Are you looking for Solutions for America in Distress

You are in the right place to find out about what is really going on behind the scenes in the patriot movement in America, including solutions from Oathkeepers, Anna Von Reitz, Constitutional Sheriffs, Richard Mack, and many more people who are leading the charge to restore America to freedom and peace. Please search on the right for over 5100 articles.
You will find some conflicting views from some of these authors. You will also find that all the authors are deeply concerned about the future of America. What they write is their own opinion, just as what I write is my own. If you have an opinion on a particular article, please comment by clicking the title of the article and scrolling to the box at the bottom on that page. Please keep the discussion about the issues, and keep it civil. The administrator reserves the right to remove any comment for any reason by anyone. Use the golden rule; "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Do not attempt to comment using the handle "Unknown" or "Anonymous". Your comment will be summarily deleted. Additionally we do not allow comments with advertising links in them for your products. When you post a comment, it is in the public domain. You have no copyright that can be enforced against any other individual who comments here! Do not attempt to copyright your comments. If that is not to your liking please do not comment. Any attempt to copyright a comment will be deleted. Copyright is a legal term that means the creator of original content. This does not include ideas. You are not an author of articles on this blog. Your comments are deemed donated to the public domain. They will be considered "fair use" on this blog. People donate to this blog because of what Anna writes and what Paul writes, not what the people commenting write. We are not using your comments. You are putting them in the public domain when you comment. What you write in the comments is your opinon only. This comment section is not a court of law. Do not attempt to publish any kind of "affidavit" in the comments. Any such attempt will also be summarily deleted.

Saturday, October 31, 2009

Banks failing right now one after another! Don't wait to protect yourself!

I received this note this morning ( Oct. 31st, 2009) from a friend here in Montana.

"I do not normally pass on rumors or here-say but a very good personal friend's uncle is a Deputy Economic Advisor to Obama as well as a Professor at a prestigious Eastern school. He was called into a private meeting last week with the President. They were told, I quote the Following: " Between now and Jan 1st 70 more big banks will fail and 70% of Retail Companies will be Bankrupt. The President will allow them to make as much as they can for the Christmas Holidays then Jan 15 there will be a Bank holiday and their new currency will be issued with a devaluation of 6 to 10 to 1. " I believe this is why they are trying to keep the market and dollar up now with their lies on all the News outlets. Set up the people to steal every last penny they can get. Martial Law can not be too far behind. Get your money out of banks and into physical Gold and silver, I recommend 60% Gold 40%silver, food , Foundation seed, guns ammo generators ...etc. If you can not eat it, drink it, wear it, live in it, raise food on it, do not invest in it. If you have stocks, bonds 401K, IRA take the penalty and put it in what I just said. If you have substantial funds call me privately and I can help. And remember get far away from the Cities!!!!! This is first hand information and I would take it very seriously. "

I am not at liberty to disclose who sent this but the note speaks for itself.

The only part of this that I take issue with is the gold to silver ratio. I don't believe you should invest in gold unless you have huge resources that you don't know what to do with. I am talking millions of FRN's (Federal Reserve Notes). There are several reasons for that. First is that there is still enough gold above ground to make it worth while for them to try to confiscate it like they did back in the 30s. Also when gold is thousands per ounce who is going to be able to make change for it.

There is another reason that silver has much more potential for gain than gold. The normal dollar ratio of silver to gold is 16 to 1. Right now it's way over 60 to 1. At it's normal  ratio, with the price of gold over $1000.00 per ounce silver should be selling for over $60 per ounce. So silver has a lot of catching up to do. Another reason for buying silver instead of gold is that silver is in very short supply right now.

In 1986, when they started to produce the American Silver Eagle bullion coin, there was over 2 Billion and 200 Million ounces of silver above ground to make various silver products. Right now there is less than 200 million ounces. That is 10 times less silver than back then. The reason is that silver is an INDUSTRIAL precious metal but gold is not. There is still over 2 Billion ounces of gold above ground.

Another thing to look at is the history of silver and gold.

In 1971, when Tricky Dick Nixon ended Bretton Woods and took us off the gold standard, it triggered a devaluation of the dollar just like we face right now. In the next 9 years gold gained 24 times it's value but silver gained almost 39 times it's value in the same period. In 1980 gold topped out at about $850 per ounce, and silver at about $50 per ounce. That is about the normal ratio of 16 to 1. Let's say you were paying attention in 1971 and took just $100,000 and put it into gold, by 1980 you were now worth 2.4 million, but if you put it into silver instead, you were now worth 3.9 million. Enough said.

Another reason to get silver is that when this nation deteriorates into a barter system you might still be able to use very small quantities of silver as barter or currency. Gold will be so expensive it will be almost useless. Nobody will be able to make change for your gold.

In any case, if you have any wealth at all in a bank, credit union or any other institution, especially an IRA or 401K, those are always enumerated in FRNs. GET IT OUT NOW!

Then I received this from another LCW attendee. 
It's happening right now just like that last letter predicted!
Banks that have failed since October 1st.

This list used to be just a couple or three banks at a time.
Now look.
Don't wait to get your silver. Time is short and the demand is huge.
I can show you how to get silver at very reasonable prices.
Call me at 800 889 2839

Paul Stramer
P.O. Box 116
Eureka Montana USA
800 889 2839
Skype: pstramer

LEGAL NOTICE: The Authors specifically invoke the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and of the press, without prejudice, on this website. The information posted on this website is published for informational purposes only under the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America. Images, text and logic are copyright protected. ALL rights are explicitly reserved without prejudice, and no part of this website may be reproduced unless by written consent. You hereby have written consent to post any individual post from this website containing this copyright to any other blog or email only if you post the whole and unaltered article including this copyright, and give proper credit to the author, and a link back to this blog at This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2009 by Montana Business Communications (PDS) All rights remain in force. Removing this notice forfeits all rights to recourse. Copyright strictly enforced © The videos are third party and not covered by this legal notice.

Friday, October 30, 2009

Letter from Procter & Gamble Exec to Obama -You Scare Me

 Please read, even if you are an Obama fan.. It is legitimate, written by respected, Lou Prichett, formerly of Proctor and Gamble. Lou Pritchett is one of corporate America 's true living legends- an acclaimed author, dynamic teacher and one of the world's highest rated speakers. Successful corporate executives everywhere recognize him as the foremost leader in change management. Lou changed the way

America does business by creating an audacious concept that came to be known as "partnering." Pritchett rose from soap salesman to Vice-President, Sales and Customer Development for Procter and Gamble and over the course of 36 years, made corporate history. _______________________________________________________


Dear President Obama:

You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.

You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.

You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.

You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.

You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.

You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core.

You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.

You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America ' crowd and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.

You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.

You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.

You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations.

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals..

You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.

You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.

You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.

Lou Pritchett


This letter was sent to the NY Times but they never acknowledged it. Big surprise! Since it hit the Internet, however, it has had over 500,000 hits. Keep it going. All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing. It's happening right now.

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Montana Grand Jury - How do We STOP Corruption in the Montana Judicial System?

By  posted Oct. 26, 2009

When Does Blind Justice in Montana End?

What Can be Done in Montana to STOP the Corruption.. ?what I have been told, shown and heard of over the last 1.5 years and on top of a lifetime in Montana, I see no way to Stop the corruption as the Law is irrelevant, it is based on the opinion of local judges state wide, based on attorneys and their friendships and quickest pay off. Be it Rape, WR Grace Victims, Real Estate Fraud, Robberies, Embezzlement, or other horrible crimes.. well there is only Politics, only Opinion of judges.. and there is no way to STOP corruption among the very legal system itself as the innocent are constantly set up, discredited, and "proved" by illegal and false means to actually be the guilty one.

I see no really way to stop the corruption in the courts and to STOP judges, law officials, Montana County Attorneys, Montana Mayors, Montana Sheriffs .. no way to STOP the local law and government in place that is to uphold the laws.... you simply have to live with it and to pay their wages to Set You Up, Discredit You, Lie To, Keep you in the Dark, Fail to Prosecute real crimes while they set up cops, local citizens, bloggers, law abiding citizens when they try and do the Right Thing and when they point out laws that are being broken and who is breaking them..

Read the whole article here:

Who are the real enemies of your freedom, and who are their helpers?

Daily prayers for American Patriots.

From the Missal for today, the ferial day of the 21st Sunday after Pentecost.

Lesson from the Epistle of blessed Paul the Apostle to the Ephesians ch 6, vs.10-17

Bretheren, be strengthened in the Lord, and in the might of His power. Put you on the armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil. for our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.
Therefore, take unto you the armor of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and to stand in all things perfect. Stand therefore having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breast plate of justice, and your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; in all things taking the shield of faith, wherewith you may be able to extinguish all the fiery darts of the most wicked one.
And take unto you the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the spirit, which is the word of God.

And from Psalm 118, 81, 84, 86

My soul is in Thy salvation, and in Thy word have I hoped: when wilt Thou execute judgment on them that persecute me? The wicked have persecuted me: help me, O Lord my God.

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Gun control in DC? How about in Iraq?

An interesting letter in the Australian Shooter Magazine this week, which I quote:

"If you consider that there has been an average of 160,000 troops in the Iraq theatre of operations during the past 22 months, and a total of 2112 deaths, that gives a firearm death rate of 60 per 100,000 soldiers.

"The firearm death rate in Washington , DC is 80.6 per 100,000 for the same period.
That means you are about 25 percent more likely to be shot and killed in the U.S. capital, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the U.S., than you are in Iraq."


