I have been warning patriots for years to stay in a strictly defensive posture, and that the enemies of freedom want an excuse to start martial law. Here is one guy who put it to words.
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 8400 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." 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 opinion 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. Comments containing foul language will be deleted no matter what is said in the comment.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Intelligence - Former Spy tells the truth
See the comments on this YouTube video to get the whole story.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHisG7gxUNs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHisG7gxUNs
Montana Freemen speak out from inside the 81 day standoff.
FREEMEN CALL IN ON RADIO TALK SHOW DURING MIND CONTROL INTERVIEW
The following is a transcript of a live radio broadcast conducted by telephone during the 81 day standoff in 1996 of the Montana Freemen near Jordan Montana. Most people have never seen anything that came directly from any of their side of the story. This is presented for your information only without comment. Read this and make up your own mind. You have heard much negative comment from mainstream media calling these people criminals and many other demonizing words. Now you can read their own words and make up your own mind if they are criminals or "political prisoners".
By T. Kirby March 23, 1996
During an interview with W.H. Bowart, author of OPERATION MIND CONTROL on the satellite-linked American Freedom Network, talk radio host John Bryant took a surprise call from Freemen while they were surrounded by Federal agents at their farm in Jordan, Justice Township, Montana. It was the first time the Freemen had been able to call from the compound without getting jammed.
When the call came, the so-called Freemen "standoff " with the feds was in its 60th day. The story was being poorly covered by the media -- so poorly covered in fact that Patriots had reason to be convinced that there was federal manipulation and control of the media in place. What the "standoff" was apparently really all about was that the Freemen, who, to their way of thinking , have legally severed all contracts with the federal government, seek protection under the common law which they believe takes precedence over federal law. Under common law, the Freemen maintain, among other things, the FBI has no right to operate in the State of Montana.
There are other points of common law which might create a powerful motive for the Freemen's side of the story to get suppressed -- points of law which would make the Federal Reserve Act and the National Security Act illegal and unconstitutional. These and other points of common law have made for an ever-widening gap between the federal government and Freemen whose stand represents a growing number of individuals who have severed their individual ties with federal authority to claim human rights provided under common law since the Magna Carta and before.
Shortly before the program was aired ( at 8 p.m. M.S.T) the computer service, America On Line, carried the following report from REUTER
"...the FBI said Thursday it set up equipment to sever power to the remote Montana ranch were the group is holed up.
"The activity came a few days after talks broke down and the mediator, Colorado state Sen. Charles Duke, flew home, saying "the time for negotiation is over."
"Agents trucked in generators late Wednesday, which would allow other farms in the region to receive electricity fi the Freemen were cut off. In Washington, Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick told reporters that FBI agents have not yet decided whether to cut off power. "Gorelick said the FBI remained interested in a peaceful resolution of the dispute and in settling the matter through negotiations, even though the latest round of talks collapsed. The Freemen have refused to talk directly with the FBI.
"We are keeping all lawful options open," Gorelick said. A woman, identified by local residents as Janet Clark, wife of Freeman Edwin Clark, was driven to the compound by two FBI agents. She was believed to be delivering medicine to a teen-age boy on the ranch.
"Activity was otherwise quiet.
"State Sen. Duke, who has links to the right-wing Patriot movement, suggested that authorities make life a little more difficult on the ranch, which is believed to be heavily armed.
"Moving in the generators appeared to be the first step, although federal authorities have been cautious since the standoff began March 25 when two Freemen leaders were arrested. " The FBI, criticized for its handling of previous confrontations with militant groups, has 100 agents ringing the ranch.
"The two leaders and several others among the 20 or so Freemen on the ranch are accused of taking part in a financial scheme to defraud businesses and public agencies of more than $1.8 million, stealing television news equipment and threatening a federal judge.
"The Freemen do not recognize government authority, refuse to pay taxes and hold white supremacist views."
Many have said that this is an example of biased reportage.
