government has the ultimate sovereignty, that nothing can undo its will and often point to Article VI Section II of our Constitution (Supremacy Clause) as the basis for confirmation of their beliefs. But to believe thusly is to completely dismiss a crucial element in why the colonists fought an eight-year war in order to gain their independence from such a Parliament.

We also have those who believe that true sovereignty, in some cases ultimate sovereignty, lies with the states.  To believe that ultimate sovereignty lies with either the central or state governments is to discount the very concept and purpose of our Declaration of Independence.

Our basic organic document, The Declaration of Independence, is a document of secession, the proof of which can be found in its words and phrases. “dissolve the political bands, … assume among the powers of the earth, declare the causes which impel them to the separation … it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and institute new government … it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such Government and to provide new Guards for their future security … that all political connection between them is and ought to be totally dissolved.” 

To refuse to accept the Declaration of Independence as an article of secession is to call attention to one’s own ignorance. The demanded separation contained in our Declaration is a complete refutation of any government being the ultimate sovereign over the people.

Our founders, including those on both sides of the Federalist/Antifederalist divide, wrote and spoke often of the ultimate sovereignty of the individual. James Wilson of Pennsylvania was a delegate to the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 as well as a delegate to the Ratification Convention of his state. It was during that ratification debate James Wilson stated the following as to the forms of government that might be created.

“The United States may adopt any one of four different systems. They may become consolidated into one [National] government, in which the separate existence of the states shall be entirely absorbed. They may reject any plan of union or association and act as separate and unconnected states. They may form two or more confederacies. They may unite in one federal republic. Which of these systems ought to have been formed by the Convention? To support, with vigor, a single government over the whole extent of the United States would demand a system of the most unqualified and the most unremitted despotism.” (All emphasis mine)

Patrick Henry also addressed the issue of a consolidated government during the Virginia Ratification Convention when on June 5, 1788, Henry rose to speak and said this about the new proposed government.

“Here is a revolution as radical as that which separated us from Great Britain. It is radical in this transition; our rights and privileges are endangered, and the sovereignty of the states will be relinquished: And cannot we plainly see that this is actually the case?”

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison both stated the actual meaning of the Constitution was to be found in the debates at the various state ratification conventions. Reading through these debates one will find the descriptions and meanings of the proposed constitution are very well stated by those who advocated for ratification and were “selling” the constitution (Federalists) to those who had questions (Anti-federalists) or those who opposed ratification outright. The Federalists were most clear; the government would not be a national government, the powers “delegated” to the government would be few and limited; the states would at the very least have an equal say in the actions of the government. I list below just a sampling of what form of government was promised to the states and to the people.

“It is the opinion of the greatest writers, that a very extensive country cannot be governed on democratical principles, on any other plan than a confederation of a number of small republics, possessing all the powers of internal government but united in the management of their foreign and general concerns. It would not be difficult to prove, that anything short of despotism could not bind so great a country under one government; and under whatever plan you might, at first setting out, establish, it would issue in a despotism.” ~ George Bryan of Pennsylvania

In this one simple paragraph, George Bryan describes not only what was happening at the time of the ratification conventions but also perfectly describes how unconstitutional and tyrannical our government has become since its creation. Mr. Bryan mentions first “a very extensive country.” Please remember that at that time our “country” only contained the 13 original colonies. Then there is the mention of “democratical principles’ which is a reference to a democratic form of government which if you asked the common person on the street what form of government we have today, the majority would answer “a democracy.” If 13 colonies or states would be too large for a democracy, what makes anyone believe a democracy would work for 50 states? (57 if you believe our current chief magistrate)

Mr. Bryan then spoke to the proposition that all smaller parts of this confederacy (the states) would possess all the powers of “internal government.” Is that true today? Absolutely not! Bryan then states “nothing short of despotism” would issue from the implementation of any other form of government other than what the people were guaranteed would be created with the ratification of the constitution.

“Any law … of the United States, for securing to Congress more than a concurrent right with each state is usurpation and void.” ~ Theophilus Parsons, Massachusetts, 1788

“Any law,” says Mr. Parsons, is void if passed by Congress and does not provide a “concurrent right” to the states. I would begin to cite for you the hundreds of laws that should be void and unenforceable, but time and logistics of such a listing prohibit such.

“If the gentleman will attend, he will see this is a government for confederated states; that, consequently, it can not meddle where no power is given.” ~ Archibald Maclaine, North Carolina, 1788

Mr. Mcclaine states very clearly that the government cannot meddle where no power is given. Again, time and space do not permit an accurate listing of all of the laws passed by Congress that “meddle” where no such power was ever delegated by the states and the people to the central government. Of, course any such list would include the Affordable Care Act and the many variations of the Patriot Act.

“The State governments can put a veto, at any time, on the general government, by ceasing to continue the executive power.” ~ William Richardson Davie, North Carolina, 1788

Is what Mr. Davie so clearly stated in 1788 true today? If, not our government has been perverted, stolen and used to enslave us all. Are we any more subjects than were our founders in 1775 and who declared their grievances and separation in our most famous of founding documents?

John Adams predicted what would occur should the tenets and principles of what the people of their respective states were promised if these principles were violated and usurped by the central government.

“It is not even said in our Constitution that the People shall be guarranteed in a Free Republican Government. The Word is So loose and indeffinite that Successive Predominant Factions will put Glosses and Constructions upon it as different as light and darkness, and if ever there should be a Civil War which Heaven forbid, the conquering General in all his Tryumphs may establish a Military Despotism and yet call it a constitutional Republic as Napoleon has already Set him the Example. The only Effect of it that I could ever See, is to deceive the People: and this practice my heart abhors, my head disapproves, and my Tongue and my Pen have ever avoided.” (Spelling and capitalization in the original)

John Adams was most knowledgeable of history and he correctly predicted usurpations on the part of the government which included the assumption of powers the states and the people were guaranteed would never occur would eventually lead to a “civil war.” Adams also predicted a triumph in such a “civil war” by military forces of the central government would lead to a military despotism such as that of Napoleon. He also correctly predicted that such a government would continue to call itself a “constitutional republic.” This is precisely why the Pledge of Allegiance, written by an avowed socialist, is embraced by those who support a continuation of the Napoleonic constitutional republic mentioned by John Adams.

The type and form of government promised to the people and the states in their ratification conventions ceased to exist well before the election of Abraham Lincoln and the assumption of power by the so-called Radical Republicans. The election of Lincoln simply brought all of the simmering resentments to a full boil in 1860. With the assumption of power by the Lincolnites, the government promised 72 years prior to the people and the states had ceased to exist.

The people from Virginia who ratified the Constitution by a very slim margin in 1788, were still very suspicious of the intentions of those who would be assuming the mantle of power and possible future usurpations of the powers of the individual states by an overreaching central government. To this end, they placed the following in their ratification agreement.

“Do in the name and in behalf of the People of Virginia declare and make known that the powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the People of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression and that every power not granted thereby remains with them and at their will …” 

Here, in plain and simple words is established the authority of the states and the people to withdraw from a government of their own creation “whensoever that government shall be perverted to their injury or oppression.” The wording also clearly indicates the people of the states are the ones to determine when that injury and oppression has occurred; not the Congress of that government, the executive of that government or the judicial element of that government.

The original ratification documents were presented and discussed during the first Convention of Secession in Virginia in which the people of Virginia, acting the same as those who had ratified the Constitution in 1788, at first voted to remain in the Union. It was the actions of Abraham Lincoln and his radical republicans who forced the acts of secession on Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Missouri.

The states who seceded, did so in an effort to recapture and retain the form of government promised to them 72 years prior. Yet, Lincoln chose to deal with a constitutional issue, not with the courts, mediation or reconciliation, but through the use of force and coercion, both of which comprise the very essence of tyranny.

The only path left to those who wish to oppose the overreach of government enforced tyranny is first nullification, as well outlined in Jefferson’s Kentucky Resolution, and should that fail, a full and complete withdrawal from the forces of tyranny: Secession.

Regardless of who is elected in November, the tyranny and oppression will continue to increase. Such is the natural course of history, for the form of government promised at the ratification conventions totally ceased to exist under the fusillade of bullets, bayonets, and cannons, delivered courtesy of Abraham Lincoln to the people of at least 12 states who only wanted the form of government their ancestors had been promised in 1787-1788.

Delaware Senator James Bayard III stated on the floor of the US Senate in 1861,

” … to warn gentlemen that the system of government adopted in 1787 is inconsistent with the prosecution of war for the subjection of the South: and yet you cannot execute the laws as you claim to do within the Confederate States without their entire conquest and subjugation. You must, if successful, convert, and it has been threatened by many leading papers, and at least one leading member of the administration, that you will convert this government into a single government, and absolve all the state lines. In answer to such a purpose, and as an all-sufficient objection to it, I give you the general truth enunciated by Mr. Wilson, that a government of that kind, to exist over the extent of the this country must be a system of the most unqualified and unremitting despotism.”

The government employees, media shills and useful idiots in academia and the common street idiot, all of whom would guarantee the right of an individual to escape an abusive relationship, would deny the same to the states and its citizens. The government that was promised to our ancestors has long since ceased to exist—-Nullification and Secession are our only options.



Given the power and ability to do so, I would corral every born in America person in groups and not let them leave their chairs until they totally understood the significance of Mike’s words, whether they crapped on them selves or starved to death matters not to me. They could die in their chair or become a real American ready to die a horrible death before allowing this damnable government to continue.



5-10-2016 8-55-33 AM


August 4th, 2016 by


By Pastor Chuck Baldwin
Writing for FreeBeacon.com, Elizabeth Harrington summarized a comprehensive report by a taxpayer watchdog group that chronicles the exponential increase in the militarization of police agencies in the United States during the past several years.

Harrington writes, “There are now more non-military government employees who carry guns than there are U.S. Marines, according to a new report.

“Open the Books, a taxpayer watchdog group, released a study Wednesday [June 22, 2016] that finds domestic government agencies continue to grow their stockpiles of military-style weapons, as Democrats sat on the House floor calling for more restrictions on what guns American citizens can buy.

“The ‘Militarization of America’ report found civilian agencies spent $1.48 billion on guns, ammunition, and military-style equipment between 2006 and 2014. Examples include IRS agents with AR-15s, and EPA bureaucrats wearing camouflage.

“‘Regulatory enforcement within administrative agencies now carries the might of military-style equipment and weapons,’ Open the Books said. ‘For example, the Food and Drug Administration includes 183 armed “special agents,” a 50 percent increase over the ten years from 1998-2008. At Health and Human Services (HHS), “Special Office of Inspector General Agents” are now trained with sophisticated weaponry by the same contractors who train our military special forces troops.’

“Open the Books found there are now over 200,000 non-military federal officers with arrest and firearm authority, surpassing the 182,100 personnel who are actively serving in the U.S. Marine Corps.

“The IRS spent nearly $11 million on guns, ammunition, and military-style equipment for its 2,316 special agents. The tax collecting agency has billed taxpayers for pump-action and semi-automatic shotguns, semi-automatic Smith & Wesson M&P15s, and Heckler & Koch H&K 416 rifles, which can be loaded with 30-round magazines.

“The EPA spent $3.1 million on guns, ammo, and equipment, including drones, night vision, ‘camouflage and other deceptive equipment,’ and body armor.”

Harrington continues, “Open the Books appealed to both liberals like Bernie Sanders–who has called for demilitarizing local police departments–and conservatives in its report.

“‘Conservatives argue that it is hypocritical for political leaders to undermine the Second Amendment while simultaneously equipping non-military agencies with hollow-point bullets and military style equipment,’ Open the Books said. ‘One could argue the federal government itself has become a gun show that never adjourns with dozens of agencies continually shopping for new firearms.’”

See the report: There Are Now More Bureaucrats With Guns Than U.S. Marines

Most Americans would be shocked if they knew how many millions of rounds of ammunition their local and State police agencies are amassing. And don’t let anybody tell you all of this ammunition is for “practice.” We are talking about hollow-point pistol rounds and military rifle rounds such as 5.56 and .308 calibers. I would take an educated guess (based on my conversations with both ammunition and arms suppliers and police officers themselves) that your local police agencies have enough ammunition stockpiled to kill the entire population of your community four or five times. But these numbers pale in comparison to the numbers of guns and ammunition being amassed by federal agencies–including agencies that nowhere come close to being categorized as “police” agencies, such as those mentioned in the above report.

To realize that the alphabet agencies of the federal government have more armed agents (assigned to domestic duties) than our premier combat branch of the U.S. military (the U.S. Marines), whose job is to engage America’s enemies in direct combat, is a staggering thought. Tell me again exactly who it is that our federal government deems to be the enemy. And they wonder why more and more Americans are arming themselves?

Couple the militarization of our domestic police (and non-police) agencies with the increased call from many in Washington, D.C., to strip the American people of their right to keep and bear arms–especially their right to keep and bear semi-automatic rifles–and one can understand why so many of the American people are “on edge” and have lost all trust in their federal government.

Understanding and acknowledging the Providence of God notwithstanding, the ONLY thing standing between us and abject tyranny is a massively armed citizenry. America is the last nation in the free world that instilled the right to keep and bear arms not only in its Constitution but also in the very heart and soul of its citizens. Should the American citizenry ever cease to be an armed citizenry (and I mean armed with semi-automatic rifles with high-capacity magazines), the entire free world would collapse into the Dark Ages.

I’m saying it straight out: the only reason that Canada, Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Sweden, New Zealand, Australia, etc., have the modicum of freedom that they do is because the American citizenry is an armed citizenry. It is NOT the U.S. armed forces that are keeping this country and the rest of Western Civilization free; it is the armed citizenry of America that is protecting whatever vestiges of liberty Western Civilization has left. Disarm the American people and the entire free world falls into the abyss of tyranny and oppression–maybe for a thousand years.

Listen to Daniel Webster: “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 6000 years, may not happen again. Hold on to the Constitution, for if the American Constitution should fail, there will be anarchy throughout the world.”

When Webster talked about holding onto the Constitution, he was including the Second Amendment to the Constitution. And Daniel Webster was not alone in his veneration for the Second Amendment. To a man, America’s Founding Fathers equated the preservation of liberty with the freedom to keep and bear arms.

Listen to our founders:

“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.” (Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787)

“Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.” (James Madison, “Federalist No. 46”, January 29, 1788)

“To disarm the people…[i]s the most effectual way to enslave them.” (George Mason, referencing advice given to the British Parliament by Pennsylvania governor Sir William Keith, “The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution.” June 14, 1788)

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.” (Noah Webster, “An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution,” October 10, 1787)

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.” (Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836)

“The great object is that every man be armed. . . . Everyone who is able might have a gun.” (Patrick Henry, Debate in Virginia Ratifying Convention, Elliot 3:380–95, 400–402, June 14, 1788)

“The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside. And while a single nation refuses to lay them down, it is proper that all should keep them up. Horrid mischief would ensue were one-half the world deprived of the use of them; for while avarice and ambition have a place in the heart of man, the weak will become a prey to the strong. The history of every age and nation establishes these truths, and facts need but little arguments when they prove themselves.” (Thomas Paine, “Thoughts on Defensive War” in Pennsylvania Magazine, July 1775)

“[I]f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.” (Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 29, January 9, 1788)

What could be plainer? Our Founding Fathers did not engrave the right to keep and bear arms in our Constitution for the purpose of hunting or target shooting or even simply as a deterrent to domestic criminals (as necessary as those things are). No. The purpose of the Second Amendment was to keep the American people FREE, including if our own government was the enemy trying to enslave us.

For the most part, utopian globalists have successfully disarmed the citizens of Western Civilization. All over the “free world” only governments are armed; citizens have been stripped of their right to keep and bear arms. Even the people of Switzerland are extremely regulated in this regard.

Again, I’ll say it plainly: if citizens are not able to freely keep and bear semi-automatic rifles, they are effectively DISARMED.

The semi-automatic rifle is to us what the Roman sword was to the people in Jesus’ day. It is the preeminent self-defense tool. It is no coincidence that Jesus commanded His disciples to buy a Roman sword, even if they had to sell their clothes to do so. (Luke 22:36) And by the way, it was against the law for Jews to own a Roman sword at that time. That’s right: when Jesus told His disciples to buy a sword, He was telling them to break the law. Tell this to your pastor and see what he says. His response will give you a little hint as to 1) his honest understanding of scriptures and 2) his honest commitment to liberty.

I submit that we would not even be having a discussion of this issue if the pastors of America were doing their jobs from the pulpit. Instead of trying to mimic Joel Osteen and Rick Warren, they should be following the example of America’s patriot pastors and equipping their people with the Biblical Natural Law principles they need to protect and defend their homes, communities, and country. And that requires teaching them the God-ordained duty of self-defense.

When Barack Obama and Dianne Feinstein tried to make it illegal to possess semi-automatic rifles back in 2013, the vast majority of America’s pastors either said absolutely NOTHING or they actually told their churches, “If the government outlaws your guns, Romans 13 tells us to turn them in.” NO! Romans 13 teaches NO SUCH THING.

When I realized the dearth of pastoral leadership regarding the Christian duty to keep and bear arms, my attorney son and I wrote a book to teach believers (and anyone else) the scriptural truth regarding their responsibility of self-defense. The book is called “To Keep Or Not To Keep: Why Christians Should Not Give Up Their Guns.” We show from the scriptures–all of them, including Romans 13–that self-defense is much more than a constitutional right: it is a God-ordained DUTY. We show that to surrender our means of self-defense (and that especially includes the semi-automatic rifle) is to DENY the Christian faith.

If readers have not been taught this truth and are in any way uncertain or confused about it, I strongly urge you to get the book. And if you have a pastor or Sunday School teacher that doesn’t understand and courageously teach this truth, buy a copy for them.