The U.S. should pull out of Washington .

Majority of the people are NOT buying the H1N1 swine flu scare!

The New "Twilight Zone" -- Obama Declares Swine Flu Emergency

Dr. Mercola
October 27 2009

Dr. Joe Mercola has the most visited health blog and website on the Internet for alternative and wholistic medicine.
This is important.  You are being misinformed by elected officials and imposters.

Take heart ye children of men. The truth shall set you free!

Today's Gospel taken from the Catholic daily Missal is very interesting and has some special significance for American patriots of our day.

It is the yearly feast of two saints. The Holy Apostles Simon and Jude.

Saint Simon was a Chananean, and was known among the apostles as "the Zealot." Before Christ called him to be an apostle, Simon belonged to the patriotic party known as Zealots, who, impatient of foreign rule, perpared for a war of independence. This circumstance was not forgotten, and even after he had become a disciple of the Lord, he was still known by the appellation of the Zealot. He suffered martyrdom in Persia, according to tradition.

Saint Jude is the brother of James the Less, first bishop of Jerusalem, and therefore a cousin of Our Savior. The New Testament includes a short letter written by St. Jude, who is daily commemorated in the Roman Canon of the Mass under the name of Thaddeus. It is believed that the relics of these two apostles are in St. Peter's in Rome. Tradition says that he preached in Mesopotamia, where he died for the Faith. He is the patron of difficult cases.

The Gospel from today's feast of Saints Simon and Jude.
John 15, 17-25

"At that time, Jesus said to His disciples, These things I command you, that you love one another. If the world hate you, know ye that it hath hated Me before you.
If you had been of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. Remember My word that I said to you, The servant is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted Me, they will also persecute you:
If they have kept My word, they will keep yours also. But all these things they will do to you for my name's sake, because they know not Him that sent Me.
If I had not come, and spoken to them, they would not have sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin. He that hateth Me, hateth My Father also. If I had not done among them the works that no other man hath done, they would not have sin; but now they have both seen and hated both Me and My Father. But that the word may be fulfilled which is written in their law, They hated Me without cause."

If the shoe fits, wear it. We should all make sure we are on the right side of every issue.

May St. Simon guide our actions in the fight for freedom, that we always do God's Holy Will, and may St. Jude the patron saint of difficult cases clear our way and keep us on track through this difficult fight to restore our Republic, and bring our elected officials back to the rule of law.

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

1948 Cartoon even more true today!

If you love Freedom and want the rule of law are you a terrorist?

Is this what Sheriff Daryl R Anderson of Lincoln County Montana would like to see happen to Paul Stramer and others who attend the Lincoln County Watch meetings?

Who runs the Lincoln County Sheriff's Department? Is it the fusion centers and the federal agencies?

In the Tobacco Valley News of October 15th Sheriff Anderson is quoted by Krista Tincher with the following paragraph.
"The recall push started, speculated Anderson, when Anderson first denied the concealed weapons permit last year of Paul Stramer, who was involved in the 1996 Freedman uprising at their Jordan compound and was subsequently jailed."
Evidently Sheriff Anderson believes every word of the vicious diatribes of the now repudiated M.I.A.C. report , the DHS report, the Southern Poverty Law report, and the propaganda of the Fusion centers in general.
Is he trying to brand Paul Stramer and Lincoln County Watch assembly participants as terrorists? Is he getting ready to trump up charges, arrest some of those people, and try to destroy their 2nd amendment rights? We hope not. But we have reason to believe that is exactly what he wants.

Sheriff Anderson, are you in for a big surprise on this? If you continue down this path you will find that you should have checked your information more thoroughly. You don't have your facts right.

1. The recall move was already up and running when Paul Stramer and other Lincoln County Watch attendees found out about it.  Sorry to disapoint you Sheriff but there is no membership list for Lincoln County Watch, and the attendance changes from meeting to meeting. You are of course invited to attend any one of these meetings and put your reasons and views on the table for discussion. Show us your proof that Paul Stramer was involved in the Jordan incident! Show us your proof that Paul Stramer was jailed after that incident in 1996. When you denied Paul Stramer's permit you stated "Past Criminal History"  Show us any convictions either Misdemeanor or Felony against Paul Stramer. Show us where Paul Stramer has ever even been prosecuted for any crime whatsoever. Of course the other thing you can do is admit that all the times you have defamed him in the newspaper have been unfounded and pure political reprisal.

2. The recall people requested that the denial of the permit be included as an issue, because they saw the long paper trail of evidence proving the denial was done without cause, and that no proper statement of the reason for denial was given. Instead of making a proper statement for the reason for denial on the record, the Sheriff has chosen to disparage Stramer in the newspaper.  Since the first denial the Sheriff has said things like "connection with anti-government groups", and "heavily involved with the Freeman uprising of 1996, and now twice he has said that Paul Stramer was part of the 81 day incident in Jordan. Please Mr. Anderson, provide proof of these very serious accusations, or stop defaming Mr. Stramer.

The article goes on "The sheriff's decision was upheld by a Polson judge in August."  The judge in Polson ruled that the appeal was not done in a timely fashion. In other words the appeal was not filed within the 30 days allowed, thus the necessity for another application. That second application had already been submitted BEFORE the ruling from the Polson judge. Sheriff Anderson denied the second application based on false information according to Stramer's attorney, Thane Johnson. That denial had already been appealed by the time this Oct. 15th article came out and we submit he already knew that.

Lincoln County Watch is about the rule of Law, rather than the rule of men, making the rules as they go.
The citizens and voters of Lincoln County are well satisfied when everyone obeys the law, including the Sheriff, because that is the only way there can be peace and good order in the community.

Is the sheriff obeying the law when he denied the permit?  Is the sheriff keeping his oath to support, defend and obey the Constitution, the Supreme Law of this land, (if indeed he actually took that oath and filed it with the county clerk and recorder as required)? Is the sheriff abusing the power of his office for political reprisal against a political opponent, and that, without ever bothering to call Stramer on the phone and to ask him about his involvement with Leroy Schweitzer, and without ever checking his facts?

Who are the real terrorists?  Lincoln County Watch has been about law and order from the beginning. Lincoln County Watch has promulgated lawful change, legislative solutions, and public political action, like supporting the recall, to remedy these problems.  We know that when everyone obeys the law, then and only then can we have peace and good order in our communities.

We know that when we have a problem with the law as currently written we can change it. That is exactly what happened at the last legislative session when people from all around Montana, including Paul Stramer, testified for house bill 246, the Firearms Freedom act, and HB 228 the Self Defense bill to clarify and improve Montana's gun laws and self defense laws. Those two laws are now signed by the Governor of Montana, who happens to be the cousin of Leroy Schweitzer. Does that make Governor Brian Schweitzer a person with "connections to anti-government groups"?

On the other hand the Federal agencies, who it seems Daryl Anderson follows carefully, (the same agencies who brought us Waco and Ruby Ridge), are threatening Ron Paul supporters, returning veterans, Chuck Baldwin supporters, people who love the Constitution (the supreme LAW of this land) and Tea Party people as being potential terrorists.

We submit as a matter of opinion that those agencies are the real terrorists. (See legal notice below) All they have is their tired old buzzwords that they have been demonizing for 15 years. Nobody believes them, because they never offer any proof, or they send agent provocateurs to entice otherwise law abiding citizens to break some statute so they can be demonized as criminals.  Ask Randy Weaver about that.

Is Daryl Anderson now involved in a conspiracy with those same federal agencies to remove your rights to buy and own firearms, and to speak out on the issues without fear of political reprisal? Was he abusing the power of his office to create fear, intimidation and coercion against signing a lawful petition to recall and stop the abuse?  Only he can answer that question. Of course he will say no. But many of the people who were asked to sign the petition of recall said otherwise, and asked not to be identified for fear of reprisal by the sheriff and his deputies, especially some business owners around Libby.

Our advice for the Sheriff, is that this time he should offer convincing proof of each accusation to the public and to Lincoln County Watch attendees, or he should stop talking. Sheriff, where is your proof?

Sheriff Anderson was quoted in several newpapers saying that one of the reasons he denied Stramer's permit was his "connection with anti-government groups"

Show us with proof which groups they are and how they are "anti-government". Are you sure those groups are not anti-corruption in government instead?  Are you sure those groups are not pro good government - pro Constitution - pro rule of law?

Are you sure Paul Stramer was involved in Jordan in 1996? Are you sure he was arrested after that incident? Please show proof. If you can't show proof then don't you owe Mr. Stramer a public apology and don't you owe him a concealed carry permit?  Might you not also owe him some money for making him pay an attorney to secure a right he should have had automatically? And what about his business reputation? Haven't you blackened his name state wide based on false information?

Stramer can prove he had a concealed carry permit AFTER the incidents in question, and that permit was good up until 2002 issued by the sheriff's predecessor, Sheriff Ray Nixon, who renewed that permit in 1998, two years after the Jordan affair. Why didn't you revoke Stramer's permit long ago? Why did you just let it run it's course till 2002 if Mr. Stramer is such a danger to the peace and good order of the community?  Mr. Stramer can prove he has passed the federal background check for buying firearms six different times AFTER you, Sheriff Anderson, denied his first application for a permit.

Stramer has shown Lincoln County Watch the proof with receipts for each of those sales dated AFTER sheriff Anderson's denial of his permit. So if Stramer has passed the Federal background check and bought six different firearms after the sheriff denied his permit, and if the wording on the regulations governing who can own and buy firearms are almost identical to the 8 regulations on who can obtain a concealed carry permit (which they are) then what in the world do you, Mr. Anderson,  offer as proof that Stramer is a danger "to the peace and good order" of the community"?  Are you not terrorizing Mr. Stramer, and threatening the loss of his ability to buy and own firearms? Are you conspiring to threaten him with orders of protection that could effect this 2nd amendment right without proof of anything required by his accusers? Are you accusing in the newspaper without any proof of your own?  Isn't that slander and defamation when you put it in the paper without proof and evidence?  Are you listening to bosses in the federal agencies giving you orders not to cut Stramer any slack?  Are you a willing participant in denying Stramer the right to protect himself in his daily activities without proof of cause? Are you thereby politically persecuting Stramer for your own political ends and to preserve your power? We need your answers to these questions and lots more.

Who are the real terrorists?

Sheriff Anderson, you need to prove your accusations in the court of public opinion, where you certainly have taken your so called case against Mr. Stramer and made him your political whipping boy, or you need to apologize and shut your mouth, and issue his permit.

Why is all this important to the voters in Lincoln County?
( The real danger to peace and good order.)

When elected and appointed officials use the power of their office to promote their own political agenda at the expense of good law abiding citizens, isn't that the very definition of tyranny? It's exactly to prevent tyranny that the rule of law was established in America by our founding fathers. "Power corrupts, and ablsoute power corrupts absolutely".  We have a Constitutional Republic, NOT a Democracy. In a Democracy the mob rules. If the majority vote to take away your home, what is to stop them? In a Republic, what stops them is the law. The law protects the minority from the tyranny of the majority. So we can only have peace and good order in the community when everyone obeys the law. In other words, when elected or appointed officials refuse to do their duty and obey the law, and then they use the rule of men, making the rules as they go "outside the written law", are not peace and good order then destroyed?

What is the most important office to the rule of law? Isn't it the Sheriff's office? If it is, then isn't the sheriff duty bound and oath bound to know the law, and to know the facts about any particular case he is involved with?  Isn't the sheriff under a legal and fiduciary obligation to make sure his facts are correct and that he is following the letter of the law? What is to be said of a sheriff that ignores the law or neglects to find correct facts about a certain set of circumstances, before making public statements? If a sheriff does that over and over, how does that make for peace and good order in the community?

Are there lots of unanswered questions in all this? Are the people in Linclon County being intimidated?
You the public can draw your own conclusions, but only the sheriff can answer these questions.
One more question then.
When did the sheriff of Lincoln County, Daryl R Anderson, ever bother to even call Paul Stramer on the telephone and ask any questions about any of this at all before opening his mouth in the newspaper?
That question we (the Paul Stramer family) have the answer to. The answer is NOT ONE TIME.  NEVER!
Why is that Sheriff Anderson? 

This article submitted by Paul Stramer speaking only for himself and his family.

LEGAL NOTICE: The Authors specifically invoke the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and of the press, without prejudice, on this website. The information posted on this website is published for informational purposes only under the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America. Images, text and logic are copyright protected. ALL rights are explicitly reserved without prejudice, and no part of this website may be reproduced unless by written consent. You hereby have written consent to post any individual post from this website containing this copyright to any other blog or email only if you post the whole and unaltered article including this copyright, and give proper credit to the author, and a link back to this blog at This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2009 by Montana Business Communications (PDS) All rights remain in force. Removing this notice forfeits all rights to recourse. Copyright strictly enforced © The videos are third party and not covered by this legal notice.

Monday, October 26, 2009

American Grand Jury issues presentments on Obama ineligibility to be President

Hi Everyone,

At the last meeting of the Lincoln County Watch and also at the Republican Central Committee meeting we discussed ways to bring lawbreaking government officials to justice using the Grand Jury.

Jeff sent me a link to something he stumbled accross while reading one of the blogs and I did some research. I think it's a way to really bring public attention to the issue of not only AKA Obama the Usurper's fraud, but also much needed attention to the Grand Jury system itself, which we all agreed is the fourth check and balance in our system of government.

This is very recent. This Citizen's Grand Jury issued it's finding on this October 7th, 2009 and they have done a very excellent job. It's also a way to approach the Grand Jury thing without changing your status.

I know the guys that are advocating recinding all contracts will have some problems with this, but my opinion is that with this vehicle we can really focus on crimes by government agents without running the risk of arrest. It's up to the court system to prosecute. The Grand Jury issues presentments upon examination  of evidence, and then serves the officers of the court with the presentments. Those officers include any judge, Sheriff, attorney, Attorney General, or any other officer in the Judicial system.

Please review the website and give me some feedback before the next meeting.

Especially review all the documentation and the actual presentments.

And here is the public version to show people with all the evidence acted on by the Grand Jury.

I defy anyone to read this and then deny that Obama is ineligible to be President.

If this gets enough support nation wide it will back up the court case in California in Judge Carter's court on January 26th of 2010. That is not very far off.

Think of the result if this is enforced. Absolutely everything Obama has done is NULL AND VOID.

No bailouts or stimulus. No orders for military. No health care. Nothing he has signed or will sign has any force of law whatsoever if he was or is not eligible to be the President!

Paul Stramer

LEGAL NOTICE: The Authors specifically invoke the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and of the press, without prejudice, on this website. The information posted on this website is published for informational purposes only under the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America. Images, text and logic are copyright protected. ALL rights are explicitly reserved without prejudice, and no part of this website may be reproduced unless by written consent. You hereby have written consent to post any individual post on this website containing this copyright to any other blog or email only if you post the whole and unaltered article including this copyright, and give proper credit to the author, and a link back to this blog at This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2009 by Montana Business Communications (PDS) All rights remain in force. Removing this notice forfeits all rights to recourse. Copyright strictly enforced © The videos are third party and not covered by this legal notice.

Friday, October 23, 2009

Pat Buchanan “Traditional Americans are losing their nation”

In the brief age of Obama, we have had “truthers,” “birthers,” tea party activists and town-hall dissenters.

Comes now, the “Oath Keepers.” And who might they be? Writes Alan Maimon in the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Oath Keepers, depending on where one stands, are “either strident defenders of liberty or dangerous peddlers of paranoia.”

Formed in March, they are ex-military and police who repledge themselves to defend the Constitution, even if it means disobeying orders. If the U.S. government ordered law enforcement agencies to violate Second Amendment rights by disarming the people, Oath Keepers will not obey.

“The whole point of Oath Keepers is to stop a dictatorship from ever happening here,” says founding father Stewart Rhodes, an ex-Army paratrooper and Yale-trained lawyer.

“My focus is on the guys with the guns, because they can’t do it without them.

“We say if the American people decide it’s time for a revolution, we’ll fight with you.”

Prediction: Brother Rhodes is headed for cable stardom.

And if the Pelosi-Reid progressives went postal over town-hall protesters, calling them “un-American,” “Nazis” and “evil-mongers,” one can imagine what they will do with the Oath Keepers.

Read the rest here:

Most important video of our time. Obama the Dictator!

Fall of the Republic-The Presidency Of Barack H Obama

Get it here on DVD:

Thursday, October 22, 2009

Obama born in Kenya according to AP (Associated Press)

AP declared Obama “Kenyan-Born”
John Charlton
The Post & Email
October 16, 2009

What most people know is that the Associated Press (AP) is one of the largest, internationally recognized, syndicated news services. What most people don’t know that is in 2004, the AP was a “birther” news organization.

How so? Because in a syndicated report, published Sunday, June 27, 2004, by the Kenyan Standard Times, and which was, as of this report, available at

The AP reporter stated the following:

Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations.

This report explains the context of the oft cited debate, between Obama and Keyes in the following Fall, in which Keyes faulted Obama for not being a “natural born citizen”, and in which Obama, by his quick retort, “So what? I am running for Illinois Senator, not the presidency”, self-admitted that he was not eligible for the office. Seeing that an AP reporter is too professional to submit a story which was not based on confirmed sources (ostensibly the Obama campaign in this case), the inference seems inescapable: Obama himself was putting out in 2004, that he was born in Kenya.

The difficulty in finding this gem of a story is hampered by Google, which is running flak for Obama: because if you search for “Kenyan-born US Senate” you wont find it, but if you search for the phrase without quotes you will find links which talk about it.

For those who believe what they see, here is the screen capture of the page from the Kenyan Sunday Standard, electronic edition, of June 27, 2004 — Just in case that page is scrubbed from the Web Archive:

See the full story and screen shot here:

The coverup of what the Montana Freemen discovered! Why is it important to you?

If you are reading this blog on a regular basis you will begin to understand that the Author does not believe the hype and propaganda that surrounded the "capture and conviction" of Leroy Schweitzer and the others Leroy was working with in Roundup Montana around 1995 and 1996.

If you remember or followed that incident you probably only got your information from televison, newspapers, and other main stream media. In that case do you think you really have the information you need to understand what happened?

You might ask why Paul Stramer should have any credibility at all concearning such things, considering the way my name has been dragged through the mud for the last 14 years by county commissioners, sheriffs, deputies, judges, State officials, newspaper reporters, newscasters and others.

Let me say at the outset that I don't agree with some of the tactics reported as employed by these men, but on the other hand I don't have any first hand information about their dealings with law enforcement personnel, especially after they left Musellshell county and Roundup, and went to Garfield county where the so called standoff took place in 1996. I have never been in that county, contrary to the news articles covering what the local Sheriff has said, and they have been trying to make you believe.