To order “To Keep Or Not To Keep: Why Christians Should Not Give Up Their Guns,” click here.


Thankfully, Obama and Feinstein failed to outlaw our semi-automatic rifles back in 2013 (no thanks to most of America’s pastors), but you can rest assured if Hillary Clinton is elected the confiscation of our semi-automatic rifles will be NUMBER ONE on the agenda. And even if she isn’t elected, Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan are standing in the wings to compromise away every liberty we have–including the right to keep and bear arms.

So, while federal agencies in Washington, D.C., are being increasingly militarized, the American people are being told they need to surrender their means of self-defense. It is no hyperbole to say that the fate of the civilized world rests with the American people–not with the U.S. armed forces, but with a free and resolute armed citizenry.

© 2016 Chuck Baldwin – All Rights Reserved

Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America was founded. He was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitution Party. He and his wife, Connie, have 3 children and 9 grandchildren. Chuck and his family reside in the Flathead Valley of Montana. See Chuck’s complete bio here.

E-mail: chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Website: ChuckBaldwinLive.com


AMERICA‘S HUNTERS —Pretty Amazing!

8-4-2016 7-45-11 AM

A blogger added up the deer license sales in just a handful of states and arrived at a striking conclusion: 
There were over 600,000 hunters this season in the state of Wisconsin …Allow me to restate that number: 600,000!

8-4-2016 7-46-55 AMOver the last several months, Wisconsin’s hunters became the eighth largest army in the world.

8-4-2016 7-47-26 AM(That’s more men under arms than in Iran . More than France and Germany combined. )

8-4-2016 7-48-32 AMThese men, deployed to the woods of a single American state, Wisconsin, to hunt with firearms,


8-4-2016 7-49-18 AM8-4-2016 7-50-05 AM

That number pales in comparison to the 750,000 who hunted the woods of Pennsylvania and Michigan’s 700,000 hunters, ALL OF WHOM HAVE RETURNED HOME SAFELY.

Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia and it literally establishes the fact that the hunters of those four states alone would comprise the largest army in the world.

And then add in the total number of hunters in the other 46 states.
It’s millions more.

The point? 

America will forever be safe from foreign invasion with that kind of home-grown firepower!

Hunting… it’s not just a way to fill the freezer.

It’s a matter of national security.

8-4-2016 7-50-44 AMThat’s why all of our enemies, foreign and domestic, want to see us disarmed.

That is anytime and every time America considers gun control. Our enemies want guns out of our hands.

Overall it’s true, so if we disregard some assumptions that hunters 
don’t possess the same skills as soldiers, the question would still remain…

What army of 2 million would want to face 30 million, 40 million, or 50 million armed citizens???

For the sake of our freedom, don’t ever allow gun control or confiscation of guns.



It is undeniable that many of our so called citizens want us disarmed, and to them, one and all, I say they are the most stupid cowards in the entire world! Only a fool would trust any government, let alone a corporate government to protect us. Is it not now apparent that the government has a NATO FORCE IN AMERICA? AND THEY HAVE NO LOYALTY TO US. How is it possible that our neighbors believe what the media and education industry is teaching and claiming?




10 13 11 flagbar




July 29th, 2016 by




7-29-2016 10-07-10 AMPhoto: schmoesknow

 By Stephanie Sledge | The Government Rag

 There are two more plots that go hand-in-hand brewing against the American People when it comes to more suppression and total tyranny on firearm freedoms. Plot one is the Firearm Risk Protection Act 2015 and the other is the pending Sandy Hook lawsuit against various gun manufacturers to attempt to hold them criminally responsible for murders by which their products are used. But, are the gun manufacturing owners involved in the plot? Hillary Clinton secretly met with several alleged Orlando Night Club shooting victims recently and several families have agreed to join the Sandy Hook lawsuit.  Lawyers representing some of the Orlando victims have already had preliminary talks with those representing the Sandy Hook families.


TIMELINE – In January 2015, three years after the alleged mass murder at the Sandy Hook Elementary School, family members of some of the alleged dead victims filed a wrongful death suit against Remington Arms Company (the maker of the Bushmaster), the distributor (Camfour Holding, LLC), and Riverside Sales (the now-defunct East Windsor gun store).

The wrongful death suit argues Remington Arms as well as the other defendants “unscrupulously marketed and promoted the assaultive qualities and military uses of AR-15s to civilian purchasers.”

In December of 2015, all defendants asked Judge Bellis to throw out the lawsuit on the claim of ‘immunity’ under the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). According to the Act,

“To prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms

or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others. <<NOTE: Oct. 26, 2005 –  [S. 397]>>


A Brief History – Adam Lanza allegedly gunned-down 6 adults and 20 children using a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle (model XM15-E2S) at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut on December 14, 2012. Adam was also reportedly to have killed his mother, Nancy Lanza, with a .22 rifle prior to going to the elementary school that morning. It was also reported Nancy Lanza had purchased the AR-15 legally prior to the shooting from Riverside Sales.

The family members claim the AR-15 military style rifle should not have been made available to the public citing it is a military style weapon and is not suitable for civilian usage. The families also claim the gun maker and sellers knew civilians are considered unfit to operate the assault rifle and yet they continue to sell it to civilians while disregarding the dangers and threats the weapon poses.

Following the shooting, a campaign to ban military style high-powered weapons and accessories from the civilian populous has emerged again and the gun advocates have been on a deceptive marketing campaign to disarm America begging for more rules, regulations, codes, and laws to restrict the sale of these guns to just police or military. Remington, the primary defendant in the case filed to have the lawsuit dismissed. The Plaintiffs then ask the judge to not seal the gun maker’s records. Remington has argued to the judge the dangers of their company releasing trade secrets to the public due to this lawsuit.

According to Hartford Courant,

“Remington Arms, the principal defendant, has asked Bridgeport Superior Court Judge Barbara Bellis to keep records it views as proprietary from being made public. The company’s court filing said that for competitive reasons, it does not want the public or its competitors to see the records. The company has also asked the judge to dismiss the suit.

Bellis previously ruled that the process of “discovery” would go forward even as she considered whether to dismiss the lawsuit against the manufacturer of the AR-15 rifle used in the slayings. The discovery process allows the plaintiffs’ lawyers to demand internal documents that could provide insight into how the gunmaker markets the AR-15 and to depose company executives. Lawyers said those depositions began earlier this month.

In unusually harsh language for a legal filing, the plaintiffs’ lawyers wrote: “The Remington Defendants ask the Court to order the plaintiffs to keep their secrets, in the name of preserving Remington’s competitive advantage among sellers of AR-15s. For plaintiffs, such conditions are repugnant.”

They also go on to say,

“Remington did not become the country’s leading seller of military weaponry to civilians by accident. It ascended to that position through its calculated marketing and pursuit of profit above all else. Plaintiffs lost family members, including children, in the service of that bottom line. Now Remington wants them to do more to protect its profitability. Plaintiffs will of course abide by whatever order the Court enters, but they will not by agreement help in a cover up of Remington’s marketing strategies or profit margins.”

Connecticut Superior Court Judge, Barbara Bellisa ruled the lawsuit could go forward; trial has been set for April 2018.  


The Insurance banksters would like to have total control over American’s weapons including prohibiting the sale or purchase of a firearm without the purchaser first obtaining qualified liability insurance policy. This could become an economic hardship for many families and owners of weapons during a planned economic collapse. Individuals will be classified as criminals and face legal sanctions and punishments if they do not or cannot comply.

The Firearm Risk Protection Act of 2015 was introduced on May 21, 2015 by N.Y’s 12th Congressional District Democrat, Carolyn Maloney. The Act is just another bowl of ‘word salad’ which appears to be a deceptive way to disarm more Americans while demanding gun owners to carry liability insurance on their weapons. Any person who fails to comply can be criminalized and face fines up to $10000. Of course, the Act would exempt any federal, state, or local agencies from having to comply with obtaining liability insurance on the sale and transfer of every weapon. So, it is clear the banksters want their cut in owning your firearm and penalizing you if you do not comply. In addition, the banksters, their criminal mafia insurance monopolies, and of course the government would have yet another way to access your name and location of your weapons at any time as their newly created database grows. Waiting to be implemented, it could cost thousands of gun owners their weapons and freedoms if they cannot afford to purchase or maintain the insurance. However, the government, its representatives, and the agencies on a federal, state, and local level can get off scott-free with having an uninsured weapon.

Summary: The Firearm Risk Protection Act of 2015 Amends the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to: (1) prohibit the purchase or sale of a firearm unless the purchaser presents proof to the seller and the seller verifies that the purchaser is covered by a qualified liability insurance policy, and (2) require any person who purchases a firearm on or after this Act’s effective date to be covered by such a policy. Exempts the purchase or sale of a firearm for use by a federal, state, or local agency. Defines “qualified liability insurance policy” to mean a policy that: (1) provides liability insurance covering the purchaser specifically for losses resulting from use of the firearm while it is owned by the purchaser, and (2) is issued by an insurer licensed or authorized to provide the coverage by the state in which the purchaser resides.

Maloney makes these remarks in the House of Representatives on May 21, 2015:

Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Firearm Risk Protection Act, innovative legislation to promote safe gun ownership. Too often, our communities are left looking for answers after horrific tragedies inflicted with dangerous firearms. A requirement to carry liability insurance is a market-based solution that would hold gun owners responsible for the risk their firearms present, and create incentives for responsible gun safety practices. The Firearm Risk Protection Act would harness the power of insurance markets to allow professional actuaries to determine the risk presented by each gun and gun owner. Just as with car insurance, higher-risk owners of firearms would face higher premiums, while responsible owners could qualify for reduced rates. As gun violence continues to inflict scars on American families and our communities, Congress should look for new ways to promote gun safety and prevent future tragedies. I hope my colleagues will join me to support this forward-thinking legislation.”


A brief peek into Maloney’s history says a lot about who she is really interested in pleasing. I can guarantee, it is not the People, it is financial interests and the Jewish Agenda to Disarm America: Communism’s Secret Back Door. She has deep background ties to the banksters and wants to criminalize speech, eliminate guns, and enslave the American people. She is a snake slithering in the grass waiting to dupe and bite the People using manipulative and dirty tactics including participating in ways to market deceptive campaigns against the Civilian populous to make money off disarming the nation and promoting economic hardships, criminal sanctions, and plotting to help make the insurance companies money off the Second Amendment.

“Today, all across New York, all across the country, Americans are sitting in and standing up because we are tired of watching as each day 89 people die from gun violence,” said Congresswoman Maloney.‎ “We are tired of being told that the solution to gun violence is more guns. We are tired of massacres like Orlando and Sandy Hook. And we are tired of tweets and prayers that do nothing to stop the bloodshed. Today, we are here to continue the movement that began on the House floor last week. We are sitting in to demand action. It is time for a vote to keep guns away from dangerous terror suspects, a vote to require background checks on all gun sales, a vote to stop gun trafficking, a vote to lift the ban on gun violence research, a vote on common sense. It’s time for gun violence to end.”

“Just one week after the historic sit-in on the House floor, today leaders in Congress will hold yet another historic event to urge our elected officials in the U.S. House of Representatives to hold a vote on bipartisan legislation that protects the rights of law-abiding Americans, keeps guns out of the wrong hands, and saves lives,” said former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, Co-Founder of the gun violence prevention organization Americans for Responsible Solutions. “I want to thank Congresswoman Maloney for helping lead the fight against our nation’s gun violence crisis. Speaking is difficult for me. But I haven’t been silenced. And neither should the American people. Their Representatives must vote to make our communities safer.” 




7-29-2016 10-12-17 AM

For a full list of how Maloney represents the People, go to this page. Some highlighted Bills/Resolutions Carolyn Maloney supports/sponsors/co-sponsors, etc are:


H.Res.753 — 114th Congress (2015-2016) – Expressing support for the designation of June 2, 2016, as “National Gun Violence Awareness Day” and June 2016 as “National Gun Violence Awareness Month”.

H.R.2917 — 114th Congress (2015-2016) – End Purchase of Firearms by Dangerous Individuals Act of 2015

H.R.2916 — 114th Congress (2015-2016) – Fire Sale Loophole Closing Act

H.R.2612 — 114th Congress (2015-2016) – To authorize the appropriation of funds to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for conducting or supporting research on firearms safety or gun violence prevention.

H.R.2546 — 114th Congress (2015-2016) – Firearm Risk Protection Act of 2015

H.R.3375 — 114th Congress (2015-2016) – To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to extend the period during which a firearms licensee is required to wait for a response from the national instant criminal background check…

H.R. 4603 – Hates Crime Prevention Act – To prevent a person who has been convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime, or received an enhanced sentence for a misdemeanor because of hate or bias in its commission, from obtaining a firearm.

H.R. 1217: Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act – This bill is a comprehensive, bipartisan proposal to close the gaps and loopholes in the Brady Bill, including requiring background checks for all gun sales. In addition, this bill would establish the National Commission on Mass Violence, to examine mass shootings and other incidents to determine their root causes and risk factors.


H.Res.810 — 114th Congress (2015-2016) Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the life and work of Elie Wiesel in promoting human rights, peace, and Holocaust remembrance.

H.Res.729 — 114th Congress (2015-2016) Expressing support for the expeditious consideration and finalization of a new, robust, and long-term Memorandum of Understanding on military assistance to Israel between the United States Government..

H.Con.Res.129 — 114th Congress (2015-2016) Expressing support for the goal of ensuring that all Holocaust victims live with dignity, comfort, and security in their remaining years, and urging the Federal Republic of Germany to continue to…

H.R.2545 — 114th Congress (2015-2016) Simon Wiesenthal Holocaust Education Assistance Act


H.Res.769 — 114th Congress (2015-2016) Terminating a Select Investigative Panel of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Federal funding and support for abortion providers;


H.R.5373 — 114th Congress (2015-2016) LGBT Data Inclusion Act


There are a lot of questions to be asked and as everyone is diverted by the most current false-flag details or even ‘wooing’ the next in line on Facebook, the snakes slither in the grass to turn Civilian’s choice of weapons purchases into a tightly regulated ‘pay-up’ or do the time to keep and possess them. 

The families of the Sandy Hook lawsuit argue the rifle allegedly used by shooter, Adam Lanza, should not have been entrusted to the general public… 

“Shouldn’t have been entrusted to the general public because it is a military-style assault weapon that is unsuited for civilian use.”

 “They say the gun companies knew—or should have known—about the high risks posed by the weapon, including the ability for a shooter to use it to inflict maximum casualties and serious injury.”

Now, in the ‘discovery phase’ this lawsuit is the first of its kind to challenge the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) after its enactment. According to the so-called experts on the fake news network, (CNN),

“This is precedent setting in the sense that, after PLCAA, this is the first case against a firearms manufacturer under a negligence theory that looks like it might make it to trial,” said Georgia State University law professor Timothy Lytton, who studies gun industry litigation.”

7-29-2016 10-14-05 AM

The attorney, Joshua Koskoff, representing the families of nine people who allegedly died in the attack said, “It was Remington’s choice to entrust the most notorious American killing machine to the public.” ( in 2014, for example, there were approximately 275 people killed with a rifle of any kind – hardly a killing machine).

He also denied claims that the lawsuit amounted to an attempt to ban assault weapons.

7-29-2016 10-15-24 AM


Hillary and the gun-hating gang are right where we would expect them to be following the recent alleged mass murder at the Orlando Pulse Night Club – right at the front gate…

Following the recent alleged but yet completely shady shooting in Orlando, Hillary Clinton promptly met privately with family and friends of the alleged victims of the Pulse Night Club shooting. ‘Shady- meaning there are unanswered questions, signs of crisis actors and false reporting from the mainstream media. The details reported by the ‘Fake New Networks,  (FOX, CNN, ABC, NBC, ETC) about the shooting itself is suspect and should be classified by the general populous as another suspicious shooting with gun-control as it’s primary marketing strategy. Just like the Tucson shooting, the Sandy Hook shooting, the Navy Yard shooting, the San Bernardino shooting, the Aurora Theatre shooting, and numerous others we have endured during the Obama Administration. 

While in Orlando, Hillary uses the perfect mix of ‘word-salad’ to bring together people who are vulnerable and buy into the lies of ‘terrorism’ while labeling everything a ‘hate’ crime. As Hillary and the Gang continue to find more ways to disarm the nation, Gabrielle Giffords implements her ‘victim marketing scam’ aka Americans for Responsible Solutions anti-second amendment organization. Giffords, Maloney, Clinton are part of a malicious deception to disarm Americans coincident with the deliberate destruction and looting of the American financal system and collapse now in progress, not coincidently caused  by same people funding this anti-American agenda.. 

Most Americans go throughout their day totally unaware of what really is happening around them. Most people are told through the fake news networks and Hollywood deception media the way the weather will be, the way the economy is going, what clothes to wear, what shoes to purchase, and what is happening around the world. The majority of Americans do not have a single clue as to the real matrix we live in. A real life version of the Truman Show. I like to refer to the nation as being ‘duped’ from the real pleasures of truth and freedom.

With all the recent shootings, there has been fuel poured on the already burning fire to incite a war between the blacks and the whites, the blacks and the police, the whites and the police, a total divide. Rumors surface after each alleged shooting and chatter starts among social media on their opinions as to what is really happening. This is great news considering Hillary Clinton has been promoting the racial divide in the nation and has been targeting the black women using the St. Louis Ferguson shooting planned event. It seems very peculiar when there is another shooting, Hillary, Giffords, and Maloney are on the trail…

Hillary’s presidential campaign route is right in alignment with all the recent shooting. Another reason for their BULLHORNS to be screaming and preaching VICTIMS, VICTIMS, VICTIMS… MORE GUN CONTROL… WE HAVE MORE VICTIMS….