The fact is that I have first hand knowledge of the evidence the so called "Freemen" had accumulated over several years of study and research. That evidence was shown to me via computer and hard copy during several hours on the first of only two short visits at Rodney Skurdahl's cabin south of Roundup in March of 1995. That evidence has since dissappeared, or been suppressed. More on that later.

Leroy Schweitzer presented a very convincing case that there was massive fraud in the money system of the Federal Reserve, and that we the people of America have been systematically defrauded of our wealth over the period of years since 1913 under the "color of law".  Now in 2009 we have many political figures asking where the money went, and calling for an audit of the Fed because of that same coverup. In fact Ron Paul has a bill, HB1207 that has enough sponsors to make it veto proof in the House.

Leroy also made a case for 14th Amendment fraud on a massive scale. That fraud has been promulgated according to Leroy, mostly by Federal Judges by aquiesence if not by actual formal participation over the entire period since the so called ratification of that same 14th Amendment. See this link for more on that subject from another source. It has to do with your status.

He also made a case for the fraud of the Income Tax. They knew that the IRS has no law, which has now been proven by many cases.  See for just one recent case where an attorney by the name of Tommy Cryer from Shreveport LA was acquitted of all charges because the jury it seems could not get a straight answer about the law requiring him to file from either the judge or the prosecutors. Then see another website where Bill Benson, working with Red Beckman of Montana travelled to every state and collected over 17,000 notarized documents (certified) from the archives of every state legislature that was involved in the so called ratification of the 16th Amendment (income tax amendment) proving that there in fact was no ratification at all. It's been null and void from the beginning.
This amounts to nothing less than the legalized plunder of the American people UNDER THE COLOR OF LAW. That is the crime of fraud. Look up the definition of fraud on Google.

Then there is the issue of status. Are we indeed the We the People free sovereigns living on the land, or county at large, who wrote (ordained and established) the US Constitution for GOVERNMENT to follow with 17 enumerated powers as in Article I Section 8, or are we citizen subjects (read slaves) as the 14th Amendment says, and how was that all perpetrated on the American people largely in the judicial system after the fact?  And how are we constantly told we are living in a free country, and people talk about the Constitution, and yet at every turn we are pressed on and our Liberties taken from us? What is it at law that allows government to do this and get away with it continuously? Is it the false interpretation of the commerce clause by the Supreme Court?  Has the Federal government upsurped powers without authority in the law, and passed those off as law for us to follow? What is our status at law? How has the judicial system covered up this status issue?

Then what exactly was Leroy "convicted" of?  Something to do with a video camera?  I heard that the news media wanted to do an interview at some point, and Leroy or one of the others told them to stay away, and not come on the ranch property they were living on.  The media came anyway after clear warning not to come. Was the media not trespassing at that point?  I also heard that those reporters tried to video without any permission to do so.  Now if someone came on your property and attempted to video your family, and you suspected the video would be used to lie about your life and beliefs what would you do? Wouldn't you attempt to stop the video taping?  In any case, when has the media ever told the truth about any major event?
I can think of several examples including but not limited to the Kennedy assasination, Waco, Ruby Ridge, Pearle Harbor, 9-11, Oklahoma City, and many more.

So are there many unanswered questions? You bet there are.  So let's get to the very definition of the word "Freeman".  What would the media like you to believe it means?  Wouldn't they like it to mean "criminal"?
Out of the other side of their mouth are they not wanting everyone to believe we are free men? Don't politicians talk about "Constitutional Rights" like we all have them?  Who wrote the Constitution and who was a party to the Constitution? Think about the definition of fraud here.

Almighty God is the real author of rights!  He wrote certain rights into the very nature of man! Prove me wrong. What happens when men take away the God given rights that were written into man's very natural order?  Revolution?  Was that what the revolutionary war was fought for? So who were "We the People"?
Were they residents on the land? Were they only land owners? One thing is for sure. They were NOT 14th Amendment "citizen subjects"!

Why is government so afraid of all this that they absolutely can not allow the tuth to come out?  What are they so afraid of that they could not allow Leroy and his friends to present their evidence on the record? Why did they have to bury them in Federal prison with extremely harsh sentences and keep them without communication all these 14 years?  Why did the judge seem to acknowledge the status of these men in the courtroom on the record, only to then proceed with their "trial" after having them removed from the courtroom?  Was he mocking them in total arrogance? Who is committing the real crimes here?

Why were these men not allowed to present the evidence that was supposed to be guarded by a State Legislator, who later received an award from the FBI for turning it over to them?

Has there been a coverup all these 14 years?  Has the sheriff of Lincoln County, Daryl R. Anderson, bought in to this whole coverup without ever bothering to get any other side of the story?  Has he ever even ONE TIME bothered to call Paul Stramer and ask any of these questions?

The answer is NO. Not ONE TIME! 

So Sheriff Anderson, Are you going to continue to defame me in the newspapers without bothering to check out the facts?  Are you sure you want to go there?  Are you sure you want to continue to accuse me about something you know nothing about?  Are you sure you want to keep on saying that I was at the "freeman standoff" in Jordan in 1996?  Are you sure you want to continue to believe hearsay without any proof whatsoever from politically biased agencies and individuals, or are you one of those individuals?  Are you going to uphold your oath of office to defend, protect and obey the Constitution for the United States and the Montana Constitution, or did you even take that oath?  If you did, please show us where we can see it on file with Lincoln County in a notarized form as the law requires.

If you did take this oath, did you understand what it means?  You said recently that if you were asked to collect the guns from the people in Lincoln County you would quit, lay down your badge and walk away, or words to that effect.  Is that keeping your oath to protect, defend and obey the US Constitution, not to mention Montana's Constitution? Or is that violating your oath and leaving the Lincoln County people unproteced and it's residents vulnerable to unlawful federal actions that violate that Constitution you were supposed to protect, obey and defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic?  Is that creating peace and good order in the community?  I doubt it.  Do we even have a supreme law of the land in the US Constitution or don't we?

You have my phone number. You could have called me any time and asked any questions you wanted to. Instead you denied me a concealed carry permit and accused me of a lot of things without even bothering to ask.  Are you part of the solution or are you part of the problem?

Who are the real potential terrrorists? Who is really putting peace and good order in the community in joepardy by operating under the rule of man (making the rules as they go)  rather than the rule of law?

Paul Stramer   Eureka Montana  406 889 3183

LEGAL NOTICE: The Authors specifically invoke the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and of the press, without prejudice, on this website. The information posted on this website is published for informational purposes only under the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America. Images, text and logic are copyright protected. ALL rights are explicitly reserved without prejudice, and no part of this website may be reproduced unless by written consent. You hereby have written consent to post any individual post on this website containing this copyright to any other blog or email only if you post the whole and unaltered article including this copyright, and give proper credit to the author, and a link back to this blog at This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2009 by Montana Business Communications (PDS) All rights remain in force. Removing this notice forfeits all rights to recourse. Copyright strictly enforced © The videos are third party and not covered by this legal notice.

So you think hyper-inflation is a far fetched concept that could never happen here?

Right!  Here is the real story on what is coming soon to your neighborhood super market and to your gas pump!  Pay attention or pay the consequences.

Bernanke gone berserk! Bank reserves explode!

by Martin D. Weiss, Ph.D. 10-19-09

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Serious Vaccine Reactions to Now Be Called 'Coincidence'?

by Dr. Mercola
Tue, Oct 20th, 2009 12:00:00 am

Every day Americans wake up to news reports that warn us about the dangers of influenza, especially the new H1N1 “swine flu”.
But swine flu is mild for most people and the virus is not mutating into a more serious form.

Millions of people around the world have recovered from swine flu, and millions more will get sick with fevers, body aches, nasal congestion, cough and sometimes diarrhea and vomiting and recover from it this year and next year without any complications.

Nonetheless, wide-scale vaccination is being encouraged -- even though swine flu vaccines have been tested on only a few thousand healthy Americans for a few weeks. There is little or no information about how safe the vaccine is for pregnant women and chronically ill or disabled children.

If you or your child are injured from getting a flu swine flu shot, you are on your own. Congress has shielded the vaccine manufacturers and any person giving swine flu shots from lawsuits if people get hurt.

There is no funded government vaccine injury compensation program for swine flu vaccine.

Do NOT let a doctor or anyone else tell you that a serious health problem you or your child experiences after vaccination is a coincidence and allow more shots to be given until you know for sure.

The most tragic cases of vaccine injury occur when vaccine reaction symptoms are dismissed as a 'coincidence" and more vaccines are given that result in more severe symptoms -- and sometimes end with permanent brain and immune system damage or death.

But while Americans are still debating whether to roll up their sleeves for a swine flu shot, companies have already figured it out: vaccines are good for business.

Drug companies have sold $1.5 billion worth of swine flu shots, in addition to the $1 billion for seasonal flu they booked earlier this year. These inoculations are part of a much wider and rapidly growing $20 billion global vaccine market.

"The vaccine market is booming," says Bruce Carlson, spokesperson at market research firm Kalorama, which publishes an annual survey of the vaccine industry. "It's an enormous growth area for pharmaceuticals at a time when other areas are not doing so well," he says, noting that the pipeline for more traditional blockbuster drugs such as Lipitor and Nexium has thinned.

As always with pandemic flus, taxpayers are footing the $1.5 billion check for the 250 million swine flu vaccines that the government has ordered so far and will be distributing free to doctors, pharmacies and schools. In addition, Congress has set aside more than $10 billion this year to research flu viruses, monitor H1N1's progress and educate the public about prevention.

Drugmakers pocket most of the revenues from flu sales, with Sanofi-Pasteur, Glaxo Smith Kline and Novartis cornering most of the market.

But some say it's not just drugmakers who stand to benefit. Doctors collect copayments for special office visits to inject shots, and there have been assertions that these doctors actually profit handsomely from these vaccinations.

Read the whole article and related links here:

Ron Paul on CNN American Morning 10/20

Big banksters sucking up the money to make their own bottom line look good.
No lending, no stimulating the economy, no relief for main street!

Dr. Paul discussing the Economics, the Federal Reserve and Wall Street Bonuses.

The Triumph of Evil – Losing our ‘Real’ Federal Grand Jury

October 12, 2009
This ConOp comes from Duane A. Sipe, and it was previously published with the title, “Time to Take Action” on Page 4 of Ravalli County’s August 2009 Issue of The First Edition. Please add Mr. Sipes’ blogs, USSA Watchdog and Montana Grand Jury, to your respective blogrolls. We look forward to inspiring discussion here!

– MonCon1776

As is often attributed to Edmund Burke, the quote, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing” shows itself to be truer with each passing day.

Take the Constitutional reference to grand juries for example. The 5th amendment reads, in part, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury …”

Let’s take a look at a couple of cases that shed light on what our founders put in place regarding the grand jury.

An independent grand jury is to “stand between the prosecutor and the accused,” and to determine whether a charge is legitimate, or is “dictated by malice or personal ill will” ~ (Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 (1906)).

The Supreme Court states that the independent grand jury’s purpose is not only to investigate possible criminal conduct, but to act as a “protector of citizens against arbitrary and oppressive governmental action,” and to perform its functions; the independent grand jury “deliberates in secret and may determine alone the course of its inquiry” ~ (United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338 (1974).

“The grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It is a constitutional fixture in its own right.” ~ United States v. Chanen, 549 F.2d 1306, 1312 (CA9 1977.

“In fact, the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional Government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people.” ~ United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 at 48 (1992), Justice Scalia.

And from the Creighton Law Review article titled, “If It’s Not a Runaway, It’s Not a Real Grand Jury” we find, “The function of a grand jury to ferret out government corruption was the primary purpose of the grand jury system in ages past.”

What happened? What does the Creighton Law Review mean … ages past? Well, the power of government, when left unchecked, tends to grow, like a vicious uncontrollable cancer. It is the force of evil that causes those in power to exercise ever expanding, oppressive power, over others … when allowed to do so. Those in judicial power, in recent decades, have found another way to remove (or so they think) another piece of the people’s final authority over its government.

From the Creighton Law Review article once again, we find: “In 1946, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure were adopted … In the area of federal grand jury practice, however, a remarkable exception was allowed. The drafters of Rules 6 and 7, which loosely govern federal grand juries, denied future generations of what had been the well-recognized powers of common law grand juries: powers of unrestrained investigation and of independent declaration of findings. The committee that drafted the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provided no outlet for any document other than a prosecutor-signed indictment. In so doing, the drafters at least tacitly, if not affirmatively, opted to ignore explicit constitutional language. What all authorities recognize as a ‘presentment,’ however, has been written out of the law and is no longer recognized by the federal judiciary. A ‘runaway’ grand jury, loosely defined as a grand jury which resists the accusatory choices of a government prosecutor, has been virtually eliminated by modern criminal procedure. Today’s ‘runaway’ grand jury is in fact the common law grand jury of the past. Prior to the emergence of governmental prosecution as the standard model of American criminal justice, all grand juries were in fact ‘runaways,’ according to the definition of modern times; they operated as completely independent, self-directing bodies of inquisitors, with power to pursue unlawful conduct to its very source, including the government itself. The loss of the grand jury in its traditional, authentic, or runaway form, leaves the modern federal government with few natural enemies capable of delivering any sort of damaging blows against it. The importance of this loss of a once powerful check on the ‘runaway’ federal government is a focus that has remained largely untouched in the legal literature.”

It’s time to breathe life back into this power, granted solely to the people, so that we may correct the wrongs inflicted upon us … one unconstitutionally acting public official at a time. The power is truly, in the hands of the people.

Just like Dorothy, we own a pair of ruby slippers; although, our pair is the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

For me, it is becoming more apparent, as I research such topics, that we’ve had the power to ‘go home’ all along, I just didn’t know how much … until now.

It’s time “good men” did something. Let’s get our ruby slippers out of the attic, dust them off, put them on, and take a walk in them.

Whadd’ya say?

© Duane A. Sipe

Monday, October 19, 2009

Don't Let Obama Shut Down the Internet!

by John Tate

Campaign For Liberty
Fri, Oct 16th, 2009 12:00:00 am
October 15, 2009

Dear Patriot:

Please take your time and read this email carefully.

Because if a bill quietly sneaking its way through Congress passes, an email like this could be the last non-government message to ever hit your inbox.

In fact, someday you may even find yourself unable to log in to your email in the first place!

I know what you're thinking: Maybe this is just another Internet hoax.

I wish it were.

But Barack Obama and Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) want to make this nightmare a reality. That's why Rockefeller recently introduced S. 773, "The Cybersecurity Act of 2009."

Initial cosponsors include Senators Evan Bayh (D-IN), Bill Nelson (D-FL) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME).

You see, Barack Obama is seeking sweeping new powers to "shut down" all private internet in the event of a "cybersecurity emergency" — a vague term that the President can define at his discretion.

And Rockefeller's bill gives Barack Obama just what he wants.

That's why this expansive new power grab should really be called "The Internet Takeover Bill."
As you know, the Internet has developed into an independent sphere where 1st Amendment Rights can still be (fairly) freely exercised.

It's also become an important outlet for liberty-minded speech, cutting around the Obama-worship and corporate censorship of the mainstream media.

And we've already seen the Obama Administration's reaction to any online speech they deem "fishy."

In July, the Administration called upon Americans to report their friends' and neighbors' emails to help Barack Obama silence the "disinformation" about the Obamacare bills in Congress.

Well, now Barack Obama wants to cut out the middle man.

If the Internet Takeover Bill passes, Barack Obama can silence his dissenters directly — by ordering a shutdown of all Americans' access to the Internet.

That's right. Under this bill Barack Obama can order all non-government U.S. networks to shut down access to the Internet.

But that's not all.

Even outside of periods of White House-declared "emergency," this bill mandates that private-sector networks only be managed by government-licensed "cybersecurity professionals."

If you think dealing with your office IT department is bad now, just wait until they're federally-licensed bureaucrats.

And God forbid you like to visit websites that spread "fishy disinformation" like freemarket healthcare solutions: Passing socialized medicine could soon become enough of an "emergency" for Barack Obama to shut them down.

You know, for the public good.

Well, I know I like writing to you, and I hope you like hearing from me.

Or if not me, at least you probably like staying in touch with your family and friends, and having access to uncensored news and current events.

And that's why I hope you'll help Campaign for Liberty stop the Internet Takeover Bill by signing our Internet User's Mandate to Congress.

Today, legislation like this — built on the same statist principles as the infamous Patriot Act — has to sneak through Congress quietly.

They know Americans are no longer willing to swallow this "for our own good" swill.

And it's especially critical that Campaign for Liberty and other fellow R3volutionaries fight this power grab.

Can you imagine how easily those in power could fabricate an "emergency" on a big money bomb day for a strong liberty candidate threatening the establishment?

Or how about message boards vital to planning and freedom rallies and protests of socialized medicine?

With "right-wing extremists" freely and visibly exercising their 2nd Amendment rights at such events, no doubt the White House could declare an "emergency" and shut down all online planning.

I don't want to see good politicians lose potential millions or demonstrations of liberty extinguished. I hope you don't either.

That's why I hope you'll sign your Internet User's Mandate and make a donation right now to Campaign for Liberty to make sure that never happens.

We're going to fight this bill hard, because it's clear that the Internet is the next frontier for liberty politics, and Campaign for Liberty is right on the forefront.

So please click here to sign your Internet User's Mandate to Congress in opposition to Barack Obama's Internet Takeover and Shutdown Bill.

And in addition to signing your mandate, please make a generous contribution of $250, $100 or $50 so we can fight this Internet takeover.

We need to fight to make sure Barack Obama doesn't disconnect your computer, shut down your favorite websites, or block your email.

And frankly, with Audit the Fed, Cap and Tax and socialized healthcare debates, Campaign for Liberty is stretched pretty thin.

And unlike the government, we don't print, borrow or take money by force (taxes). Our only revenue comes from voluntary contributions from liberty activists like you.

We need you to stay educated and active.

We've put too much time into building our pro-liberty online networks, websites and email lists. We simply cannot afford to give Barack Obama the power to dismantle all that at the drop of a hat.

So please, click here to sign your Internet User's Mandate, and if you can, make a contribution of $250, $100 or $50 or whatever you want to Campaign for Liberty to stop this power grab... defend our rights...
...and most importantly, to protect this movement.

I trust you'll join this fight to protect all the progress we've made.

In Liberty,
John Tate

P.S. The Internet Takeover Bill (S. 773) is threatening to "unplug" private networks from the Internet on the order of the President and dismantle the online army we've worked so hard to build.

Click here to sign your Internet User's Mandate to Congress, and please make a generous contribution of $250, $100 or $50 to Campaign for Liberty so we can lead the fight against this Obama power grab.

Was the 17th Amendment to the US Constitution properly ratified?

While you read this think about how out of control Max Bacus and Jon Tester are on this health care monstor, and think about how we can get back the power to reign them in or fire them for it!