REMINGTON and BUSHMASTER have been specifically named in the Sandy Hook lawsuit. Clearly, without question, the primary agenda for the lawsuit is to challenge the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Remington and Bushmaster are owned by Freedom Group (FG), which has a parent company called Cerberus Capital Management. Other companies FG owns are:

Advanced Armament Corp

Barnes Bullets

Dakota Arms

DPMS Panther Arms

H&R Firearms


Para USA

Parker Gunmakers


There are some specific shady actions that Cerberus Capital Management displayed directly following the Sandy Hook shooting.



As most people already know, following the Sandy Hook shooting, gun sales were on the rise due to Americans being threatened by the gun-control advocates to ban the civilian population of military-style high powered rifles, extended magazines, and other accessories.

What exactly gives the gun haters right to claim, “the gun maker and sellers knew civilians are considered unfit to operate the assault rifle” … Unfit? Really..?

Definition: Oxford Dictionary – UNFIT– (Of a person) not having the requisite qualities or skills to undertake something competently:

REMINGTON ARMS – is the manufacturer of the Bushmaster. Freedom Group (FG) is the owner of Remington Arms and is a subsidiary of the private equity firm known as Cerberus Capital Management. L.P, Est. 1992.  They are well known for their takeover of struggling Chrysler, who was eventually rescued by the taxpayer. Zionist Stephen Feinberg is the co-founder & CEO.

In just a few days following the Sandy Hook shooting, Cerberus Capital Management made a stunning move to announce the sale of Freedom Group. As most Americans were distracted by the Hollywood movie of the Sandy Hook shooting playing out on the fake-media stage, Cerberus Capital Management’s executives, who own America’s largest gun company, was making arrangements to sell off Freedom Group after receiving a harsh phone call from the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, or CalSTRS, which has $750 million invested in the private equity firm. After just a few short hours of contemplating, Cerberus announced it was putting Freedom Group up for sale. How could this decision be made so soon after an event that brought gun sales and gun control to the forefront of every conversation in America.

Instead of taking the heat and fighting back (considering they know their products are not the reason for murder by guns) Cerberus took the coward way out and gave notice to the nation it wanted to remove itself from the heated gun debate uproar and announced it would  sell Freedom Group, which made the weapon Adam Lanza allegedly used in the massacre.

According to PR NewsWire, Cerberus released the following statement publicly following the shooting at Newtown.

“We were shocked and deeply saddened by the events that took place at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT on December 14, 2012.  We cannot comprehend the losses suffered by the families and friends of those killed by the unthinkable crimes committed that day.  No words or actions can lessen the enormity of this event or make a dent in the pain that was inflicted on so many.”

“It is apparent that the Sandy Hook tragedy was a watershed event that has raised the national debate on gun control to an unprecedented level.  The debate essentially focuses on the balance between public safety and the scope of the Constitutional rights under the Second Amendment.  As a Firm, we are investors, not statesmen or policy makers.  Our role is to make investments on behalf of our clients who are comprised of the pension plans of firemen, teachers, policemen and other municipal workers and unions, endowments, and other institutions and individuals.  It is not our role to take positions, or attempt to shape or influence the gun control policy debate.  That is the job of our federal and state legislators.

There are, however, actions that we as a firm can take.  Accordingly, we have determined to immediately engage in a formal process to sell our investment in Freedom Group.  We will retain a financial advisor to design and execute a process to sell our interests in Freedom Group, and we will then return that capital to our investors.  We believe that this decision allows us to meet our obligations to the investors whose interests we are entrusted to protect without being drawn into the national debate that is more properly pursued by those with the formal charter and public responsibility to do so.”

However, they did take a position in the fierce gun control policy debate. Cerberus claims in their press release, “Our role is to make investments on behalf of our clients who are comprised of the pension plans of firemen, teachers, policemen and other municipal workers and unions, endowments, and other institutions and individuals.” This alone should make the reader question everything considering these false-flag shootings revolve around special medical ops which use crisis actors, firemen, police officers, teachers, municipal workers, local Masonic orders, etc. Do you see where this is going? However, as Cerberus is hiding under the table, knowing they are going to profit on both sides of the false-flag, Remington’s profits soared 52+ percent following the Newtown shooting as a direct result of this event as well as the national gun debate.

The surge in profits to Freedom Group came at the right time as Remington was preparing to replace 7.5+ million rifle triggers in a major recall resulting from a class action lawsuit. Interesting…

Plus, let’s not forget about the amount of money many states make from the sales of guns with licensing fees and permits and such. Wow, is this what Obama meant by we are a nation investing in the service industry?

Regardless, more than two-years after Cerberus made the announcement to sell Freedom Group after the phone call from the California State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS), they exited their investments in the gun manufacturer anyway. Then months later, CalSTRS made national headlines by “voting at its annual board meeting to divest the $193.1 billion pension fund from manufacturers of firearms that are illegal for sale in the state of California, according to Forbes.

Is could me safe to say hypothetically if a person wanted to make some money on the next false-flag… they might want to invest in the players… 🙂

7-29-2016 10-17-38 AM7-29-2016 10-18-23 AM


There is quite a bit of information to digest when it comes to the Sandy Hook lawsuit, the Orlando shooting alleged victims families joining the lawsuit, the manufacturer’s response to the Sandy Hook shooting, and the introduction of the Firearms Risk Protection Act. Studying them all closely as well as the gun haters agenda, it is quite clear the Second Amendment is up for sale. The Firearms Risk Protection Act alone will profit billions to insurance companies making it mandatory gun owners have liability insurance on their weapons. Depending on ‘your risk assessment, you may either be considered a ‘low risk’ individual and pay lower rates or a ‘high risk’ person and pay higher rates. What they do not specify is how they determine what risk you are. I suppose all the tracking and databases are tied together now so who knows what lies ahead for American gun owners.

Mental health agenda is also tied into the gun control debates. Following the Sandy Hook shooting, the push for DNA testing and studies for the ongoing search for the ‘evil gene’ is underway. Obama is demanding the CDC receive millions of dollars in funding to study gun-violence and Hillary Clinton vows to keep the guns out of the hands of who she believes are dangerous individuals.

Cicero and countless others have reminded us “A nation can survive it fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.” Mahoney, Clinton, and Giffords wear the face of do-gooders, concerned women exercising the natural feminime desire to make things safe, but, in fact, they are liars. They “rot the soul of a nation” while working “secretely and unknown in the night” to undermine the pillars of the Constitution, tirelessly seeking and exploiting  weak spots wherein to insert their treason. These women and many other men and women are not Americans , nor are they nationalist, rather they are globalist, Talmudists, serving a self fulfiling prophecy. The stateless one world government, a new world order and  new religion of tyranny – dictated by the same kinds of personalities which destroyed the old world order. These chosen-ones fantasize about  a new paradise of pyschopaths, bringing order out of chaos, but we expect in the end, once again, they will remain miserable, having nothing left to destroy but themselves. 

10 13 11 flagbar



July 28th, 2016 by


By Chuck Baldwin
July 28, 2016

When it comes to constitutional government, the whole left-right, conservative-liberal, Republican-Democrat, even Christian-secular paradigms are, for the most part, an illusion. Over most of the last century, conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats, and Christians and secularists have collectively jettisoned constitutional government in favor of a Welfare State, a Warfare State, a Nanny State, and a Police State.

So-called conservative Republicans like to talk about “limited government,” but in reality Republican presidential administrations and Congresses have equaled or sometimes even surpassed Democrats in exploding the size and scope of government. Likewise, liberal Democrats like to talk about ending foreign wars and so-called free-trade deals that favor international corporations, but in reality Democrat presidential administrations and Congresses have done nothing to bring the troops home or dismantle job-killing “free-trade” deals. After all of the campaign rhetoric, both major parties in Washington, D.C., have become nothing more than water boys for the 1 percent donor class.

Over the past several decades, Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, Christians and secularists have, for the most part, supported the creation of the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, the indefinite detention sections of the NDAA, the militarization of our local and State law enforcement agencies, the draconian, liberty-killing, blatantly unconstitutional Department of Homeland Security (DHS), ubiquitous government spying of the American people, endless wars of aggression overseas, “the war on terror” at home, ad infinitum.

It seems that the vast majority of liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, secularists and Christians want bigger, more intrusive government. It is not just inner city blacks (who often vote Democrat) who are taking advantage of America’s monstrous welfare system, so are a huge percentage of whites (who often vote Republican) from suburbia. I will make an educated guess that one will find as many so-called Christians living on the government dole as those who profess no faith. Plus, if you think that only liberals and secularists are getting abortions, think again. Some studies indicate that over half of the people asking for abortions are professing Christians. The paradigms mentioned above are all but useless.

Look at how Democrat and Republican presidential candidates feel they must go kiss the rings of the Zionists in Tel Aviv; look at how they grovel and pander to the globalist elite at the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR), Trilateral Commission (TC), and Bilderbergs; and look at how quick they all are to go to war–and STAY at war.

When the Patriot Act was being rushed through Congress by G.W. Bush, I was living in a rather large metropolitan area in the southeast. There were over 100 Southern Baptist churches in my area. That’s JUST Southern Baptist churches. That doesn’t count all of the other brands of Baptist churches and all of the other denominations in town. Hundreds and hundreds of churches. Guess how many pastors joined together to oppose the Patriot Act. You’re looking at him, pal. In my town, it was me and the ACLU that stood in opposition to the passage of the Patriot Act. You read it right: the “conservative” Chuck Baldwin and the “liberal” ACLU. So much for labels. In fact, when it comes to Big Brother and the Warfare State, labels mean absolutely nothing.

This is what most people just don’t understand: the Constitution is neither a “conservative” nor “liberal” document. The Natural rights of man are neither “conservative” nor “liberal,” neither “Christian” nor “secular.” Our Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights were meant to protect the Natural rights of ALL men. And when it comes to opposing America’s burgeoning Police State and endless wars of aggression, throw political and ideological labels away: they mean absolutely nothing.

I have often said that when it comes to voting for candidates for federal office, we should focus much more on whether one is a globalist or nationalist than whether they are conservative or liberal. And I hesitate to use the word “nationalist,” because too many people associate that word with the phony “American exceptionalism” philosophy that is used to foment most of these endless international wars that the U.S. engages in. I actually prefer to say one is either a globalist or an AMERICAN, because historic American ideology (until the Twentieth Century at least) considered foreign entanglements anathema.

However, since World War II, globalists have controlled every presidential administration of both parties (with the possible exceptions of John F. Kennedy’s and Ronald Reagan’s) and most of the U.S. Congresses. This reality has brought America to the brink of a Police State and World War III. And, again, neither Republican nor Democrat, conservative nor liberal, Christian nor secularist means diddlysquat when it comes to stopping this juggernaut.

Preventing the complete implementation of a Police State and the advent of World War III is going to take a consortium of strange bedfellows–such as what happened when Bob Barr (representing the ACLU) and I teamed up to oppose the Patriot Act.

For example, I find it incredible that the only people I’ve heard who are trying to warn the world of how close we are to global nuclear war are “progressives” (aka “liberals”). And they are warning that if Hillary Clinton (a “liberal”) is elected, World War III is almost inevitable. I remind you the following report is produced by progressives, NOT conservatives. Plus, at least some of the people who report for this organization would identify themselves as atheists or agnostics. And THEY are warning us about the liberal, Hillary Clinton.

Listen to what THEY say in this video report:

“The leading likes of the so-called progressive movement argue that it is the left’s duty to vote for this neocon warmonger. But the consequences of this strategy may well lead directly to nuclear war.

“Hillary Rodham Clinton is a Wall Street-backed warmonger whose potential election as President of the United States this November poses an existential threat, not just to Americans, but to all of humanity.

“As First Lady and then as Senator, she actively supported the US’s illegal wars of aggression abroad.”

“She not only admitted the US’s role in creating Al Qaeda:

“[Hillary Clinton speaking] ‘When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, we had this brilliant idea that we were gonna come to Pakistan and create a force of Mujahideen, equip them with stinger missiles and everything else to go after the Soviets inside Afghanistan.’

“But then, despite this admission, as Secretary of State, her support of the war on Libya and the jihadis in Syria directly led to the rise of ISIS and the migrant crisis in Europe.”

“She was the one who announced the US’s so-called Asia Pacific Pivot that has seen more US military forces being placed in the Asia Pacific as a direct military threat to China.”

“And she has stated in no uncertain terms that Russia and Iran will be militarily targeted in a Clinton Presidency and that the nuclear option is as always ‘on the table.’”

“Hillary Clinton is a neocon, a war hawk, a liar, and unindicted criminal and a Wall Street puppet. Why is it then, that those on the so-called progressive left, who would be warning against her if she had an ‘R’ next to her name, are instead lecturing other leftists that it is now their duty to fall in line and help her get elected?”

“[Michel Chossudovsky speaking] ‘In so many words, Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy stance is to “blow up the planet.” She has made statements to the effect that a first-strike nuclear attack against Russia or Iran is on the table, so that if she is in the White House she could in fact unleash the unspoken which is World War III. I think this is something we have to address, both in terms of analysis, but in terms of political choice. So that anybody who wants to blow up the planet is not progressive. Secondly, she has a criminal record. Not only in regards to the email scandal but also in relation to the Clinton Foundation which is involved in fraud, money laundering, political cronyism, etc. It is amply documented. So that, in effect, the choice of the American people is to elect a war criminal.’”

“It is no hyperbole to say that the election of Hillary Clinton as President this November would be one of the greatest tragedies in the history of the United States and perhaps the world. It is incumbent on people of all stripes, American and non-American, Republican and Democrat, progressive and libertarian, anarchists and those who have never thought about politics a day in their life to protest her nomination at the Democratic National Convention, work against her campaign for President, and divert the nightmare that is now coming into view.”

Watch the video: Hillary Clinton: A Threat To All Humanity

I have been trying to warn people for decades about the threat that the Clinton and Bush families pose to the future of the United States. In reality, the Clinton and Bush families are ONE CRIME FAMILY. They represent corruption, criminality, corporatism, cronyism, and global cannibalism to the nth degree. For twenty out of the last twenty-eight years, America has had either a Bush or a Clinton in the White House. And to the chagrin of Democrats who thought they were getting “change” with Barack Obama, for the past eight years, he has simply treaded water for the Bush/Clinton regime. And with Hillary winning the Democrat nomination, they are back. And as Ted and Heidi Cruz are ardent GW Bush disciples, had Ted won the GOP nomination, globalists would have had the presidency locked up. (Despite the allegations of some, I am still unconvinced that Donald Trump is a globalist; I tend to think he is not. However, I suspect Mike Pence might be a closet globalist. If Pence is a globalist, we could be looking at another Reagan/Bush scenario–and we all know what happened to Reagan, don’t we? But I will leave that subject for another column.)

Hillary (along with Bill, and GHW, and GW–and never forget to include Newt Gingrich among the globalist elite) is the globalists’ globalist. She is EVERYTHING the CFR, TC, and Bilderbergs want. And there is nothing that enriches globalists like war. The Bushes and Clintons have kept America at war for over two decades (and Obama did nothing to change it; in fact, he escalated it), but World War III is what the global gamemakers long for.

Let me pause here to encourage readers to purchase the book “War Is A Racket” by Major General Smedley Butler (USMC). Read this short book, and you will understand how the top 1 percent is enriched by war. Nothing enriches the elite like war. Nothing. And the bigger the war, the bigger the riches.

Find General Butler’s book in my online store here: War Is A Racket

A Hillary victory puts the Bush/Clinton Crime Family back in the White House. And let’s be clear: the two main goals of Hillary’s administration would be the full implementation of a Police State in America (including gun confiscation) and the advent of World War III. And right now, it seems that some progressives understand the danger more than many Christians and conservatives.

Again, throw the labels and the paradigms away. Hillary Clinton is a threat to all humanity.

P.S. As the DHS continues to escalate Police State training tactics throughout America’s law enforcement agencies, it means the chances of citizens being subjected to all kinds of bullying by police officers also escalates–not to mention the “shoot first, ask questions later” mentality that is growing exponentially among law enforcement personnel. It is very incumbent on citizens to have a good grasp of their constitutional rights when confronted by a policeman. In these days and times, knowing what to say and what not to say and what to do and what not to do can literally save your life.

My constitutional attorney son, who was a prosecutor before becoming a defense attorney, has put together an outstanding video that teaches people the do’s and dont’s when contacted by police, whether it be a traffic stop or something else. What Tim teaches will help citizens better protect liberty in their communities and will help policemen to be better peace officers. Yes, I recommend this video for honest lawmen as well.

The video is called “Police Contact: How To Respond.” I highly recommend this video to everyone. Order the DVD here.

[If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link.]

[I also have many books and DVDs available for purchase online. Go to Chuck Baldwin Live Store]

© 2016 Chuck Baldwin – All Rights Reserved

Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America was founded. He was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitution Party. He and his wife, Connie, have 3 children and 9 grandchildren. Chuck and his family reside in the Flathead Valley of Montana. See Chuck’s complete bio here.

E-mail: chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Website: ChuckBaldwinLive.com

5-10-2016 8-55-33 AM



July 21st, 2016 by


By Olddog

 To be a real American, one must understand the history of the different kinds of governments, and insist on lawful protections for the people and their assets. That sentence is the epitome of freedom from tyranny, because history has documented how tyrannical most governments have been to their constituents.

Unless the children are raised up with this knowledge being the focus of their attention, sooner or later they will fall pray to demented desires and lean toward democracy because they want to make the world to suit them.

This is called human nature, and the correct teaching of Christian scripture authenticates all humans are born with a depraved nature, and must seek God for redemption. This ideology was prevalent in the beginning of America, but was denigrated by depraved Pastors, and the ever present desire to be in charge of ones depraved mind. Also, many parents were too lazy to study scripture and allowed these depraved Pastors to “bend their minds” so to speak.