The 17th Amendment turns over the Election of US Senators to popular vote where before that the State Legislatures had control of who the two US Senators are.  The Senate is supposed to represent the States, not the people.  WHY SHOULD YOU CARE?

THE SHORT ANSWER IS NO, the 17th amendment was NOT ratified. It's NOT part of the Constitution. It never was. It is wholey null and void, is not law, and is as if it had never been.

WANT PROOF and why it's important?

Read this article by Devvy Kidd:

Is the War on Terror a War against Your Freedom? Prove it!

The Chasm - The Future Is Calling (Part One)

© 2003 – 2009 by G. Edward Griffin
Revised 2009 April 26

"What I am going to tell you is this: Although it is commonly believed that the War on Terrorism is a noble effort to defend freedom, in reality, it has little to do with terrorism and even less to do with the defense of freedom.

There are other agendas at work; agendas that are far less praiseworthy; agendas that, in fact, are just the opposite of what we are told. The purpose of this presentation is to prove that, what is unfolding today is, not a war on terrorism to defend freedom, but a war on freedom that requires the defense of terrorism."

Read the whole article here:

Who is Ed Griffin?

G. Edward Griffin is a writer and documentary film producer with many successful titles to his credit. Listed in Who’s Who in America, he is well known because of his talent for researching difficult topics and presenting them in clear terms that all can understand.
He has dealt with such diverse subjects as archaeology and ancient Earth history, the Federal Reserve System and international banking, terrorism, internal subversion, the history of taxation, U.S. foreign policy, the science and politics of cancer therapy, the Supreme Court, and the United Nations. His better-known works include The Creature from Jekyll Island, World without Cancer, The Discovery of Noah’s Ark, Moles in High Places, The Open Gates of Troy, No Place to Hide, The Capitalist Conspiracy, More Deadly than War, The Grand Design, The Great Prison Break, and The Fearful Master.

Mr. Griffin is a graduate of the University of Michigan where he majored in speech and communications. In preparation for writing his book on the Federal Reserve System, he enrolled in the College for Financial Planning located in Denver, Colorado. His goal was not to become a professional financial planner but to better understand the real world of investments and money markets. He obtained his CFP designation (Certified Financial Planner) in 1989.

Mr. Griffin is a recipient of the coveted Telly Award for excellence in television production, the creator of the Reality Zone Audio Archives, and is President of American Media, a publishing and video production company in Southern California. He has served on the board of directors of The National Health Federation and The International Association of Cancer Victors and Friends and is Founder and President of The Cancer Cure Foundation. He is the founder and president of Freedom Force International.

Read the whole article here:

Saturday, October 17, 2009


The Clarion Call for a Constitutional Convention is dangerous.

By Kelleigh Nelson

October 17, 2009

The proponents of a con-con under the guise of a balanced budget amendment still believe that if they get another two states who call for a balanced budget amendment that they can open a convention, despite the states that have recalled their calls. Con-con supporter James Dale Davidson of the National Taxpayers’ Union even stated that he didn’t care if the con-con couldn’t be limited to the Balanced Budget. As well, Henry Hazlitt (renowned conservative) was the NTU’s economic advisor wrote a book in 1974 entitled, “A New Constitution Now.” The book is extremely alarming because in the book he says, “an amendment could be proposed that would strike out everything after ‘We the people,’ “ and that of course includes the Bill of Rights.

I too tremble at the thought of a Constitutional Convention and unfortunately a new threat is on the horizon and comes from sources one would least expect. Judge Andrew Napolitano is often a guest on the Fox Network Glenn Beck Show. My first inkling that Judge Napolitano was pro-Constitutional Convention, was at the end of the Glenn Beck show on May 1st, 2009 when Glenn’s audience were tea party attendees from across the nation. At the end of this program, Judge Napolitano stated that we needed a Constitutional Convention to eliminate the 16th amendment (income taxes).
Read the whole article here:

Friday, October 16, 2009

No Recall, No Recourse, No Remedy, Just Tyranny

Is this what Sheriff Anderson is willing to let happen? He says he will lay down his badge and walk away if they ask him to collect guns from the citizens of Lincoln County.

Now just wait a minute. The recall didn't go through and some of you out there who have put allot of effort into it are probably feeling pretty discouraged, I bet. There seems to be no end and it's at every level of government corruption. Can there be a another way to get the sheriff out of office, or get him to step down. I believe there is. I am angry at the rape issues just as much as you are. I am angry of the entire lack of due process denying a concealed permit. Those are issues hard for me to be able to get involved with. I have not the proof of the rapes, and I did not apply for the permit. But one issue that does effect me and every single one of you in this county is the people elected with a fiduciary obligation.(An individual in whom another has placed the utmost trust and confidence to manage and protect property or money. The relationship wherein one person has an obligation to act for another's benefit). That would be a Sheriff,judge,cop, what have you. They contracted into this obligation through their oath of office. While these people are in this capacity, and they commit fraud, theft or conspiracy to deprive you of your rights it makes a simple crime they commit a whole lot worth.

So to get to my point I am talking about the issue of Mr. Sheffield. With him not being a peace officer under state law, and the sheriff appointing him, with all the money they stole from you, with the courts who took your money, the clerk who received your money, the jailer who took you when he released you to him. All of this constitutes fraud and conspiracy, and theft of the highest sorts. All because of Mr. Sheffield was never a cop ab initio(from the beginning). There never was any jurisdiction. Every one that touched the tar baby is in violation of law.

It is almost Halloween and there are allot of costumes out there to buy. I think this year I want to be a COP. I buy my cop suit, and my badge, I grab my gun and oh yea let me not forget my bubble to put on my car. I take my car driving around and watch other drivers. I all of a sudden think I see some one violate a Motor vehicle code. I turn my bubble on and he pulls over for me. I go through all of the same traffic routine as all the other cops and this guy has no idea I am in my Halloween costume. Now I give him a citation and I give it to a judge. The judge, either knowing or not knowing, it doesn't matter because they are deamed to know. So this judge sees the man and tells him to pay the clerk. The man gives his hard earned money to the clerk. Do you see where I am going with this? This is Fraud, Theft, and robbery with a weapon, because I was carrying my weapon. And every one who touched it is involved. Or what if i arrested this person? I take him to libby and now I give him over to the jailer. Now I just committed aggrevated kidnapping, displaying my weapon. I give him to the jailer, who now is complicite. This jailer then posts a bond(ransom). None of this is real because I am not really an officer and all I want is your money, and also all of these other people.

Now to my real point, would any one out there who reads this and has been pulled over by Mr. Sheffield and has not been retracted their money , or has lost their liberty in any way, even a roadside stop!!!! Please contact me at I think there could be a great RICCO suit. But at the very least, we need to get Criminal complaints Flying!!!

Do we really want this for us in our future?

Posted by notyranny
Paul Stramer is not the author of this article.

LEGAL NOTICE: The Authors specifically invoke the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and of the press, without prejudice, on this website. The information posted on this website is published for informational purposes only under the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America. Images, text and logic are copyright protected. ALL rights are explicitly reserved without prejudice, and no part of this website may be reproduced unless by written consent. You hereby have written consent to post any individual post on this website containing this copyright to any other blog or email only if you post the whole and unaltered article including this copyright, and give proper credit to the author, and a link back to this blog at This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2009 by Montana Business Communications (PDS) All rights remain in force. Removing this notice forfeits all rights to recourse. Copyright strictly enforced © The videos are third party and not covered by this legal notice.

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Are we slaves and think we are freemen? The Ultimate Solution!

What is the Ultimate Remedy?

Was the 14th Amendment properly ratified?

What did the 14th Amendment do to your status and freedom?

Are you really free in America? (Your insticts tell you no but what is the law and how do you get your freedom back?)

What is the Remedy at law for this?

Was the 14th Amendment really to "free the slaves" or was it used to make slaves at law out of all of us?

Are the courts and judges hiding this from you because they know the truth, and they know if you knew the truth there would be massive retribution over this fraud?

This article was not written by Paul Stramer. It is a study done by Pacinlaw at their website here:

Wednesday, October 14, 2009


By: Devvy

October 14, 2009
© 2009 -

Way back in 1991, I began to learn the truth about the privately owned Federal Reserve Banking system. My research led me to connect the dots between the disaster that struck America in 1913: The fraudulent ratification of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Amendments and the Federal Reserve Act. In order to syphon off the wealth of America, it was necessary to create two entities to get the job done: The so-called income tax amendment and the unconstitutional central bank. Lest the states should decide to rear up their heads over all this, the Seventeenth Amendment was fraudulently declared ratified and the states lost their right of representation in Congress.

Contrary to popular belief and propaganda by the ignorant in the controlled media and special interest groups, the federal income tax does not apply to domestic Americans. However, that fact of the law as its written doesn't seem to matter to judges, U.S. Attorneys and companies out there who thrive on "tax season." Pay up or go to jail.

Tommy Cryer is an attorney in Shreveport, Louisiana. He defied the system. Not because he doesn't want to "pay his fair share," but because he knows what the IR Code says and decided to take a stand for the truth. Even at great expense to himself -- like so many others over the decades. Tommy was indicted and went to trial. He was acquitted in July of 2007 and went on a mission. Truth Attack was born and the results have been nothing short of amazing.

Read the rest of this article here:


WASHINGTON – With the U.S. Food and Drug Administration scheduled to begin nationwide delivery this week of swine flu vaccine to 90,000 government-approved locations, attorney James Turner filed a complaint Friday in federal court in the District of Columbia for a Temporary Restraining Order to halt the distribution, licensing and use of four controversial vaccines -- including their use under an existing Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) -- until there has been adequate safety testing and a full opportunity for public hearings.