This entire problem human beings have with getting along with one another is directly due to their depraved desire to make their own rules, do their own thing, and be in charge!

Any intelligent person can and should study real history so as to know what human traits to follow and avoid, because those who have the compulsion to lead are usually depraved.

Not all men/women are tyrants, but most will struggle with, and find the ability to get people to obey His/Her dictates until they are holding power over the people. Hence, unbreakable provision must be in place before any government comes to power. This is available in plain English in the Bible, and is the not a hindrance to government, or the unbeliever.

I have never heard of a Church forcing people to attend as the depraved know full well they must have a system of division to play one group over another. So, how can a group of doctrinally ignorant people choose a pastor?

THEY CANNOT! Therefore raising up a child in a godly home and school is of upmost importance. Homo sapiens must be converted before they can live in peace.

I do not write this with the confidence I am a born-again Christian, but from the knowledge gained from a compulsive life of studying the train-wreck of demented human-beings that were never educated on the history of man-kind.  How can one avoid tyranny if they know not what it is and looks like?

Surreptitious men and women prowl the world looking for followers, knowing full well the power of their gymnastic word-smithing, and these liars abound everywhere, and the only protection from their linguistic narcotics is knowledge of the past.

I believe coupled with the events this generation has personally witnessed; what I have claimed above should be easy to accept. Even if Christianity is no longer acceptable to the majority of this country and generation, something must convince them to avoid being ignorant of the past failures of the Church, the government, and the morals of the people.

Being convinced that only moral people can lead a group of people if freedom is to prevail, I will now itemize some absolutes that history has authenticated must be followed.

(1)As stated above only intelligent and informed people are    equipped to be leaders and that should apply to those who vote. One cannot escape the necessity of having learned from past history that a democracy equalizes everyone regardless of their knowledge and negates the votes of the learned person. The results are catastrophic! The person who wants to vote their self some benefit they have not the skill or intelligence to acquire on their own is a burden to everyone else, denigrates freedom, and has no value to the Nation. Supporting the poor is the obligation of the Christian community and those who have more than they need.

(2)A performance bond should be forced on all who occupy government offices, from the President on down. The people must demand total compliance to the Constitution by their elected representatives and all government employees.

(3)As the need for more and more communication between other Nations has increased from the out of control world commerce the Bankers forced on us, an import export equalization must be designed and adhered to, and only bonded people  with prior international commerce experience should be allowed to represent the States.

(4)The people’s militias must be reinstated by the states with no control by the National Government and after a period of time if it becomes a necessity a National army-Navy may be formed with permission of all the States, but never allowed to exercise operations falling under the state Militias’ obligations. Only foreign wars are the obligation of the National armed forces and it is the equal by population, obligation of the States to finance an Army-Navy

(5)From past experience it is foolish for the States to surrender any authority to a National government, and must establish said national government with State governors, leaving the obligation of state operations to the deputy Governor.

(6) Public education facilities should be funded and maintained by State Governments but have no authority over the Teachers or administration and every community should have a school staffed by teachers who have attended and excelled in constitutional law. The number of Government supplied buildings for education must conform to each neighborhood population requirements. An agreed on number of students per buildings should be established by a County Government and controlled by County Commissioners. All physical maintenance needs should be by the private sector. School supplies are the responsibility of the parents and when necessary by the County.

(7)All possible means of eliminating control over the people by powerful organizations, both private, Corporate, and Government must be applied in the States Constitutions.


This is going to be an on going project and all readers are welcome to participate with suggestions by email. I will publish your name with each suggestion or withhold it per your choice. Time prevents me from committing to the full and complete document, and it is your country and future to help protect also, besides no one person has the intelligence and experience to be a lone author of this project.


10 13 11 flagbar

There Will Be No Second American Revolution: The Futility of an Armed Revolt

July 19th, 2016 by



By John W. Whitehead
July 18, 2016

“A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty.”—James Madison

America is a ticking time bomb.

All that remains to be seen is who—or what—will set fire to the fuse.

We are poised at what seems to be the pinnacle of a manufactured breakdown, with police shooting unarmed citizens, snipers shooting police, global and domestic violence rising, and a political showdown between two presidential candidates equally matched in unpopularity.

The preparations for the Republican and Democratic national conventions taking place in Cleveland and Philadelphia—augmented by a $50 million federal security grant for each city—provide a foretaste of how the government plans to deal with any individual or group that steps out of line: they will be censored, silenced, spied on, caged, intimidated, interrogated, investigated, recorded, tracked, labeled, held at gunpoint, detained, restrained, arrested, tried and found guilty.

For instance, anticipating civil unrest and mass demonstrations in connection with the Republican Party convention, Cleveland officials set up makeshift prisons, extra courtrooms to handle protesters, and shut down a local university in order to house 1,700 riot police and their weapons. The city’s courts are preparing to process up to 1,000 people a day. Additionally, the FBI has also been conducting “interviews” with activists in advance of the conventions to discourage them from engaging in protests.

Make no mistake, the government is ready for a civil uprising.

Indeed, the government has been preparing for this moment for years.

A 2008 Army War College report revealed that “widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.” The 44-page report goes on to warn that potential causes for such civil unrest could include another terrorist attack, “unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters.”

Subsequent reports by the Department of Homeland Security to identify, monitor and label right-wing and left-wing activists and military veterans as extremists (a.k.a. terrorists) have manifested into full-fledged pre-crime surveillance programs. Almost a decade later, after locking down the nation and spending billions to fight terrorism, the DHS has concluded that the greater threat is not ISIS but domestic right-wing extremism.

Meanwhile, the government has been amassing an arsenal of military weapons for use domestically and equipping and training their “troops” for war. Even government agencies with largely administrative functions such as the Food and Drug Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Smithsonian have been acquiring body armor, riot helmets and shields, cannon launchers and police firearms and ammunition. In fact, there are now at least 120,000 armed federal agents carrying such weapons who possess the power to arrest.

Rounding out this profit-driven campaign to turn American citizens into enemy combatants (and America into a battlefield) is a technology sector that is colluding with the government to create a Big Brother that is all-knowing, all-seeing and inescapable. It’s not just the drones, fusion centers, license plate readers, stingray devices and the NSA that you have to worry about. You’re also being tracked by the black boxes in your cars, your cell phone, smart devices in your home, grocery loyalty cards, social media accounts, credit cards, streaming services such as Netflix, Amazon, and e-book reader accounts.

All of this has taken place right under our noses, funded with our taxpayer dollars and carried out in broad daylight without so much as a general outcry from the citizenry.

It’s astounding how convenient we’ve made it for the government to lock down the nation.

We’ve even allowed ourselves to be acclimated to the occasional lockdown of government buildings, Jade Helm military drills in small towns so that special operations forces can get “realistic military training” in “hostile” territory, and  Live Active Shooter Drill training exercises, carried out at schools, in shopping malls, and on public transit, which can and do fool law enforcement officials, students, teachers and bystanders into thinking it’s a real crisis.

The events of recent years—the invasive surveillance, the extremism reports, the civil unrest, the protests, the shootings, the bombings, the military exercises and active shooter drills, the color-coded alerts and threat assessments, the fusion centers, the transformation of local police into extensions of the military, the distribution of military equipment and weapons to local police forces, the government databases containing the names of dissidents and potential troublemakers—have all conjoined to create an environment in which “we the people” are more distrustful and fearful of each other and more reliant on the government to keep us safe.

Of course, that’s the point.

The powers-that-be want us to feel vulnerable.

They want us to fear each other and trust the government’s hired gunmen to keep us safe from terrorists, extremists, jihadists, psychopaths, etc.

Most of all, the powers-that-be want us to feel powerless to protect ourselves and reliant on and grateful for the dubious protection provided by the American police state.

Their strategy is working.

The tree of liberty is dying.

There will be no second American Revolution.

There is no place in our nation for the kind of armed revolution our forefathers mounted against a tyrannical Great Britain. Such an act would be futile and tragic. We are no longer dealing with a distant, imperial king but with a tyrant of our own making: a militarized, technologized, heavily-financed bureaucratic machine that operates beyond the reach of the law.

The message being sent to the citizenry is clear: there will be no revolution, armed or otherwise.

Anyone who believes that they can wage—and win—an armed revolt against the American police state has not been paying attention. Those who wage violence against the government and their fellow citizens are playing right into the government’s hands. Violence cannot and will not be the answer to what ails America.

Whether instigated by the government or the citizenry, violence will only lead to more violence. It does not matter how much firepower you have. The government has more firepower.

It does not matter how long you think you can hold out by relying on survivalist skills, guerilla tactics and sheer grit. The government has the resources to outwait, out-starve, outman, outgun and generally overpower you.

This government of wolves will not be overtaken by force.

Unfortunately, we waited too long to wake up to the government’s schemes.

We did not anticipate that “we the people” would become the enemy. For years, the government has been warning against the dangers of domestic terrorism, erecting surveillance systems to monitor its own citizens, creating classification systems to label any viewpoints that challenge the status quo as extremist, and training law enforcement agencies to equate anyone possessing anti-government views as a domestic terrorist.

What the government failed to explain was that the domestic terrorists would be of the government’s own making, whether intentional or not.

By waging endless wars abroad, by bringing the instruments of war home, by transforming police into extensions of the military, by turning a free society into a suspect society, by treating American citizens like enemy combatants, by discouraging and criminalizing a free exchange of ideas, by making violence its calling card through SWAT team raids and militarized police, by fomenting division and strife among the citizenry, by acclimating the citizenry to the sights and sounds of war, and by generally making peaceful revolution all but impossible, the government has engineered an environment in which domestic violence has become inevitable.

What we are now experiencing is a civil war, devised and instigated in part by the U.S. government.

The outcome for this particular conflict is already foregone: the police state wins.

The objective: compliance and control.

The strategy: destabilize the economy through endless wars, escalate racial tensions, polarize the populace, heighten tensions through a show of force, intensify the use of violence, and then, when all hell breaks loose, clamp down on the nation for the good of the people and the security of the nation.

So where does that leave us?

Despite the fact that communities across the country are, for all intents and purposes, being held hostage by a government that is armed to the teeth and more than willing to use force in order to “maintain order,” most Americans seem relatively unconcerned. Worse, we have become so fragmented as a nation, so hostile to those with whom we might disagree, so distrustful of those who are different from us, that we are easily divided and conquered.

We have been desensitized to violence, acclimated to a military presence in our communities and persuaded that there is nothing we can do to alter the seemingly hopeless trajectory of the nation. In this way, the floundering economy, the blowback arising from military occupations abroad, police shootings, the nation’s deteriorating infrastructure and all of the other mounting concerns have become non-issues to a populace that is easily entertained, distracted, manipulated and controlled.

The sight of police clad in body armor and gas masks, wielding semiautomatic rifles and escorting an armored vehicle through a crowded street, a scene likened to “a military patrol through a hostile city,” no longer causes alarm among the general populace.

We are fast becoming an anemic, weak, pathetically diluted offspring of our revolutionary forebears incapable of mounting a national uprising against a tyrannical regime.

If there is to be any hope of reclaiming our government and restoring our freedoms, it will require a different kind of coup: nonviolent, strategic and grassroots, starting locally and trickling upwards. Such revolutions are slow and painstaking. They are political, in part, but not through any established parties or politicians.

Most of all, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, for any chance of success, such a revolution will require more than a change of politics: it will require a change of heart among the American people, a reawakening of the American spirit, and a citizenry that cares more about their freedoms than their fantasy games.

5-10-2016 8-55-33 AM

Timeline of Worldwide School-Mass Shootings, and gun control

July 12th, 2016 by


Gun-related tragedies in the U.S. and around the world

The following table lists the worldwide mass and school shootings from 1996 to the present. Find the date, location, and a short description of each incident.

7-12-2016 9-03-47 AM7-12-2016 9-04-39 AM7-12-2016 9-05-44 AM7-12-2016 9-06-56 AM7-12-2016 9-08-10 AM7-12-2016 9-09-01 AM7-12-2016 9-09-49 AM7-12-2016 9-11-15 AM7-12-2016 9-12-15 AM7-12-2016 9-12-57 AM7-12-2016 9-13-41 AM7-12-2016 9-14-23 AM7-12-2016 9-15-16 AM7-12-2016 9-16-03 AM7-12-2016 9-16-45 AM7-12-2016 9-17-30 AM7-12-2016 9-18-14 AM7-12-2016 9-18-54 AM7-12-2016 9-19-56 AM7-12-2016 9-21-47 AM7-12-2016 9-22-14 AM7-12-2016 9-23-02 AM

07 12 16 Milestones in Federal Gun Control Legislation


A timeline of gun legislation and organizations from 1791 to the present.

7-12-2016 9-25-52 AM7-12-2016 9-26-24 AM

Throughout American history, high-profile gun violence has focused the national spotlight on gun control.

The Dec. 14, 2012 tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School and other mass shootings are typically followed by a public debate of gun safety and gun owners’ rights in America.

The following is a timeline of important federal legislation and milestones reached by national organizations tied to the Second Amendment and the issue of gun control.

7-12-2016 9-28-04 AM7-12-2016 9-29-12 AM7-12-2016 9-30-05 AM7-12-2016 9-30-52 AM7-12-2016 9-31-34 AM7-12-2016 9-32-11 AM7-12-2016 9-32-51 AM7-12-2016 9-33-30 AM


Thinking people, (assuming they are intelligent enough to be aware and involved in human affairs) would conclude that there should be a major change in how children are raised, what they are taught, and by whom they are taught. Humanity has a problem, not guns! Homo sapiens have been killers since Able and Cain, so a major change in education is drastically needed. We could start by making sure the government stayed out of family affairs, education; and the corporations who sell violence in all of the media methods should be held responsible. One cannot expect children or adults who have watched the glorification of violence their whole life to mature into responsible adults who respect human and animal life. There is, and never has been a government who did not have a motive to advance their control over their constituents, and indirectly teaching them to be killers has always worked in their favor. What the whole world needs is finding and authorizing the right people to be their leaders, instead of allowing the BANKERS to do it.

Now let’s consider the present movement to disassociate ones person from the federal government Corporations, and the people who are assuming the leadership of teaching how it is accomplished. For them I have a few questions: such as how they expect to proceed without a step by step methodology, including the proper forms, and estimated expense. Also what kind of personal protection can they expect from past and new forms of law enforcement? How will they who are completely dependent on different forms of government compensations going to survive once they have declared their independence? Is this going to be another form of division between the rich and the poor, the well educated and the lesser intellects? Just who are going to front the money to pay for offices, and supplies, telephone and electric, transportation and personal compensation for this new form of government?

I see a huge potential for the wealthy to take over this freedom movement as recorded history has no evidence of assisting the poor and less intelligent! The backbone of all nations are the working class who have been dehumanized, dumbed down to self centeredness, and systematically brain-washed. We will wind up in a civil war as soon as the Bankers see any threat from this quest for independence. May the Holy Lord of Glory have mercy on us all! I know of no person who has had a stronger desire to kill and maim our so called leaders for their debauchery than I do, but never will, simply because my Lord and my God forbids it. That my dear people, is the only thing that will save America from destruction. So keep on legitimizing allah and see what you get. Now let’s consider our heroes, the military, the so-called ones who sacrifice their life to protect America! Where the hell are they when we need them to clean house at home? Forget the ragheads boys, and take care of the International Investment Bankers. Then you will be idolized for ever!!!!!

10 13 11 flagbar


July 11th, 2016 by




And you guys thought I was a Looney Ole Man





Obama and the most successful national subversion in world history

2-25-2016 1-18-50 PM


America is coming apart – not just the United States, the sovereign nation, but our Constitution, our culture, our traditions, all of what “America” has come to mean.

It is not by accident.

What we are witnessing is the product of eight years of Barack Obama and his divisive rhetoric and destructive policies.

Obama’s “transformation” is a euphemism for the crippling and humbling of a great nation he considers racist, oppressive, venal and dysfunctional.

He warned us.

“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” – Barack Obama, October 30, 2008.

But Michelle Obama said it best.

“We are going to have to change our conversation; we’re going to have to change our traditions, our history; we’re going to have to move into a different place as a nation.” – Michelle Obama, May 14, 2008.

And that different place as a nation is fragmentation and collapse.

It is not a conspiracy.

There is, in fact, a deliberate, coordinated and ongoing effort to subvert the United States as a capitalist, Judeo-Christian based republic and replace it with alien political ideologies and cultures incompatible to personal liberty.

None of what is happening is “home-grown.”

There is an alliance between the global political left and radical Islam, two totalitarian philosophies that cannot dominate the world without first destroying capitalist, Judeo-Christian-based democracy, the United States being both the foremost proponent and primary target.

Just as Islamists attempt to  impose  their religion on the world in a totalitarian fashion requiring unwavering obedience, so do radical leftists strive to create an omnipotent socialist state that will control every aspect of daily life and will enforce a universal brand of “social justice” on all mankind.

I will not mince words.

The Democrat Party now represents, at least philosophically if not operationally, the American subsidiary of that alliance.

The Republican Party is dominated by globalists, obsessed with the acquisition of personal power and profit, and uninterested and willingly impotent in defending the rights, liberties and well-being of American citizens. The GOP leadership has solidified its choice to no longer represent what had been its constituency, but to adopt the identity of junior partners in the ruling class.

To summarize, the crises we are currently experiencing are the direct consequence of the policies pursued by Barack Obama, a coffeehouse communist and Islamic groupie, who leads a lawless cabal of fellow-travelers, financed by domestic anti-American and foreign sources, supported by professional agitators, facilitated by a supine Republican political opposition and cheered-on by a predominately left-wing media.

Societal division and social unrest are tactics used to destabilize and demoralize, to further fundamentally transform the country, which has already been undermined economically, educationally and culturally from within.

It has always been the dilemma of social revolutionaries, whether communist or Islamic, that as long as individuals embraced liberty and had the belief that his or her Divine spark of reason could solve the problems facing society, then that society would never reach the state of hopelessness and alienation recognized as the necessary prerequisite for totalitarianism.

Political correctness is part of that effort. Its aim is to narrow the range of thought in order to make independent thinking literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express those thoughts. It is accomplished through the systematic destruction of words and phrases as “micro-aggressions” or simply making statements that are patently untrue.

For example, despite exhaustive efforts by the Mainstream Media to paint Black Lives Matter (BLM) as a movement dedicated to “racial equality” or “social justice” and engaging in “peaceful protests;” it is, in reality, a violent, racist, and dangerous domestic terror group funded by rich white men (links to Ben and Jerry’s Foundation and George Soros) devoted to destabilizing American socio-cultural infrastructure, legitimized by Obama with a presidential invitation to the White House, and endorsed by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim Brotherhood front group and the unindicted co-conspirator in the prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation for providing support to the terrorist group Hamas.

That is a pattern of connected dots, which our hopelessly corrupt political-media establishment, as acts of self-preservation and complicity-avoidance, tries tirelessly to disconnect.

Most of the social chaos and extremism we are currently witnessing in our country is the product of a well-funded and well-organized anti-American, predominately foreign, radical Islamo-leftist agenda – and an administration that enables rather than opposes the aims of our enemies.

It is time for patriots to take America back.

10 13 11 flagbar


July 9th, 2016 by



I highly recommend you buy this book as this is only a sample of the contents you need to know.

By Mel Stamper



The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light.

They lived in a land of shadows, and now the light is shining on them.

(Isaiah 9:2)

Fruit from a Poisonous Tree


While researching my first book, High Priests of Treason, I discovered  some of the most fascinating information anyone could ever hope to uncover about money, finance and government. I will share it with you so that you have a better understanding of the issues you will be reading about and possibly facing in the near future. This knowledge could not be obtained without years of research; I have saved you the trouble of traveling that same forty miles of bad road. I do, however, advise any that wish to challenge this evil empire as I have to verify cites and information that I supply. Get educated on the facts before you act, and then act.

My investigation concentrated on the Judiciary; Internal Revenue Service; Federal Reserve Bank, Inc.; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; offices of the Secretary of the Treasury and State; as well as the President and the Congress. That investigation has disclosed, in my mind, a broad, premeditated conspiracy by the International Bankers and their agents in the United States government to defraud and enslave the Citizens of the united States of America since 1900.

Examination into the Statutes at Large, United States Code, Code of Federal Regulations, Congressional Record, Federal Register, the Internal Revenue manuals, and other sources too numerous to mention, reveal a conspiracy of such magnitude that I do not have the words to adequately describe that betrayal to the American people. This is why I repudiated my citizenship with the corporate government of the United States, its demonic masters and their tool on earth, the United Nations, controlled by the International Banking families. These families would slit their children’s throat for a dollar, and they dearly love their children.

What I uncovered has clearly been designed to circumvent the intent and restrictions of the Constitution for the united States of America by the defacto government in operation today. I’m convinced that their purpose was to implement the Communist Manifesto within the fifty States and enslave us all. If you take the time to read that “Manifesto,” you will discover that its principles are enshrined in our federal and state statutes. Engles and Marx espoused that to create a classless society, a “graduated income tax” should be used as the weapon to destroy the middle class of a country. Such a system is in place, managed by the US version of the KGB, the ever-benevolent Internal Revenue Service, which is not even a part of the government.

For the proof, refer to Diversified Metal Products v. T-Bow Trust Co., IRS and Steve Morgan, within the United States’ Answer and Claim at paragraph 4: “Denies that the Internal Revenue Service is an agency of the United States Government, etc.,” signed by Richard R. Ward, US Dept. of Justice (US District Court, District of Idaho; Civil No. 93-405-E-EJL).


Deception, quick hands, sophistry and obfuscation all constitute the art of magic. Those who practice in illusion are called magicians or, in the less poetic sense, “politicians” – “now you see me; now you don’t.” The Congress and the IRS are full of magicians who have created their web of deceit and illusion in the tax laws, not by quick hands but by illusory language.

Have you ever questioned why your Christian name is spelled in all capital letters, when we all know that English grammar requires the spelling of all proper nouns in upper and lower case letters? I can assure you that it is not for clarity. Does the word “person” in statutory law mean the same as in everyday language usage? You are about to discover the answer to both of those questions.

In the beginning of the Twentieth Century, when the courts still had truly honorable judges, they ruled some of those early tax laws unconstitutional or unlawful.

The IRS immediately removed themselves outside the jurisdiction and venue of the courts, to the Philippines and Puerto Rico. By deceiving and coercing the population, beginning with the War Tax Act of 1942, the Congress and the IRS continued their unconstitutional and criminal activity to this day. These criminal magicians have convinced the American population that citizens of this nation are of a status that they are not – that they are subjects of the federal government, which they are not.

They led us to believe that we must do things that are not required to be done or go to jail. Through the clever use of “IRS-speak” and the Congress’ “word art,” the Executive Branch promotes the fraud, the Congress turns a blind eye to their misconduct (but they have hearings that they hope will demonstrate their outrage to the voters), and then their dishonorable courts ratify the alleged criminal misconduct by rubber-stamping the convictions of innocent Citizens.

To illustrate my point on the complicity of the court in this immoral scheme, I refer to a recent case before the Supreme Court, the case of United States v. Sandra L. Craft, Case No. 00-1831, in hearing on January 14, 2002. The Assistant Solicitor General, Mr. Kent L. Jones, was asked a question from the court:

1.“… some penalties for failing to file a return?”

2.“There are some penalties, but the penalties, like taxes, have to be enforced against the property of the taxpayer, and if the taxpayer is allowed to exempt all of its property in this fashion, then there’s literally no way that the taxes can be enforced through civil procedures.”

“What about criminal procedures? Are there any criminal procedures for – failure, continued failure to file – ?”

“Of course if you file a return, then you’re not exposing yourself to any criminal obligations, and if you don’t file a return, it would be – (I’m not familiar with a statute that makes that a crime by itself.) Now, it may be that it’s a crime in connection with some intent to conceal, but just the fact that you didn’t file – I’m not – even though I come before the Court on tax cases.

I’m not an expert on criminal tax matters, but it’s my impression that that would not by itself be a crime.”

“We’d better not let the word get out. I thought it was a crime, but I’ll check.” (Followed by laughter)

Over three thousand Americans each year are sent to federal prison for not filing a tax return, and the Assistant Solicitor General, Mr. Kent L. Jones, admits to the Supreme Court that it is not illegal to not file a tax return.

The Supreme Court advises him, “We’d better not let the word get out.”

That supposed bastion in the protection of our freedom wants to keep it a dirty little secret among the privileged few and to continue to permit the imprisonment of thousands of innocent people and the resultant destruction of their lives. That is something to laugh about?

This is a perfect point in the book to educate you on your proper status as a Citizen of one of the Republic States of the Union. What you were taught in public school was exactly what the federal and state government wanted you to be taught. The most powerful tool of control of any population by the government is ignorance of its subjects.

“A sovereign is one in whom supreme power is vested. He may delegate whatever of his total authority he wishes. He can consent to whatever outside authority he may choose or none at all. However, he cannot be “subject” to outside authority; this would be in contradiction to sovereignty.” (Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Ed.)

The creation of the enumerated powers in the United States Constitution was done by delegation of authority. The power of the sovereign people remained with the people. The federal government may exercise its enumerated power only on their behalf. This relationship was well-stated by the Supreme Court as follows:“Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.” (Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US 353)

Are you a citizen of the United States?

Are you a Sovereign?

Those two questions and their answers hold the secret of our present day condition of servitude to the de facto federal and state governments. There have been massive fraudulent practices of the Congress and state legislatures in the creation of legislation (statutes) that has regulated our lives and commerce for over sixty years. Without a thorough understanding of your correct relationship to these legal fictions and the statutes they have created, you are doomed to a lifetime of servitude, which can be avoided.

I pray for more understanding and knowledge, as I do not as yet know the impact or total paradigm of this deception. What I do know is shocking but enlightening. I will attempt to explain as much as is possible with that limited knowledge of the methods used to obfuscate the law and your citizenship status, effectively placing you in a feudal relationship with government forces.

In order for you to take cognizance of the full context of this conspiracy, you need to understand the meaning of words of art used by the various legislative bodies to entrap you. The words used in statutory law do not have the normal, everyday, street meaning. By diagramming the statute, it is possible to understand the intent of the law and its application. Get out your old 10th Grade English Grammar Book and learn how to diagram sentences; it will save you a world of grief.


“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.”

It appears that “We the People” of the United States, acting through our representatives, were sovereign, because we are doing the creating of this constitutional compact. But does that mean that you individually are a sovereign?

If King Juan Carlos of Spain were to submit to a kidney transplant and the recipient was a farmer from Ohio, would the farmer become a sovereign king of Spain the moment the kidney was stitched into his body? Of course not!

To be King Juan Carlos of Spain, you must be the whole person; you must be a living soul; you must wear a mask of your status. King Carlos would still be a king regardless if he had the two kidneys or one. What makes him a king and sovereign is that he was born with the title of sovereign (ruler’s mask); nothing more. If he renounced that title, he would not be a sovereign but would revert to a different class (common man’s mask) or subject of a higher authority – that which would replace him.

So being a sovereign requires that someone or some force has declared that you are sovereign and has given you the authority to exercise all of your powers over your subjects (citizens).

That could be done by God (as royalty claims to rule by divine right) or by being elected to that lofty position by your subjects. Since none of us have been declared by God to be sovereign or elected to the position of sovereign by our fellow man, individually one cannot be sovereign, as many in the Patriot community profess. Not only would the declaration that you are sovereign be frivolous to the ears of the court, it would be a blasphemy to the Lord God of the Universe, as he is the only true Sovereign to whom we all owe our allegiance.

What you are is a unique species – a species described by God as a living soul. “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” – Genesis 2:8

That distinction is unique in the United States of America, because we all – collectively as living souls – were given the highest possible status: that of sovereign over the government we created. The authority for bestowing that authority was “We the People.” When we act as a whole, then We the People are the Sovereign of the United States of America, exercising our power through our elected representatives. When we act as individuals, we are acting in the capacity of living souls, each responsible for ourselves. The court has described this concept as follows:

“A distinction was taken at the bar between a state and the people of the state. It is a distinction I am not capable of comprehending.

By a state forming a republic (speaking of it as a moral person), I do not mean the legislature of the state, the executive of the state, or the judiciary, but all the citizens who compose the state, and are, if I may so express myself, integral parts of it; all together forming a body politic.

The great distinction between monarchies and republics (at least our republic) in general is, that in the former the monarch is considered as the sovereign, and each individual of his nation as a subject to him, though in some countries with many important special limitations.

This, I say, is generally the case, for it has not been so universal. But in a republic, all the citizens as such, are equal, and no citizen can rightfully exercise any authority over another but in virtue of a power constitutionally given by the whole community, and such authority, when exercised, is in effect an act of the whole community, which forms such body politic. In such governments, therefore, the sovereignty resides in the great body of the people, but it resides in them not as so many distinct individuals, but in their political capacity only.

Thus A, B, C, and D are citizens of Pennsylvania, and as such, together with all the citizens of Pennsylvania share in the sovereignty of the state.

Suppose a state to consist exactly had a number of 100,000 citizens, and if it were practicable for them all to assemble at one time and in one place, and that 99,999 did actually assemble, the state would not be in fact assembled. Why? Because the state in fact is composed of all the citizens, not of a part only, however large the part may be, and one is wanting.” – Penhallow v. Doane, 3 Dall. 93.

The protections we gave ourselves as living souls and a sovereign body politic were incorporated into the Constitution as the first ten Amendments, which are often referred to as the Bill of Rights. These rights were specifically enumerated because, from our colonial experience, these rights were the most often abused by the king and his agents and are deemed to be so fundamental, that without them, there would be no humanity.

The Constitution was written in order to protect the commerce of the independent sovereign states from foreign aggression and equal treatment among the contracting states. The individual living souls of the states that compacted together by the Constitution were protected in their fundamental rights from its creation, the federal government, in the exercise of the enumerated powers that we granted it and nothing more.

The Constitution did not create a sovereign government over the member states to the compact or over the people of those states.

The Congress and the state legislatures are cognizant of the authority delegated them by “We the People” – the sovereign body politic – under the federal and state constitutions, and are specific when legislating law for the sovereign body politic and for subjects of the federal government. In order to gain control over us, “We the People,” they use “word art,” and by definitions such as “person,” “including,” “states,” etc., they begin stripping away our basic fundamental rights by sophistry. For their success, they depend upon our apathy towards government and the general obscurity of knowledge regarding our status vs. the citizen subject of the District.

“Person: In general usage, a human being (i.e. natural person), though by statute term may include labor organizations, partnerships, associations, corporations, legal representatives, trustees, trustees in bankruptcy, or receivers.” – Black’s Law Dictionary, 6thEdition, page 1142 Notice that there are two types of persons described:

A human being (natural person with natural rights) May include… (artificial entities or legal fictions with legal rights) The significance in our jurisprudence: The word “person,” in its primitive and natural sense, signifies the mask with which actors, who played dramatic pieces in Rome and Greece, covered their heads. These pieces were played in public places, and afterwards in such vast amphitheaters that it was impossible for a man to make himself heard by all the spectators. Recourse was made to art; the head of each actor was enveloped with a mask, the figure of which represented the part he was to play, and it was so contrived that the opening for the emission of his voice made the sounds clearer and more resounding, vox personabat, when the name “persona” was given to the instrument or mask which facilitated the resounding of his voice.

The name “persona” was afterwards applied to the part itself, which the actor had undertaken to play, because the face of the mask was adapted to the age and character of him who was considered as speaking, and sometimes it was his own portrait. It is in this last sense of personage, or of the part which an individual plays, that the word persona is employed in jurisprudence, in opposition to the word man, homo. When we speak of a person, we only consider the state of the man, the part he plays in society, abstractly, without considering the individual”. – 1 Bouvier’s Institutes, note 1.

As you can see from the definition in Bouvier’s, in our jurisprudence the part the “person” plays in society – the “mask” he wears – determines the natural or legal rights he may or may not have and the jurisdiction of the different courts over his persona.

Article 3, Section 2, of the Constitution for the United States defines the jurisdictions of the court. They are “Law,” meaning the common law with all constitutional protections, “Equity,” “Admiralty,” and “Maritime,” meaning contract law (private international law) with no constitutional protection. The common law has jurisdiction over the natural person (mask) by use of Article III courts; the remaining jurisdictions have jurisdiction over legal fictions(MASK), i.e., NON-NATURAL PERSONS, under Article IV courts.

A natural person can change his “acting role” in business and assume a different mask, if he for instance enters into a partnership, corporation or contract. He may still be a living soul, but his status (mask) under the Constitution has changed to that of a LEGAL FICTION or STRAWMAN (CORPORATE MASK), and the court’s statutory jurisdiction over the STRAWMAN is now presumed.


During the early part of the 1800s up to the time of the War Between the States, the power brokers were busy putting together a plan that would increase the political jurisdiction of the United States. This plan was necessary in their opinion because the United States had a minimum number of subjects – the ones living in the District of Columbia and only the land ceded to it by the states. The District was only ten miles square, land ceded for the seat of government by Maryland and Virginia and some land outside the District by other States, as was necessary for forts, magazines, arsenals, and other needful buildings within the member states. So the acquisition of land was also on the agenda.

Between the 1860s and the early 1900s, banking and taxing mechanisms were changing through legislation sponsored by the European central banks. Clever politicians and agents of the central banks of Europe closely associated with the powers in England had enormous influence on the legislation being passed in the Congress. It was the responsibility of the people to understand their status with regard to the United States and the legislation being passed by the Congress and their state legislatures. The largest majority of the legislation did not apply to the states or to the people within the states, but Congress did not deem it their necessary duty to make the distinction as to which law applied to whom.

This distinction between the authority and jurisdiction of the United States and that of the states was critical and taught in the home, school and church. The true status was taught because there was no federal subsidy program for the schools with required subject matter or revisionist history that the government wanted taught and no incorporation of the church restricting what could be taught because of a tax exemption.

The teaching of the Citizens’ status was unobstructed and detailed. They understood the clear line established by the Constitution and the jurisdiction of the government that flowed from the enumerated powers granted to it by that compact.

The people were in control at that precise moment because they knew both their standing (mask) in relation to the United States and its legislative jurisdiction and that of their State. The Federal courts did not interpret legislation as broadly as they do now, because the people knew when the courts were overstepping their jurisdiction by entering into litigation that was reserved for the common law, as Admiralty is private International contract law under Article IV authority.

The 14thAmendment added some confusion about the basic understanding of status because it created a new class of citizen – United States citizens that had not existed previously. The newly freed black citizen knew nothing of the Constitution, let alone jurisdiction of the government over different classes of persons. Prior to its adoption, Citizens or persons of State status automatically were deemed Citizens of the American Empire, but first and foremost, State Citizenship was paramount and American Citizenship flowed from State Citizenship.

Before the 14thAmendment in 1868, there were no persons born or naturalized in the United States; naturalization was a state function. Each person had been born or naturalized in one of the several states. Following the Civil War, the new class of citizen was recognized, and this was the beginning of the departure from the Republic and the formation of a United States democracy, whose situs is the District of Columbia. The American people in the republic sited in the several republic states could choose the benefit of federal citizenship just as one of the new United States citizens if they chose to do so.