The suit challenges the Sept. 15 licensing of four swine flu vaccines, alleging that the FDA violated the law in its hurried approval by failing to determine the safety and efficacy of the vaccines as required by law since 1964.
Turner told NewsWithViews that none of the procedures that should have been done, and that make up a formal administrative record, had been done.

Read the whole article here:

The Firearms Freedom Act (FFA) is sweeping the Nation.

If you Google for "firearms freedom act" you now get over 100,000 hits.

The FFA concept is getting a LOT of news coverage and a lot of chatter on the Internet. MSSA's domain about the FFA movement ( is getting lots of hits too. It is now the first listing on this Google search. In addition to many visits from folks in the U.S., the site stats say that in October this site has had visits from Internet surfers in Canada, Italy, New Zealand, Russian Federation, Germany, United Kingdom, Japan, Australia, Malaysia, Norway, Greece, Jordan, Latvia, Poland, Romania, Seychelles, Brazil, Switzerland, and Pakistan. Interesting!

Read more on the FFA Website here:

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

These Rights Are Not Negotiable

by Chuck Baldwin
October 12th 2009

In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote, "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies."

I would argue that we, like our patriot forebears, have also endured "patient sufferance." For at least a half-century, we have patiently endured the erosion and abridgment of our freedoms and liberties. We have watched the federal government become an overbearing and meddlesome Nanny State that pokes its nose and sticks its fingers in virtually everything we do. We cannot drive a car, buy a gun, or even flush a toilet without Big Brother's permission. We are taxed, regulated, and snooped-on from the time we are born to the day we die. And then after we are dead, we are taxed again.

In the same way that Jefferson and Company patiently suffered up until that shot was fired that was heard around the world, we who love freedom today are likewise patiently suffering "a long train of abuses and usurpations." In fact, I would even dare say that these States United have become a boiling caldron of justifiable frustration and even anger.

Accordingly, it is incumbent upon us to very seriously and thoughtfully examine those principles that we absolutely will never cede or surrender. We have already surrendered much of the freedom that was bequeathed to us by our forefathers. We are now to the point that we must define those principles that form our "line in the sand" and that we will not surrender under any circumstance. Either that, or we must admit to ourselves that there is nothing--no principle, no freedom, no matter how sacred--that we will not surrender to Big Government.

Here, then, are those principles that, to me, must never be surrendered. To surrender these liberties to Big Government would mean to commit idolatry. It would be sacrilege. It would reduce us to slavery. It would destroy our humanity. To surrender these freedoms would mean "absolute Despotism" and would provide moral justification to the proposition that such tyranny be "thrown off."

For the rest follow this link -

Monday, October 12, 2009

Bet she wishes she hadn't said that!

Ok folks. If you don't want to believe the right wing, crazy, religious
conservatives, then believe what the far left liberals and the Obama
administration are saying. Maxine Waters, the liberals liberal says it in just a few sentences.

This clip showing Congresswoman Maxine Waters discussing drilling for new oil reserves. She explains, in a slip of the tongue, what this whole administration agenda is all about.

What can you say...?! Notice the people around her.
This clip from a friend is about as blatant as a liberal can get.
What she said was accidental, and notice that it stopped her for a long moment.
Looks like the TRUTH came out of her mouth!
Notice the lady to the left trying to control her reaction to what Maxine Waters just said!

Hard to lie about it when you see it for your self in her own words.
This one needs to be passed on.
Just hope the country wakes up in the 2010 elections. Scary agenda.
She knew she blew it the second it came out of her mouth.
The intent of Obama's grand plan and it is not pretty. But luckily, the "congress person" shifted her mouth into gear before engaging her brain and let the cat out of the bag. I do not think it is possible for too many people to see this video and I hope you feel the same way and  will help send it along as fast as possible.

Ask yourself: Isn't what the government's doing now with GM, Chrysler, and the banks, actual a socialistic government takeover??

Sunday, October 11, 2009

Did you take the Oath to Defend, protect and obey the Constitution?

If you didn't take, subscribe, and file your oath your office is vacant!

From: Gary Marbut-MSSA
Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2009 11:11 AM

Subject: Oath of office

Dear MSSA Friends,

All persons elected to office in Montana must have taken, subscribed (signed under penalty of perjury) and filed (usually with the county clerk) an oath of office to defend the U.S. and Montana constitutions.

Article III, Section 3 of the Montana Constitution requires:

"Section 3. Oath of office. Members of the legislature and all executive, ministerial and judicial officers, shall take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation, before they enter upon the duties of their offices: 'I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, protect and defend the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the state of Montana, and that I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity (so help me God).' No other oath, declaration, or test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust."

Those of you interested in good government in Montana should check with the county clerk to confirm that ALL elected officials, appointed officials, peace officers and others have taken, subscribed and filed the required oath of office. If any of these official have not done all three, they cannot hold office - they have not officially assumed their office and their office is vacant.

This applies to county commissioners, sheriffs, county attorneys, city council members, legislators and everyone else elected to office. It applies to all appointed offices, and to all Montana peace officers. These officials cannot be held to compliance with their oath (to defend the constitutions) unless they have taken, signed and filed the oath.

Pasted below are some Montana statutes and some Montana court cases about this, if you want more detailed information.

Feel free to redistribute this email to interested friends. Do check to see if all local officials have taken, signed and filed the required oath of office. If they haven't, they're imposters. Moreover, every supposedly official act they have done before their oath was taken, signed and filed is void.

Check it out.
Best wishes,
Gary Marbut, president
Montana Shooting Sports Association

author, Gun Laws of Montana


Montana statutes:

1-6-101. Officers who may administer oaths. Every court, judge, clerk of any court, justice, notary public, and officer or person authorized to take testimony in any action or proceeding or to decide upon evidence has power to administer oaths or affirmations.

1-6-102. Form of ordinary oath. An oath or affirmation in an action or proceeding may be administered as follows: the person who swears or affirms expressing his assent when addressed in the following form, "You do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that the evidence you shall give in this issue (or matter), pending between .... and ...., shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God".

1-6-103. Variation of oath to suit witness's belief. The court shall vary the mode of swearing or affirming to accord with the witness's beliefs whenever it is satisfied that the witness has a distinct mode of swearing or affirming.

1-6-104. Affirmation or declaration in lieu of oath. Any person who desires it may, at his option, instead of taking an oath make his solemn affirmation or declaration by assenting when addressed in the following form: "You do solemnly affirm (or declare), etc.", as in 1-6-102.

2-16-211. Oaths -- form -- before whom -- when. (1) Members of the legislature and all officers, executive, ministerial, or judicial, must, before they enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, protect, and defend the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of Montana, and that I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity (so help me God)."
(2) No other oath, declaration, or test must be required as a qualification for any office or public trust.
(3) Except when otherwise provided, the oath may be taken before any officer authorized to administer oaths.

Case Notes: Operation and Effect: This section does not make filing of oath of office a condition precedent to entering upon discharge of duties of office, but 2-16-501 declares that, if officer fails to file his official oath within the time prescribed, the office becomes vacant. State ex rel. Muzzy v. Uotila & Certain Intoxicating Liquors, 71 M 351, 229 P 724 (1924).

2-16-212. Filing. (1) Whenever a different time is not prescribed by law, the oath of office must be taken, subscribed, and filed within 30 days after the officer has notice of his election or appointment or before the expiration of 15 days from the commencement of his term of office when no such notice has been given.

(2) Every oath of office, certified by the officer before whom the same was taken, must be filed within the time required by law, except when otherwise specially provided, as follows:

(a) the oath of all officers whose authority is not limited to any particular county, in the office of the secretary of state;

(b) the oath of all officers, elected or appointed for any county and of all officers whose duties are local or whose residence in any particular county is prescribed by law and of the clerks of the district courts, in the offices of the clerks of the respective counties.

2-16-501. Vacancies created. An office becomes vacant on the happening of any one of the following events before the expiration of the term of the incumbent:

(1) the death of the incumbent;

(2) a determination pursuant to Title 53, chapter 21, part 1, that the incumbent suffers from a mental disorder and is in need of commitment;

(3) resignation of the incumbent;

(4) removal of the incumbent from office;

(5) the incumbent's ceasing to be a resident of the state or, if the office is local, of the district, city, county, town, or township for which the incumbent was chosen or appointed or within which the duties of the incumbent's office are required to be discharged;

(6) except as provided in 10-1-1008, absence of the incumbent from the state, without the permission of the legislature, beyond the period allowed by law;

(7) the incumbent's ceasing to discharge the duty of the incumbent's office for the period of 3 consecutive months, except when prevented by sickness, when absent from the state by permission of the legislature, or as provided in 10-1-1008;

(8) conviction of the incumbent of a felony or of an offense involving moral turpitude or a violation of the incumbent's official duties;

(9) the incumbent's refusal or neglect to file the incumbent's official oath or bond within the time prescribed;

(10) the decision of a competent tribunal declaring void the incumbent's election or appointment.

3-5-201. Election and oath of office. (1) The judges of the district court, except judges pro tempore, must be elected by the qualified voters of the district.

(2) Except as provided in subsection (1), each judge of a district court must, as soon as he has taken and subscribed his official oath, file the same in the office of the secretary of state.