This Chapter will cover the particulars of the “dual legal system” that has been established by the 14th amendment to the Constitution for the United States. Its subject matter will encompass a general overview of adverse conditions which affect the freedom and liberty of all Americans. Matters included herein will be in reference to the police power of the state in its relation and application to the Citizen (i.e., nationals) members of any given state; moreover, any such state’s relations with other nationals of the American union.


To grasp the true understanding of the United States of America’s governmental system in the original premise, one must imagine that the government of the federation (the “United States”) does not exist. In such case, each state in the Union would be a separate country; accordingly, under the rules of international law, a sovereign state is a nation, much as is the European continent at present.

STATE: A people permanently occupying a fixed territory bound together by common law habits and custom into one body politic exercising, through the medium of an organized government, independent sovereignty and control over all persons and things within its boundaries, capable of making war and peace and of entering into international relations with other communities of the globe. – Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition NATION: Nations or States are independent bodies politic; societies of men united together for the purpose of promoting their mutual safety and advantage by the joint efforts of their combined strength. – Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856 [i.e. state = nation]

The foregoing is the international definition of “state” and “nation.” Now, adding the federal government back into the equation, the constitution for the united States of America is nothing more than an international agreement (or compact/charter) between the several republics of America and their respective nations.

Accordingly, in the forming of the American federation, each state of the Union gave up some of their inherent rights of statehood that they possessed under the general rules of international law. However, one such right they did not give up is the maintenance of their respective and individual nations.

This is further found exemplified in the protection provisions that are set forth by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments in the Bill of Rights of the federal constitution.

To further expand on these premises, a citizen member of any particular nation carries the quality of that nationality.

NATIONALITY: The state of a person in relation to the nation in which he was born. A man retains his nationality of origin during his minority, but, as in the case of his domicile of origin, he may change his nationality upon attaining full age; he cannot, however, renounce his allegiance without permission of the government. – Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856

In reference to domicile, such is in direct relation to one’s presence in a country. In reference to one’s allegiance, such is to the nation or state of origin or his membership thereof. In further reference of nationality and allegiance that is inherent to our system of law, one has always been able to change his nationality within the Union; such terms below encompass this legal issue:

COUNTRY: By country is meant the state of which one is a member. Every man’s country is in general the state in which he happens to have been born. – Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856

EXPATRIATION: The voluntary act of abandoning one’s country and becoming the citizen (and national) or subject of another. – Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856

NATURALIZATION: The conferring of the nationality of a state upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever. – Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, 1969

Unknown to most Americans, such matter of natural right is available; however, for political reasons, it has been kept a secret, which will be briefly discussed in the next parts.


 In a clear sense, all such qualities make up the international and constitutional de jure premise of the Union – that is to say, each state is clearly a nation by right. Accordingly, the United States of America in a purely legal sense is based on the law of nations (natural law) – is not a state, nation or country; hence, one cannot have the nationality of such. To truly maintain nationality, land is required. The “United States” does (did) not possess land to support premise of nationality; hence, the “United States” is not a state or a nation, in regards to its composite stature as the government of the Union.

The “United States” in simple sense is a “corporate body” that has been contracted by the several American nations to handle certain affairs.


It is common knowledge that after the American Civil War the Union went through some dramatic changes. Among these changes was a dominant makeover of the Union’s constitutional system. Such changes included constitutions) and the public law that is set forth by the original form of the Constitution for the United States of America.

To further illustrate the establishment of the dual system of law, we must review what has truly transpired in relation to section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Based on the rules that are set forth and established by the law of nations (and the alternate 13thAmendment), one cannot be subordinate to the dominion of another without his consent; hence, by using syntax (or rather, by applying sentence structure) to section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment you will find the following relevant wording set forth in “word art”: “…the right to vote…is denied…except for participation in rebellion, or other crime.”

In essence, what this accomplishes is an unwitting contractual agreement by a native – now naturalized – “citizen of the United States” (federal citizen) to unwittingly give up his de jure law form and accept the de facto law form, which is in essence the police power of the federal and state legislatures (i.e. voluntary servitude), such as established by the diabolical Fourteenth Amendment system.

In reference to said system, in simple terms, the state legislatures are acting in a quasi-war mode due to the induced voting rebellion (i.e. police state). A U.S. citizen is in breach of allegiance to his native state by tacitly and unwittingly declaring that he accepts the alternate governmental system.

Statutory law – state and federal – then controls him over his de jure law form, which is the common law.

All such citizens within the jurisdiction of the corporate United States are considered belligerents along with the nationals that run the de facto state governments. In the rudimentary form of the constitutional system of the Union, the legislatures could not create law that affected citizens at large (individual State Citizens); hence, some of the law established by the statutory scheme is pursuant to international rules of war.

As the law has been applied and is fundamentally being followed, the general constitutional provisions that have been craftily utilized to create this “silent hostility” can be found in the body of the original Constitution in Article IV, section 4 – “The United States shall …protect each of (the several states) against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive, against domestic Violence.”

In fact, this establishes a system of law that is based on maritime principles. Unknown to Americans, all courts of the United States – state and federal – are being operated under the principles of such law. Hence, note that all the courts in the United States of America display military flags (regular flags with gold fringe). Civil flags are hung vertically and never on a pole.

Accordingly, the states (governments) are acting in a quasi de jure capacity and asserting their sovereignty over their citizens de facto. Voting Americans – or, as they also have accepted this system, all United States citizens – have voluntarily been induced to unwittingly: 1) become enemies of the state; 2) become residents of their states (hence, not true nationals under the law of nations); 3) accept a feudal system of law (and land ownership); and thus, 4) give up their natural right to sovereignty that is protected by their state constitutions (and the law of nations).

Although the American governmental system is de facto, the de jure system of law, along with its several nationalities, is preserved. This is evident, as nothing in the original federal constitution has been repealed; thus, it is still in full force and effect. Under the rule of international law, the de facto governmental system cannot be forced on people of America that do not wish participate in it; thus, the de facto statutory construction can be applied only to consenting U.S. citizens (even if it is unwittingly so); hence, is not mandatory for – thus, cannot be forced on – those State Citizens who wish not to rebel against their de jure law to partake in the insurgent system.


In planned effect, these matters have created a legal or, rather, induced political phenomena – federalism. The antithesis of federalism is nationalism. To give a general background of the reasoning behind the two terms, the founding fathers, such as Thomas Jefferson, were concerned with the Federalists’ ulterior motives. Jefferson sensed that the Federalists were primarily interested in turning America into one big commercial plantation under their rule. The Constitution reflects the general concerns of Jefferson: the document’s predominate commerce clauses make obvious its commercial purpose.

Accordingly, if one would observe the political scheme that evolved in America, he would establish that in the early 1800s Jefferson ultimately overthrew the Federalist Party with his Democratic Republican Party. This took the Union out of the control of the elite (Federalist) and put it under the control of the American people. Soon after its establishment, the party split into two parties. The two parties are still in existence: today they are known as the Republicans and Democrats – the same snake with two heads.

These two parties, unbeknownst to most Americans, are acting secretly as the Federalists. Our real system of American law allowed too much freedom. On a mass basis, people could not be controlled to direct their labors toward the goals of the Elite. Instead, the current feudal system was induced unwittingly via the voluntary system put into place by the Fourteenth Amendment. To keep matters under the perpetual control of the Federalists (elitists), socialism was introduced.

Karl Marx, drafter of the Communist Manifesto in 1848, said: “Socialism leads to Communism.” To implement socialism on a Union-wide basis, the Fourteenth Amendment was enrolled via force of the Civil War. The general purposes of such obvious, yet covert, measures were to tame and train the masses to become a commercialistic economic slave force whereby the Elite would profit.

Communism is nothing more than another name for Federalism. It is basically a system that controls many nations centrally with the aim of commercialism. Accordingly, if one would investigate, all ten planks of the Communist Manifesto are applied in American law.


When societies, which are small local communities, are not allowed to govern themselves through their customs under the rule of natural law, they become prone to social breakdown. Many would agree that American society has seen a total breakdown. This is largely due to the combining of states (nations) to act as one under the dictatorial control of the federal government.

If America is to repair its apparent social degeneration, the police power of the states has to be negated and the civil common law has to be restored to the peoples (nations) of America. As the real intent of the Fourteenth Amendment took well over a century to accomplish, we can find that Congress passed law (found codified in Title 8 USC § 1401) that made America one nationality: “The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth – A person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Such is the language from the Fourteenth Amendment.

Fortunately, as this politically-imposed nationality is a fraud, a remedy is provided pursuant to international law. Under Title 8 of the United States Code, section 1481, the de facto federal nationality can be legally terminated.

This returns one to his original status under the principles of the original constitutional system. Then, under de jure constitutional premise, interference by the “United States” is protected by the 9th and 10th Amendments in the Bill of Rights of the federal constitution. Such is exemplified in the following legal definitions found in Black’s Law, Sixth Edition.

Constitutional Liberty or Freedom: Such freedom as is enjoyed by the citizens of a country or state under the protection of its constitution, the aggregate of those personal, civil, and political rights of the individual, which are guaranteed by the Constitution and secured against invasion by the government or any of its agencies.

Constitutional Right: A right guaranteed to the citizens by the United States Constitution and state constitutions and so guaranteed as to prevent legislative interference therewith.

Once one corrects his status, he is no longer under the jurisdiction of the police power of the federal or state governments. One is then an alien as to the de facto political system, i.e. nation/body politic; moreover, one is also an alien in every state wherein he is not a national. This plays an important part in reference to the U.S. code in reference to protections and remedies. Accordingly, as one is no longer in breach of allegiance to his state government when his status is corrected, he is protected from its unlawful actions. Such unlawful actions are called actions done under color of law. The term “color of law” is another way of saying private law , or the law created under the police power of the state legislature (as it is not of the common law, i.e. custom and usage). Under the Fourteenth Amendment system, de jure nationals (a ward, in sense) are protected from such state actions by the federal government.

Title 18 USCA § 242.

 Deprivation of rights under color of law. (Criminal) [In part] “Who ever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”

Note that a person has to be an alien to be protected from actions done under the color of law. This means that if a state employee or officer violates your natural rights that are secured by the federal and/or state constitutions, he can be put in jail; moreover, the state itself is not immune from such actions.

They can be sued for their employees’, officers’, and their own actions. As the states are not paying their debts pursuant to money based on substance, as largely caused by the socialist system of government, the United States is bankrupt, and has been since 1933. All activity that they are involved in is fundamentally commercially based, such as their money system, traffic citations, taxes, etc. Accordingly, it has been held that the state governments are not immune from their commercial activities against lawful Americans.

As the de facto law system fundamentally sets up a system that is based on commercial law, the states are liable for all damages that are done to a person that is not willfully participating in the de facto political system.

The state governments are basically quasi-political subdivisions of the federal government as they are composed of “rebelling” Americans (in treason). The state governments cannot violate the natural rights of a non-participatory American. If any such governments do violate anyone’s rights thereof, they and their employees will be held liable for their actions.

American’s problems will not see any correction until either a peaceful or violent revolution is ceased and the original system put back in place. Until then, Americans must enforce their natural rights that are held under the law of nations and claim their true nationalities. It is the obligation of every American to enforce this right and make others aware of the hidden agenda that has been inflicted on us, which agenda is purely that of a commercial interest held by the World Elite.

In 1865, the 13thAmendment opened the floodgate for the people to volunteer into servitude in order to accept the benefits offered by the United States. The 13thAmendment prohibits involuntary servitude; it does not prohibit voluntary servitude. In 1870, the 15th Amendment gave that new class of citizen the right to vote in that democracy. Benefits came with this new citizenship, but with the benefits also came duties, liabilities and responsibilities that were totally regulated by the Congress for the District of Columbia and its subjects only.

In 1913, the United States began using international private law (Admiralty) because that facilitated an increase of “persons” and property for the United States, giving the District Courts booty and prize jurisdiction over enemy property within the confines of the American Republic; subject persons and property having the same status. Admiralty is a form of Military law, and jurisdiction is based upon contract. The adhesion contracts between the State Citizen and the federal government began to grow. This increase in subject citizen population became the cornerstone for the strategy of expansion, as now the federal government had many subjects because of the benefits derived from the contracts. Federal Admiralty jurisdiction was proper, because the former living soul (mask) was replaced with a legal fiction person (mask) voluntarily by contract.

Central banking for the United States was legislated into existence by the Federal Reserve Act and the 16th Amendment in 1913; it gave the central bankers all of the support they needed to finance their fiat money scheme.

In 1917, the United States entered World War I and the Congress passed the Trading with the Enemy Act and the Emergency War Powers Act, opening the doors for the United States to suspend constitutional restrictions otherwise mandated by the Constitution. Even in times of peace, every contrived and created social, political, or financial emergency was sufficient authority for the officers of the United States to overstep its peace time power and implement volumes of “law” that would increase the wealth of the United States at the expense of the “persons” (mask) who were now duty bound to support it. All of the agencies that were created temporarily in time of war were not dismantled after the war, so the federal government got larger.

The War Powers Act of 1917 was terminated after the war, but the agencies and departments created for that purpose still remain. There is always a declared emergency in the United States and its states since the resurrection of the War Powers Act of 1933, but when the statute is read carefully, it applies only to their 14th Amendment subject citizen. This is the main reason for obscuring the fact that there are two different classes of “person” within the American Empire, as well as two distinct United States. If you are not taught the facts in school, how else will you learn?

The statutory construction appears with crystal clarity when we consider the language used by the Supreme Court to describe the different definitions of the “United States.”

“This term has several meanings. It may be merely [1] the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations, [2] it may designate territory over which sovereignty of the United States extends, or [3] it may be the collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution.”

Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt. Thus, in Hooven, it is readily discernible that there are two literal UNITED STATES consisting of definitive landmasses or geographical areas.

The third definition [3] in Hooven consists of the fifty States united under the Constitution. The second definition [2] designates the geographical area consisting of the District of Columbia and all territory over which the political sovereignty of the UNITED STATES extends. Congress expresses the sovereignty of this second UNITED STATES under authority of Article 1, §8, Clause 17 and 18, and Article 4, §3, Clause 2 of the Constitution with no constitutional restrictions placed on said plenary powers. Congress, in legislating for the District and its Territories, always defines the words “State” and “United States” in its public laws to only include such geographical areas.

Col. Edward Mandell House, who was the agent provocateur of Rothschild, the head of the European Central Banks, was assigned to oversee the President and the Congress in the implementation of the central bankers’ plans. House is attributed with giving direction and strategy to be implemented by the president and the senators to enslave the American people with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act and Amendments 16 and support for the legal presumption that the American people had  volunteered to participate in the United States democracy was legislated with the 17th Amendment in 1913 in that participation in federal elections for U.S. Senator established the legal presumption necessary in determining that you were a federal citizen.

The scheme also provided for the control of the courts via the 1913 creation of the American Bar Association, whose parent organization was the European International Bar Association, which was the creation of Rothschild. This allowed the International Bankers to control the practice of law, in that the only ones permitted to practice before the courts were those who were educated under their brand of law, which was only Admiralty and Contract law. Common law of the people was to be replaced as it gave the natural man many jurisdictional protections from the bankers’ legislation.

When the Congress made its first attempt to throw out the common law and replace it with Admiralty law, the Supreme Court rejected the proposed rules of court, explaining that the proposed rules would bring into existence a national police state. So, Roosevelt stacked the high Court and waited for a case upon which the demise of the common law could be accomplished.

Erie v. Tompkinscame along in 1938 and gave the court the opportunity that the Constitution did not. Thereafter, Common law at the federal level was to be no more.

The 1930s were an eat, drink and be merry time, with the majority of the population living the good life with no care in the world and no attention to what was happening in Congress. The stock market crashed, and those not on the inside were not warned to take their money out of the market and, as a result, lost everything. This set the stage for socialism and Roosevelt’s New Deal. It was a new deal, all right – a one-sided deal, as you are about to learn.

Contract law is above the Constitution and under the jurisdiction of Equity/Admiralty courts, so the governments began to contract with everyone. The 1930s saw federal legislation providing for the registration of babies through applications for birth certificates. Government workers could get maternity leave with pay. The States pushed for registration of cars through applications for certificates of title and for registration of land through registration of deeds of trust. Constructive trusts were created secretly by adhesion contracts, giving benefits either present or future and as a result, each of the people blindly walked into the trap of United States democracy and its jurisdiction by the signing of contracts, thereby agreeing to be sureties for the debts of the United States and collateral for the Federal Reserve Bank, Inc.

The Great Depression supplied the diversion needed to keep the people’s attention away from what the government was doing. The Social Security program was implemented, along with numerous other socialistic “New Deal” programs that invited the American people to volunteer to be the sureties behind the United States’ new registered property and adhesion contracts through the legal presumption that they were 14th Amendment United States subjects. We are permitted to contract with anyone, even the government, so for the promise of benefits from the federal government, we traded away our unalienable rights and put on a mask of the subject person.

Massive registration of property through United States agencies, including the States of the Union as instruments of the federal government in bankruptcy, assured the United States and its officers and instrumentalities (the states) that they would become wealthy beyond their wildest expectations, as predicted by Colonel House.

Edward Mandell House had this to say in a private meeting with Woodrow Wilson (President, 1913-1921) From the private papers of Woodrow Wilson:

“[Very] soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in a National system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a charge back for our fiat paper currency. Every American will be forced to register or suffer not being able to work and earn a living. They will be our Chattel and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through taxation, secured by their pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two would figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges.

This will inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor or to this fraud which we will call “Social Insurance.” Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may incur and in this manner; every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and, we will employ the high office of the President of our dummy corporation to foment this plot against America.”

All of this was done without disclosure of the material facts that accompanied each application for contract registration.

That fraud would have been sufficient reason to charge all the United States officers and elected officials with treason, unless a legal remedy could be legislated for the people to recoup their property and collect for the damages they suffered as a result of the fraud if ever discovered.

If a legal remedy was available, and the people chose not to or failed to secure their remedy, no charge of fraud could be brought, even to a common law court. The United States Congress needed only to provide the legal remedy. It was not required to explain it or even tell the people where the remedy could be found; if they did that then the entire conspiracy would be revealed and every cherry tree in Washington would be decorated with hanging bodies of Congressmen and bankers. The attorneys did not even have to be taught about the remedy in law school. Remaining quiet, Congress had plausible deniability if the people discovered the deception. The majority of the legislators did not have to have the intricate details of the law explained to them regarding the bills they were passing; the pressure was on by the leadership to pass this legislation, and that was all they needed to know.

If the people failed to exercise due diligence, the United States became the holder in trust of all the land and labor of every subject in the American Empire. If, however, the people did discover their legal remedy, the United States would have to honor it and release the registered property back to the people, but only if the people were cognizant that they had a remedy, and only if they exercised it in the proper technical manner. It was a great plan, and it has worked for over 70 years.

Having established plausible deniability, even if the people became enlightened that they had a remedy and pursued it, the attorneys, judges, and legislators could claim that they did not understand the people’s claims, especially if the technical requirements for achieving it were not followed pursuant to the statutory requirements. Requiring the public schools to teach civics, government, and history classes out of federally-approved politically correct textbooks written by the publishing houses owned by the owners of the Federal Reserve would assure that the people would not discover the remedy for a long time, if ever.

Passing state and federal statutes that subjugated the citizens to rules and regulations added another firewall of protection against the people ever discovering their remedy. The media, owned by the same people who own the Federal Reserve, was fashioned to report politically correct news day after day ad nausea, until few people believed there was any hope for relief from the system and totally forgot all of their previous history of liberty and freedom.

If the people could be separated from their money and their time in pursuit of the remedy, it could be obscured long enough so that that the solutions could be lost in millions of law library books across the country and equitable estoppel by laches could be argued against the few who discovered it.

The majority of elder Americans know there is something terribly wrong with all the conflicts in the law and the “facts” they were taught in school; not so with the newer generation. How can the American people be free and subject to a government’s fancy at the same time?

In 1933 the United States established its insurance policy with HJR 192 and recorded it in the Congressional Record. The Federal Register publication of that law was not required at that time. An Executive Order issued on April 5, 1933, paved the way for the withdrawal of all gold in the United States. Representative Louis T. McFadden brought formal criminal charges on May 23, 1933, against the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Bank system, the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Secretary of the United States Treasury (Congressional Record May 23, 1933, page 4055- 4058). Those charges are still not acted upon and are still in committee. HJR 192 passed on June 3, 1933. Mr. McFadden claimed on June 10, 1933: “Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks…”

HJR 192 is the insurance policy that protects the legislators from conviction for fraud and treason against the American people. It also protects the American people from damages caused by the actions of the United States.

HJR 192 provides that the one with the gold paid the bills. It removed the requirement that the United States subjects and employees had to pay their debts with gold. It actually prohibited the inclusion of any clause in all subsequent contracts that would require payment in gold. It also cancelled the clause in every contract written prior to June 5, 1933, that required an obligation to be paid in gold. It provided that the United States subjects and employees could use any type of coin and currency to discharge a public debt as long as it was in use in the normal course of business in the United States.

For a time, United States Notes were the currency used to discharge debts because there was 40% gold and 60% Treasury guarantees behind the currency, but later the Federal Reserve and the United States provided a new medium of exchange through paper notes and debt instruments that could be passed on to a debtor’s creditors to tender the debtor’s debts. Tender and payment are not the same. Tender merely changes the legal character of the debt, where gold and silver would extinguish the debt.

In the 1950s, the Uniform Commercial Code was adopted in most of the States as a means of unifying the generally accepted procedures for handling the new legal system of dealing with commercial fictions as though they were real. Security instruments replaced substance as collateral for debts. Security instruments could be supported by presumptive adhesion contracts. Debt instruments with collateral and accommodating parties could be used instead of money. Money and the need for money was disappearing, and a uniform system of law had to be put in place to allow the courts to uphold the security instruments that depended on commercial fictions as a basis for compelling payment or performance. All this was accomplished by the mid-1960s.

The commercial code is merely a codification of accepted and required procedures which all people engaged in commercial activity must follow. The basic principles of commerce had been settled thousands of years ago, but were refined as commerce become more sophisticated over the years. In the 1900s, the age-old principles of commerce shifted from substance to form.

Presumption became a major element of the law. Without giving a degree of force to legal presumption, the new direction in enforcing commercial claims could not be supported in Equity/Admiralty courts and had no chance in common law. If the claimants were required to produce their claims every time they tried to collect from the people, they would seldom be successful.

The principles articulated in the commercial code combine the methods of dealing with substantive commercial activity with presumptive commercial activity. These principles work as well for us as they do for the entrenched powers. The rules are neutral and respect neither side of a dispute, as they are ancient in origin.

The entrenched powers that engineered the scheme for the people to register their property and person with the United States and its instrumentalities gained control of the peoples’ property and right to property through registration and licensing.

The United States became the trustee of the titles to everything. The definition of “property” is the interest one has in a thing. The thing is the principal. The property is the interest in the thing. Profits (interest) made from the property of another belong to the owner of the thing. The International Bankers made profits by pledging as surety the registered property of the people in commercial markets, but the profits do not belong to the Bankers. The profits belong to the owners of the thing. That is always the people. The corporation government show only ownership of paper – titles to things. The substance cannot appear in the fiction. Sometimes the fiction is manufactured to appear as substance, but fiction can never become substance; it is an illusion. This is why the proper spelling of your name in upper and lower case is never used in court documents.

The ALL CAPS spelling represents the legal fiction, which the government holds title to and jurisdiction over, as it is the creation of the government. The substance cannot appear in the fiction. What will happen when you appear and claim the name ascribed on the complaint? You and the fiction become one and the same; you have changed masks from a natural person to an artificial one.

The profits from all the registered property had to be put into trust for the benefit of the owners. If the profits were put into the general fund of the United States and not into separate trusts for the owners, the scheme would evidence fraud. The profits for each owner could not be co-mingled. If the owner failed to use his available remedy (fictional credits held in a constructive trust account, fund, or financial ledger) to benefit from the profits, it would not be the fault of the government or their banking co-conspirators. If the owner failed to learn the law that would open the door to his remedy, it would not be the fault of the swindlers. The owner is responsible for learning the law so he understands that the profits from his property are available for him to discharge debts or charges brought against his legal fiction person by the United States or other commercial entities.

If the United States has the “gold,” the United States pays the bills (from the trust account, fund, or financial ledger). The definition of “fund” is money set aside to pay a debt. The fund is there to discharge the public debts attributed to the United States subjects, but ultimately back to the accommodating parties – the American people. The national debt is that which is due to the owners of the registered things – the American people – as well as to other creditors.

If the United States owes a debt to the owner of the thing, and the owner is presumed (by accommodation) to owe a public debt to the United States, the logical thing is to ask the United States to discharge that public debt from the trust fund. The way for the United States to get around having to pay the public debts for the people is to claim the owner cannot be an owner if he agreed to be the accommodating party for a debtor person. If the people are truly the principal, then they know how to handle their financial and political affairs (unless they have never been taught). If the owner admits by his actions of ignorance that he is an accommodating party, he has taken on the debtor’s liabilities without getting consideration in exchange. Here lies the fiction again.

The owner of the thing does not have to knowingly agree to be the accommodating party for the debtor person; he just has to act like he agreed. The legal presumption that he is the accommodating party is strong enough for the courts to hold the owner of the thing liable for a tax on the thing he actually owns.

Debtors may have the use of certain things, but the things belong to the creditors. The creditor is the master. The debtor is the servant. The Uniform Commercial Code is very specific about the duties and responsibilities a debtor has. If the owner of the thing is presumed to be a debtor because of his previous admissions and adhesion contracts, he is going to have a difficult time convincing the United States that it has a duty to discharge public debts for him. In addition, the federal courts are staffed with loyal judges who will look for every mistake the people make when trying to use their remedy and use the mistake against them in dismissing any action they bring.

There is a very powerful tool the people can use to help them get to the real issues when they find themselves up against the power of presumption.

The law provides for either party of an admiralty action to object to a line of questioning. When you object in that court setting, you must tell the judge why you object or he will overrule your objection. The reason is: “This line of questioning assumes facts not in evidence.”

You can request that evidence of the Plaintiff ’s claim be entered into evidence. If the judge overrules this fundamental principle of establishing subject matter jurisdiction and the right to make a charge, there is a major procedural error in the proceeding. Your objection has preserved the error for appeal. Granting in personam jurisdiction to get to the bottom of the issue is vastly better than arguing, “I’m not that person.”

The owner of the thing, after learning the law and discovering who he is in relation to the United States, can file a UCC 1 Financing Statement and Security Agreement registering his interest in the artificial entity (PERSON) the United States created after Mom applied for a birth certificate. That was the act of registering her biological property, her baby (substance), with the State. The United States holds the paper title (form), not the substance(baby). Until your Financing Statement is filed, the United States is the holder of the title to the artificial entity. Its name is spelled in all capital letters – JOHN HENRY DOE.

When John Henry Doe files the Financing Statement supported by a Security Agreement signed by the artificial entity (JOHN) and the owner (John), he becomes the holder in due course of the title to JOHN. The UCC and the State commercial law are very specific about the effect of a registered security interest. It has priority over most other interest claimed (only claimed) in the same thing. The evidence that is missing in the court is the registered claim over the person (JOHN).

The owner also must notify the Secretary of the Treasury that he is going to handle his own affairs in the future. He can file a “Bill of Exchange” with the Secretary through which he exchanges his person’s accepted-for-value birth certificate and social security numbers for a charge-back of all the presumed charges brought against his person since the birth certificate was issued.

The owner can also reserve a non-cash Federal Reserve routing number and any number of non-cash instrument numbers by filing an amendment to his Financing Statement or just including his reservation on his original Financing Statement. Each bank account opened in the name of the owner’s person has a routing number. If an account is open, it is available to process cash items. If you write a check to the plumber, it can be converted to cash at your bank. You cannot write a check on an account that has been closed.

Those accounts and their routing numbers are reserved for non-cash items for the person (JOHN) that opened the account originally. Accounts that have been closed by the bank, instead of the person, should not be used for non-cash items. Once this is done, you are in a position to begin receiving reimbursements against the obligation the United States owes to you for money and time it has received that belong to you.

The owner of registered things who has learned the law and what his rights are and who has filed his Financing Statement, Security Agreement, and Bill of Exchange, and reserved his non-cash account routing numbers, can issue an instrument indicating his UCC registration number, his registered Federal Reserve routing number, the name of the public party making a charge against his person, and the amount of the debt to be discharged.

Think of the whole transaction in relation to a hot air balloon.

The balloon represents your public person (JOHN), which is an empty entity that can function within the public maize of fiction, transmitting benefits from the public to you in the private IF it is filled with hot air. You cannot go into the public because you are not a fiction. JOHN has no lift until it is filled with hot air. That hot air comes from an IRS default notice, court judgment, credit card bill, utility bill, traffic ticket, or some other instrument that has a $ amount and JOHN’s name on it as the presumed debtor.

The bill is the hot air. It fills up the dead JOHN. You can now discharge JOHN and put JOHN’s accrual account with the charging party back to a zero balance. You as the secured party over the assets put up as security by JOHN to you as collateral for the debt JOHN owes you, can discharge JOHN with a negotiable instrument for the same $ amount as the charging instrument.

The charging party that receives your non-cash item can 1) process it through a United States department, 2) give it to a third party, 3) keep it to increase its liquidity.

Your claim to being one of the people must appear on a public register (the Secretary of State); you must have an account with the banker for the United States (the Secretary of the Treasury); You must have given notice of your reservation of routing numbers through the national debt accountant (the Federal Reserve); You must refer to the insurance policy that covers your remedy (House Joint Resolution 192);

You must make your instrument negotiable so it can be used by the United States for a profit; You must transmit your instrument back into the public through an agent (your registered debtor); You must use only a non-cash item for this exchange; You must do a banker’s acceptance of a charging instrument to attach to your non-cash item; and You must Understand you are not getting something for nothing.

Reserving your routing numbers to use on your discharge instruments is not as difficult as was thought during the previous decade. Every person has opened bank accounts in the past that have been closed for one reason or another. On the bottom of the checks for those closed bank accounts there is a routing number to the particular bank and a routing number to the particular account. Each check has a check number.

When you put the check number together with the two routing numbers, you have a means of tracking each item that goes through the worldwide banking system. The routing numbers on the bottom of the checks from accounts your person has closed will never be reassigned. They are attached to your person’s NAME forever and kept in the records of the Federal Reserve.

Bank accounts that are still open and active are used for cash items.

Checks written on these open bank accounts can be taken to the particular bank and CASHED. This is the type of instrument used in commercial transactions everyday. There is a fund attached to the check from which the debt evidenced by the check can be paid.

Bank accounts that are no longer open and active cannot be used to process cash items. They can be used only to process non-cash items. They require special handling. Title 12 of USC and CFR explain how and when receiving banks are to process non-cash items. A closed bank account associated with your debtor’s NAME has routing numbers that can route your discharge instrument through the Federal Reserve to reduce the national debt to you and increase the balance of the bank account of the party that is charging your debtor. It is a win-win situation.

The charging party is instructed to mail the discharge instrument to the Secretary of Transportation. Title 46 has sufficient evidence to support the proposition that the Secretary is the trustee over some or all vessels mortgaged by the United States. If your debtor PERSON is presumed to be a vessel, it is regulated by the Secretary of Transportation through the Maritime Ministries Administration; that is the proper party to assist in processing your non-cash item. The Secretary of Transportation can forward the item to the Secretary of the Treasury, who already has been notified to prepare for non-cash activity in your treasury direct account on the Bill of Exchange.

The Secretary of the Treasury is directly related to the Federal Reserve.

Between the Treasury and the Federal Reserve, your non-cash item can be directed to the proper parties to settle the account and get everyone into that quid pro quo position we want.

The United States and its co-business partners are debtors to you. You are the creditor, not only over your debtor PERSON, but also over the United States, the legal title-holder over the registered things to which you are the equitable title-holder. You are the primary creditor, so if the United States has other creditors, like the international bankers, they cannot jump to the front of the line. Their claims are subordinated to your claims if your claims are registered and if you understand the law surrounding what you are doing.

Now that you have a better understanding of the “person” (mask) and “contract” and “jurisdiction” let’s get back to the issue of sovereignty.

It is important to differentiate between sovereign power and unalienable rights. Sovereign power is subject to nothing, except what the sovereign expressly agrees to or consents may be done. Unalienable rights are simply those rights which cannot be taken away as they are deemed to be God-given and fundamental, without which no civilized society can exist, but they may be waived.

In this context it may be understood how the people may remain sovereign, even in the area where the federal government exercises its sovereign jurisdiction. By consent or by waiver, the people may be without those fundamental rights, as in those Federal jurisdictions; at least it appears that the federal government operates on that ideology. (Hooven v. Evatt, 324 US 652, 671-672)

Although there might be some waiver of rights, it is impossible to convert the natural born (sovereign) Citizen of this country into a subject (person) of his government. (M’Ilvaine v. Coke’s Lessee, 8 US 209)

The framers acknowledged that the proposed Constitution for the united States of America was to be a document of “We the People,” not of the States. It was to become a compact that provided for the people to be its beneficiaries in perpetuity. It was intended as a compact between the individual Citizen on the one hand and, on the other hand, the people as a whole, acting through their representatives. (Glass v. The Sloop Betsey, 4 US [4 Dall.] 8)

The Constitution was a compact drawn between the people and effective between the states. It created a union of States, not a union of people.

The people are not members of the union; only the States are members.

This is critical to your understanding of your proper relationship with the government. One is a Citizen of his state. National Citizenship is derived from state citizenship. Implicit to this process is the recognition that the true sovereignty was not with the States, but rather with the people as a whole. (Gaines et al. v. Buford, 31 KY 481, 500-501)

 By virtue of this contract, three concepts of “United States” came into existence. First is the concept that the United States is a sovereign nation in the family of nations. This requires foreign governments to deal with the government of the United States of America rather than with each State or Citizen separately. Second is the idea that the United States is sovereign over its territory. This refers to the sovereignty of the government over that territory that is subject to its exclusive legislation, not to the territory of the fifty States. This is usually conceived to be the political jurisdiction of the United States. Third, the term is merely the collective name of the fifty States which are united under the Constitution. Federal sovereignty is not sovereignty over “We, the People.”

 Everything in our system operates on a contract principle. We give something to government and get something in return. If there is no benefit, there is not reciprocal obligation. It is a maxim of contract law that a contract is not enforceable, lacking equal consideration inuring to both parties of the agreement. No state and no citizen surrendered any sovereignty to any government. It was merely agreed that the national government, the state government and the people would be bound to obey proper laws made under the authority of that compact. They would suffer penalties if they did not.

This is a common law viewpoint applicable among free men. It does not make the sovereign people subject to their government. The beneficiaries and their descendants remain bound because the compacts have created governmental entities pertaining to specific territories. If a person lives in the territory, either he obeys the common law of the territory thereof, or he is an outlaw.