3-10-202. Oath -- proof of certification. (1) Each justice of the peace, elected or appointed, after he has received his certificate of election or appointment, shall, before entering upon the duties of his office, take the constitutional oath of office, which must be filed with the county clerk.

(2) Before the county clerk may file the oath, the elected or appointed justice must satisfy the clerk that he is certified as provided in 3-1-1502 or 3-1-1503.

5-2-212. Organization of senate. At 12 noon on the day appointed for the meeting of any regular session of the legislature, the senior member present must take the chair, call the senators and senators-elect to order, call over the senators from the certified roster prepared by the secretary of state, and then, from the certified roster prepared by the secretary of state, call over the senatorial districts and counties, in their order, from which members have been elected at the preceding election. After the same are called the members-elect must take the constitutional oath of office and assume their seats. The senate may thereupon, if a quorum is present, proceed to elect its officers.

5-2-213. Organization of house of representatives. At the time specified in 5-2-212, the secretary of state, or in case of his absence or inability then the senior member-elect present, must take the chair, call the members-elect of the house of representatives to order, and then, from the certified roster prepared by the secretary of state, call over the roll of counties and districts. After the same are called the members-elect must take the constitutional oath of office and assume their seats. The house of representatives may thereupon, if a quorum is present, proceed to elect its officers.

7-1-4137. Oath of office. (1) Every elected and appointed municipal officer shall take the oath of office prescribed in Article III, section 3, of the Montana constitution. Before the officer performs any official duties, the oath of office, certified by the official before whom the oath was taken, must be filed. An elected officer shall file the oath with the county election administrator. Except as provided in subsection (2), an appointed officer shall file the oath with the city clerk.

(2) A person appointed to fill a vacancy in an elected municipal office shall file the oath of office with the county election administrator.

7-3-4217. Oath of office and official bond. Every person who has been declared elected mayor or councilman shall, within 10 days thereafter, take and file with the city clerk an oath of office in the form and manner provided by law and shall execute and give sufficient bond to the municipal corporation in the sum of $10,000, conditioned for the faithful performance of the duties of the office. This bond shall be approved by the judge of the district court of the county in which such city is situated and filed with the clerk and recorder of the county in which such city is situated.

7-4-101. Filing of oath of office. Every oath of office, certified by the officer before whom the same was taken, must be filed within the time required by law, except when otherwise specially provided, as follows:

(1) in the office of the secretary of state for all officers whose authority is not limited to any particular county;

(2) in the office of the clerk of the respective county for all elected or appointed officers for any county, all officers whose duties are local or whose residence in any particular county is prescribed by law, and the clerks of the district courts.

7-4-2205. Term of office -- oath. (1) Each person elected to an office named in 7-4-2203 holds the office for the term of 4 years and until a successor is elected and qualified.

(2) A person appointed to any of the different offices serves at the pleasure of the commissioners.

(3) Each officer who is mentioned in this part and who is elected to office shall:

(a) take the oath of office on the last business day of December following the officer's election; and

(b) take office at 12:01 a.m. on January 1 following the officer's election.

7-32-303. Peace officer employment, education, and certification standards -- suspension or revocation -- penalty. (1) For purposes of this section, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, "peace officer" means a deputy sheriff, undersheriff, police officer, highway patrol officer, fish and game warden, park ranger, campus security officer, or airport police officer.

(2) No sheriff of a county, mayor of a city, board, commission, or other person authorized by law to appoint peace officers in this state shall appoint any person as a peace officer who does not meet the following qualifications plus any additional qualifying standards for employment promulgated by the board of crime control:

(a) be a citizen of the United States;

(b) be at least 18 years of age;

(c) be fingerprinted and a search made of the local, state, and national fingerprint files to disclose any criminal record;

(d) not have been convicted of a crime for which the person could have been imprisoned in a federal or state penitentiary;

(e) be of good moral character, as determined by a thorough background investigation;

(f) be a high school graduate or have passed the general education development test and have been issued an equivalency certificate by the superintendent of public instruction or by an appropriate issuing agency of another state or of the federal government;

(g) be examined by a licensed physician, who is not the applicant's personal physician, appointed by the employing authority to determine if the applicant is free from any mental or physical condition that might adversely affect performance by the applicant of the duties of a peace officer;

(h) successfully complete an oral examination conducted by the appointing authority or its designated representative to demonstrate the possession of communication skills, temperament, motivation, and other characteristics necessary to the accomplishment of the duties and functions of a peace officer; and

(i) possess or be eligible for a valid Montana driver's license.

(3) At the time of appointment a peace officer shall take a formal oath of office.

(4) Within 10 days of the appointment, termination, resignation, or death of any peace officer, written notice thereof must be given to the board of crime control by the employing authority.

(5) (a) Except as provided in subsections (5)(b) and (5)(c), it is the duty of an appointing authority to cause each peace officer appointed under its authority to attend and successfully complete, within 1 year of the initial appointment, an appropriate peace officer basic course certified by the board of crime control. Any peace officer appointed after September 30, 1983, who fails to meet the minimum requirements as set forth in subsection (2) or who fails to complete the basic course as required by this subsection (a) forfeits the position, authority, and arrest powers accorded a peace officer in this state.

(b) A peace officer who has been issued a basic certificate by the board of crime control and whose last date of employment as a peace officer was less than 36 months prior to the date of the person's present appointment as a peace officer is not required to fulfill the basic educational requirements of subsection (5)(a). If the peace officer's last date of employment as a peace officer was 36 or more but less than 60 months prior to the date of present employment as a peace officer, the peace officer may satisfy the basic educational requirements as set forth in subsection (5)(c).

(c) A peace officer under the provisions of subsection (5)(b) or a peace officer who has completed a basic peace officer's course in another state and whose last date of employment as a peace officer was less than 60 months prior to the date of present appointment as a peace officer may, within 1 year of the peace officer's present employment or initial appointment as a peace officer within this state, satisfy the basic educational requirements by successfully passing a basic equivalency test administered by the Montana law enforcement academy and successfully completing a legal training course conducted by the academy. If the peace officer fails the basic equivalency test, the peace officer shall complete the basic course within 120 days of the date of the test.

(6) The board of crime control may extend the 1-year time requirements of subsections (5)(a) and (5)(c) upon the written application of the peace officer and the appointing authority of the officer. The application must explain the circumstances that make the extension necessary. Factors that the board may consider in granting or denying the extension include but are not limited to illness of the peace officer or a member of the peace officer's immediate family, absence of reasonable access to the basic course or the legal training course, and an unreasonable shortage of personnel within the department. The board may not grant an extension to exceed 180 days.

(7) A peace officer who has successfully met the employment standards and qualifications and the educational requirements of this section and who has completed a 1-year probationary term of employment must, upon application to the board of crime control, be issued a basic certificate by the board, certifying that the peace officer has met all the basic qualifying peace officer standards of this state.

(8) It is unlawful for a person whose certification as a peace officer, detention officer, or detention center administrator has been revoked or suspended by the board of crime control to act as a peace officer, detention officer, or detention center administrator. A person convicted of violating this subsection is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a term of imprisonment not to exceed 6 months in the county jail or by a fine not to exceed $500, or both.

Court decisions:

Substitute Justice of the Peace Not Duly Authorized or Properly Called -- Search Warrants Invalid: A Justice of the Peace submitted a written waiver request form for proposing substitute Justices of the Peace but failed to create a list of proposed substitutes as required in 3-10-231. One of the designated substitutes took the judicial oath of office, but not in the form required by this section. The substitute justice was called by a Deputy Sheriff, who requested warrants allowing a search of defendant's property. The warrants were issued and executed, but the warrants were challenged by defendants on the grounds that the warrants were not issued by a properly authorized substitute justice. The state argued that the authorization and call-in of the substitute justice were in substantial compliance with the law and that any technical errors in the procedures should not operate to suppress evidence. Applying Potter v. District Court, 266 M 384, 880 P2d 1319 (1994), the Supreme Court held that substantial compliance was insufficient. The procedure used in authorizing the substitute justice with a variant form of the constitutional oath of office was a major discrepancy in the authorization process, and the procedure of providing law enforcement with a menu of substitutes from which to choose clearly violated Potter. The substitute Justice of the Peace was not duly authorized, thus the warrants issued by the substitute were void ab initio. St. v. Vickers, 1998 MT 201, 290 M 356, 964 P2d 756, 55 St. Rep. 859 (1998), distinguishing U.S. v. Leon, 468 US 897, 82 L Ed 2d 677, 104 S Ct 3405 (1984).

"Civil Office" Defined: The words "civil office" as used in Art. V, sec. 7, 1889 Mont. Const., in providing that no Senator or Representative shall, during the term for which elected, be appointed to any civil office, mean any public office not of a military character. State ex rel. Barney v. Hawkins, 79 M 506, 257 P 411 (1927).

To make any position of employment a public office of a civil nature, it must be created by the state Constitution or by the Legislature or created by a municipality pursuant to authority delegated to it; it must possess a delegation of a portion of the sovereign power of government, to be exercised for the benefit of the public; the powers conferred and the duties to be discharged must be defined, directly or impliedly, by the Legislature or through legislative authority. The duties must be performed independently and without control of a superior power, other than the law, unless they be those of an inferior or subordinate office, created or authorized by the Legislature and by it placed under the control of a superior office or body. It must have permanency and continuity, and the incumbent must take and file an oath, hold a commission, and give an official bond, if required by proper authority. State ex rel. Barney v. Hawkins, 79 M 506, 257 P 411 (1927). See also State ex rel. Nagle v. Page, 98 M 14, 37 P2d 575 (1934).