 Article 1 of the Constitution deals with the structure and powers of Congress. If Congress does not have a power to legislate in some area, then generally the other branches have no powers there either. If there is no law, there is nothing for the executive branch to enforce and nothing for the judiciary to interpret. The function of Congress is to make our laws, to the extent that the Constitution permits law making, and to make the laws for the municipal government of the District of Columbia, where there are no constitutional restrictions.

Article 1 also deprives the states of power to do those things for which the national government was formed. Our government is a limited government and this is made clear by the fact that it can act only within those powers that are specifically delegated. The enumerated rights are set forth in Article 1, Section 8, and Article IV, Section 3. By this enumeration Congress has power to make laws insofar as they are necessary and proper for the exercise of its enumerated power.

Particularly important is the power given to the government to have exclusive legislative jurisdiction over the seat of government and such other lands as are ceded to the government by the states for its military functions. This is a power limited in its territorial scope, but not otherwise. Because this special power has no constitutional limitation, unlike Congress’ other enumerated powers, it is similar to the power of a sovereign. It is called the “political jurisdiction” of the United States. It operates in Washington, D.C., and in all areas ceded by the states to the federal government as enclaves. A similar power operates in the possessions and territories of the United States, but it has its source in a combination of the property power and the power to acquire territory. This is described as inherent powers. Sovereign power,like admiralty law, is deemed a necessity in those “uncivilized” territories.

Such sovereign power of the federal government does not operate within the fifty states. As we will explore later, all federal courts are of Admiralty jurisdiction.

 Constitutional guarantees do not generally apply in the sovereign federal areas, except insofar as Congress chooses to enforce them. Although a fundamental right should still exist since it is deemed unalienable, Congress can take the position that since “We the People” delegated sovereign power, all of the people must be subjects in those areas, because there cannot be two sovereigns ruling in the same place.

Having such power, it was not hard to predict that Congress would expand its power beyond proper Constitutional limitations. This expansion of power is manifestly evident in the application of the taxing power. That power is limited by the Constitution: direct taxes must be apportioned and indirect (excise) taxes must be uniform. These limitations, however, do not apply where the government has sovereign power. While enumerated powers are exercised all over the country, they are limited by the Constitution. The sovereign powers in territories and areas ceded by the states are not limited by the Constitution, and those citizens have little or no Constitutional protection.

Congressional power over federal funds has also been used to expand government authority. This is done by virtue of the practice of the federal government placing conditions on its grants of federal assistance. After all, the sovereign Citizen has the right to contract, even with the federal government.

If you sell a right, it is gone, even though “unalienable.” By this process the federal government has invaded every conceivable facet of the lives of citizens within the fifty states, regardless of the Constitution and its restrictions.

States, individuals and companies have all surrendered rights in exchange for Federal Reserve notes (fiat money) by entering into invisible contracts with the federal government. They do so by the use of such things as bank accounts, Social Security accounts, credit cards, etc. These invisible contracts have given the Federal Government jurisdiction over the majority of Americans, tried in Federal Equity/Admiralty Courts where the Constitution has no standing, as you have a contract with the government, and you never even knew it.

Powers not delegated to government by the Constitution belong to the people except to the extent that the people in their State constitutions have given them to States. The reality is that government has grabbed a lot more power than was given them under the Constitution and the Supreme Court has ratified the seizure. The Supreme Court in 1932 decided that any law enacted by Congress or the States was not open to challenge by anyone who had received any benefit under such law. Nor could the law be invalidated if there were some way to construe or apply such law in a manner not in conflict with constitutional limitations. (Ashwander v. T.V.A.(1932) 297 US 288)

However, whenever either a voluntary act or a questionable law appears to deprive the citizen of an unalienable natural right, if the Citizen is not aware that such is the effect of that act or law, the courts must prevent such deprivation. The Supreme Court has ruled that an unconscious and unintended waiver of any such right does not strip the Citizen of that right, but the district courts continually disregard that principle.

An example of the distinction is given by the Supreme Court in its requirement for unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury, located at 28 USC 1746. There is a different declaration for one who is within the United States used on all IRS 1040 Forms and one who is without the United States.

 What is the only way one can be guilty of perjury? If one tells a lie under Oath or Oath of Office, period! There is no other way. How then can a Citizen who is filing his 1040 tax form be under penalty of perjury if he is not under Oath? The answer is he can’t. The only ones who can file that form are government employees who are under Oath of Office.


I sincerely hope you have learned the importance of further study because we do not have much time left to protect our lives and property. In my humble conclusion, I would approve a group of Americans who have the money to get together and capture these scumbag Bankers and burn them alive. The number of human beings who have lost everything including their lives in incalculable. They must surely be SATAN’S offspring. I will assist any and all who declare their willingness to regain their natural status through more study material as I discover it. In the mean time you can do your duty by sending a link of this article to every person you can think of, regardless if you know them or not. To sit on your hands after reading this information is the crudest thing you could ever do. Take back your person!

5-10-2016 8-55-33 AM

Clinton:Destroy Syria for Israel

June 30th, 2016 by


A newly-released Hilary Clinton email confirmed that the Obama administration has deliberately provoked the civil war in Syria as the “best way to help Israel.”

In an indication of her murderous and psychopathic nature, Clinton also wrote that it was the “right thing” to personally threaten Bashar Assad’s family with death.

6-30-2016 10-51-23 AM

In the email, released by Wikileaks, then Secretary of State Clinton says that the “best way to help Israel” is to “use force” in Syria to overthrow the government.

The document was one of many unclassified by the US Department of State under case number F-2014-20439, Doc No. C05794498, following the uproar over Clinton’s private email server kept at her house while she served as Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013.

Although the Wikileaks transcript dates the email as December 31, 2000, this is an error on their part, as the contents of the email (in particular the reference to May 2012 talks between Iran and the west over its nuclear program in Istanbul) show that the email was in fact sent on December 31, 2012.

The email makes it clear that it has been US policy from the very beginning to violently overthrow the Syrian government—and specifically to do this because it is in Israel’s interests.

6-30-2016 10-52-32 AM“The best way to help Israel deal with Iran’s growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad,” Clinton forthrightly starts off by saying.

Even though all US intelligence reports had long dismissed Iran’s “atom bomb” program as a hoax (a conclusion supported by the International Atomic Energy Agency), Clinton continues to use these lies to “justify” destroying Syria in the name of Israel.

She specifically links Iran’s mythical atom bomb program to Syria because, she says, Iran’s “atom bomb” program threatens Israel’s “monopoly” on nuclear weapons in the Middle East.

READ  Brussels: Patriots Disrupt Peaceniks

If Iran were to acquire a nuclear weapon, Clinton asserts, this would allow Syria (and other “adversaries of Israel” such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt) to “go nuclear as well,” all of which would threaten Israel’s interests.

Therefore, Clinton, says, Syria has to be destroyed.

Iran’s nuclear program and Syria’s civil war may seem unconnected, but they are. What Israeli military leaders really worry about — but cannot talk about — is losing their nuclear monopoly.

An Iranian nuclear weapons capability would not only end that nuclear monopoly but could also prompt other adversaries, like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, to go nuclear as well. The result would be a precarious nuclear balance in which Israel could not respond to provocations with conventional military strikes on Syria and Lebanon, as it can today.

If Iran were to reach the threshold of a nuclear weapons state, Tehran would find it much easier to call on its allies in Syria and Hezbollah to strike Israel, knowing that its nuclear weapons would serve as a deterrent to Israel responding against Iran itself.

It is, Clinton continues, the “strategic relationship between Iran and the regime of Bashar Assad in Syria” that makes it possible for Iran to undermine Israel’s security.

This would not come about through a “direct attack,” Clinton admits, because “in the thirty years of hostility between Iran and Israel” this has never occurred, but through its alleged “proxies.”

The end of the Assad regime would end this dangerous alliance. Israel’s leadership understands well why defeating Assad is now in its interests.

Bringing down Assad would not only be a massive boon to Israel’s security, it would also ease Israel’s understandable fear of losing its nuclear monopoly.

Then, Israel and the United States might be able to develop a common view of when the Iranian program is so dangerous that military action could be warranted.

Clinton goes on to asset that directly threatening Bashar Assad “and his family” with violence is the “right thing” to do:

In short, the White House can ease the tension that has developed with Israel over Iran by doing the right thing in Syria.

With his life and his family at risk, only the threat or use of force will change the Syrian dictator Bashar Assad’s mind.

The email proves—as if any more proof was needed—that the US government has been the main sponsor of the growth of terrorism in the Middle East, and all in order to “protect” Israel.

READ  Jewish NeoCons Confounded as Putin Starts to Crush ISIS

It is also a sobering thought to consider that the “refugee” crisis which currently threatens to destroy Europe, was directly sparked off by this US government action as well, insofar as there are any genuine refugees fleeing the civil war in Syria.

In addition, over 250,000 people have been killed in the Syrian conflict, which has spread to Iraq—all thanks to Clinton and the Obama administration backing the “rebels” and stoking the fires of war in Syria.

The real and disturbing possibility that a psychopath like Clinton—whose policy has inflicted death and misery upon millions of people—could become the next president of America is the most deeply shocking thought of all.

Clinton’s public assertion that, if elected president, she would “take the relationship with Israel to the next level,” would definitively mark her, and Israel, as the enemy of not just some Arab states in the Middle East, but of all peace-loving people on earth.

5-10-2016 8-55-33 AM



June 29th, 2016 by


6-29-2016 7-00-09 AM

By Bradlee Dean
June 22, 2016

“You don’t need 30 rounds to hunt! But the 2nd Amendment was not written in case deer turn against us.”

On June 18th 2016, Barrack Hussein Obama once again proclaimed he would usurp the United States Constitution (1,180 transgressions to date) by pulling out of thin air another illegal and unconstitutional Executive Order in an attempt to further restrict Americans’ (God given) right to bear arms.

The Huffington Post Blogger’s Club feels that things are getting a little too close for their sinful comforts when it reported that the timing of the Orlando attack, combined with the demographic of the alleged victims, the demographic of the alleged gunman, and all the D.C. theatrics since the shooting, dovetail too well with the domestic and geopolitical agendas in Washington.

In fact, the group finds the timing of the Orlando shooting so suspect, that they’re offering $25,000 to anyone with substantial proof it was a false flag operation.

They say the Orlando shooting is simply perfect for at least six top priorities of the Obama regime:

  1. Repealing the Second Amendment;
    2. Justifying Orwellian surveillance;
    3. Emboldening the police state;
    4. Fan hatred of Muslims;
    5. Intervene on behalf of terrorists in Syria while pretending to fight them.

This is all coming from the administration that arms “terrorists” to do their biddings for them to pull down and overthrow governments internationally.

It was this administration that implemented “Fast and Furious,” which was responsible for putting weapons into the hands of Mexican drug lords who murdered over 300 Mexicans only to blame the American people for the crimes that Obama and his administration were responsible for.

Obama and his minions are the same people who are attempting to “brain wash” Americans through their use of lies and propaganda.

To counter the actions of this present day tyrant-dictator, let’s counter the lawlessness and misunderstandings as to why we, the militia, are an armed people. By the way, it has nothing to do with deer.

“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.” -Amendment 2 of the Bill of Rights

“A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined…”

– George Washington, First Annual Address, to both House of Congress, January 8, 1790

“What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty …. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.” – Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, I Annals of Congress 750, August 17, 1789

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.”

– James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves… and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… “To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”

– Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

These are the same men that continuously warned their posterity to:

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.” – Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

“When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace.” -Luke 11:21

Finally, President Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to James Madison, the 4th President, on December 20, 1987 said,

“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.”

Listen to Bradlee Dean on The Sons of Liberty Radio Here

Who is Bradlee Dean? 

© 2016 Bradlee Dean – All Rights Reserved

Bradlee Dean is an ordained Christian preacher, Radio show host for the #1 show on Genesis Communication Network from 2-3 p.m. central standard (The Sons of Liberty).

The drummer for #1 ranked band in the nation Junkyard Prophet, a national Tea Party favorite, as does he speak on High School and college campuses nation-wide. Bradlee is also an author, a husband to one, daddy to four boy’s.

You have probably seen Bradlee through such outlets as The New York Times, Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, The Weekly Standard etc..

Contact information for Bradlee Dean

Website: sonsoflibertyradio.com


Facebook: Sons of Liberty On Demand

E-Mail: Bradlee@SonsOfLibertyRadio.com

5-10-2016 8-55-33 AM

Ex-Secret Service Agent: “People Need to Know The Real Hillary Clinton, And How Dangerous She Is”

June 28th, 2016 by


Hillary Clinton Poll Testing Elizabeth Warren As Vice Presidential Pick…






By Ian Schwartz

Former Secret Service officer under Gary Byrne, author of the new book Crisis of Character, which examines Hillary Clinton’s conduct under his watch, appeared on Monday’s broadcast of FOX News Channel’s Hannity. Byrne talked Hillary Clinton’s temperament, her “terrified staff,” Bill Clinton carrying on affairs, drug use in the White House and more with host Sean Hannity.

Byrne said Clinton was feared by her staff and was notorious for her yelling. Byrne told Hannity that she has “blown up” at him and other Secret Service agents.

“She gets angry at things that are policy issues that, you know, take time to fix, and she’s got this attitude where she wants things fixed right now, immediately. She screams and yells at people,” Byrne said in an interview aired Monday night.

“There’s many examples that I site in my book where she blows up at people,” Byrne said. “Like I’ve said, she has blown up at me before, and agents, and her staff. At one time, I saw her staff so afraid to tell her about a mistake that was made. They weren’t upset about the waste of the mistake, ordering the wrong invitations, they were terrified that someone was going to have to tell Hillary Clinton that there was a mistake made.”

Byrne says Clinton’s behavior during his tenure in the Secret Service proved to him that she does not have the temperament for the Oval office.

BYRNE: I feel so strongly that people need to know the real Hillary Clinton and how dangerous she is in her behavior. She is not a leader. She is not a leader.

SEAN: She does not have the temperament?

BYRNE: She doesn’t have the temperament. She didn’t have the temperament to handle the social office when she was First Lady, she does not have the temperament.

SEAN: She’s dishonest.

BYRNE: She’s dishonest, she habitually lies, anybody that can separate themselves from their politics and review her behavior over the past 15 years…

SEAN: You’re going to be accused of being political.

BYRNE: Absolutely I’m sure I will be, I have already and it’s not.

SEAN: And what’s your answer?

Byrne: It’s got nothing to do as politics.

Byrne talked wrote about then-President Bill Clinton’s behavior, accusing him of carrying on multiple affairs and gave his perspective on the Monica Lewinsky affair and the scandal as it was happening. Byrne talked about several different affairs and how the Secret Service was expected to clean up after him.

HANNITY: How many women do you know, for sure, that he had affairs with in the Oval Office?

BYRNE: In the White House complex? I’d say easily three, maybe four, that I know of.

HANNITY: And you could see Monica Lewinsky from a mile away?

BYRNE: Sure. Sure.

HANNITY: You knew she wanted to be near him.

BYRNE: She was certainly manipulated some of the staff, other officers, myself to find out where he was—

HANNITY: She wasn’t manipulating if you saw through it.

BYRNE: Yeah, I agree. But I saw through it right away, but she was trying to place herself in his path, as he would move throughout the complex.

Byrne talks drug use in the White House:

HANNITY: Before I get into all the issues involving Bill and Hillary and what she knew and didn’t know and covering up and lying and you being put in the middle of all this. People use drugs the at the White House?

BYRNE: There were some issues. One of the ones I comment in my book, and I’m very careful not to tell too much about it because I don’t want — hopefully this person got on with their lives and lived a healthy life. But there was one particular staff member that they had come in in the morning, and they’d be so beat up and exhausted looking, worn out, exhausted to the point where they couldn’t be seen saying good morning. And they’d go in their office and go the bathroom and come out of the bathroom completely elevated and happy and smiling.

HANNITY: It was obvious you thought coke was being used?

BYRNE: I did. And later on, I was told that this particular person actually, they did something similar to an intervention and got her help and got her to a clinic, and I never did see her again. But I understand she did all right.



Hillary Clinton Poll Testing Elizabeth Warren As Vice Presidential Pick…

Posted on June 27, 2016 by sundance

Every action a Clinton takes is through the primary prism of self-serving political benefit. It’s all they know – it’s a DNA level attribute just like the color of their eyes, or any other genealogical trait.

Today’s political poll/wind-testing example is the appearance of Senator Elizabeth Warren.  Remember, all the prior conversations about Team Clinton having to make radical adjustments to their political strategy based on the EU referendum?

Yeah, Pocahontas.

6-28-2016 10-53-02 AMThe appearance of Senator goofy is not about attacking Trump; it is not about courting Bernie Sanders supporters, it is not about having a more authentic liberal ideologue on the ticket, it is not about gender or any specific “ism” per se’.  No, this decision is entirely about trying to find the navigation markers which shifted amid the tectonic plates of Brexit politics.

Brexit rebukes the entire ideological worldview, outlook, and lifetime framework of Global Clinton.  How is she going find a path to the presidency when such a seismic shift has taken place.  That’s the motive here, nothing more.

Team Clinton is hopeful Warren will be a possible navigator, or at least give their team the appearance of knowing where the heck they need to head…. because, like all the other lifetime leftists, generational leftists, they’re lost right now.  They have no reference points.

Their prior emphasis was on the wrong syllable.

The dialect is no longer understandable.

The magnetic political poles have shifted.

The compass is useless.

They need a stargazer….

6-28-2016 10-52-32 AM

….Enter, Goofy Pocahontas

As dozens of political consultants click, track, focus group optics, poll sub-sectors, measure metrics, analyze, study social media trends, question micro-targets and spend millions to determine political benefit.

It’s what they do.

5-10-2016 8-55-33 AM

It’s all they know.

SEO Powered By SEOPressor