A photo on America On Line showed three large semi-trucks carrying what was supposed to be electrical generating equipment moving toward the Freemen farm in Justice Township.
W.H. Bowart, author of Operation Mind Control was being interviewed by John Bryant, the moderator of the call-in talk show. As their conversation approached the kind of Psyops used against the captive people at Waco, Bryant took a call to discover that Russell Landers was calling from the surrounded Freeman ranch for the first time. The exchange lasted for almost one half hour, with Landers and Rod Skurdal speaking in calm, even tones. They cited case law, offering examples of their side of the argument against the federal government in a lawyerly fashion, even-tempered and correct.
After Landers identified himself as the caller, Bryant asked how everybody was at the ranch.
Russell Landers: Everybody's perfectly all right.
John Bryant: Well, a lot of people are concerned about you, even though you've been deamonized royally out here.
Russ: Well, we expected that. When you can't win it straight up and down, you have to go the other way, I guess. That seems to be the way they play the game.
John: Senator Charles Duke was just there and he is a man that was well respected -- or is well respected -- in Colorado. And some of the statements he made... and apparently he is very frustrated and what can you tell us about the negotiations. Do you think there's a chance of continuation.
Russ: Well, first of all... there's never been any problem with them, with the exception with the fact that they are not negotiations. They are talks to resolve the matter lawfully.
John: ... right... thank you...
Russ: ... and the problem that we're facing here is the FBI and anyone that has come in to talk, first of all don't understand the law and second of all, have no intention of living by the law. And, for example, the FBI, in order to deal with any issue in good faith would have to present a written delegation of authority signed by the president.
That's not something I dreamt up. That's the only way you'll know that they're in good faith. And it's already been decided in the case of California Bankers Association vs. Shultz...
Furthermore, Treasury Decision 95-A specifically states that any agency that purports to represent the United States has to have such a certified delegation of authority or they have no authority.
In the absence of any authority. I can't imagine where any of us would benefit from talking to someone who had no authority to enter into any type of negotiations.
John: Russell, the biggest complaint of Charles Duke.... He was on the show the first hour, seven till eight mountain time, which is not on short wave yet, but he said that there were demands made... he took them out and the FBI agreed to them... he brought them back and then the people that were involved there, um... went back on their word...
Russ: Absolutely not. On the contrary, the demands that were made were outside of the law. And they used the negotiating skills that they had to manipulate a couple of us at the gate. And they almost got us to act outside of the law.
Frankly, the law provides some very important protections for people who are pending extradition, and they were demanding the extradition of a man here who has no charges against him, and who has every right to be wherever he wants to be. But there were some very nasty allegations being made. He was being purported to be a child molester and etc. There is no evidence here of that and there has been no due process of law to establish that fact. And there's been no due process that would warrant an extradition in that case.
We simply came back with our responsibility to live within the law and demanded that if these allegations were in fact well founded they should proceed with the legal avenues necessary for extradition, and hearing would be heard here of the proper paperwork were presented. John: Can you talk about what happened during the negotiations or talks there the last five days or so?
Russ: Yes. We came back to the point we've had since the very beginning. That point is we have presented them with a proposal. We have presented the law... the decisions that have already been made by the Supreme Court of The United States of America.... As to the conduct of the Federal Courts and as to the conduct of parties in these types of situations... and we have told the F's and anyone else who has come in... that if they can produce the evidence that all of their actions thus far are specifically in compliance with the law, every man woman and child at Justice Township will come out. It's not a problem with the law.
John: Senator Duke mentioned, too, there were children and, of course, there's stress on the safety of the children... and it was his personal thing to try to get them out and that ... I believe, one of the Wards' daughters was a 13 year-old, married to... or paired off a 40 year-old man by her mother, and in any case, what do you have to say about all that?
Russ: It's a lot of deamonizing and their using these children as a front.
John: We've seen that before with Waco... (click) ... Oops, are we still connected?
Apparently not. Apparently that was the end of our conversation... Oh... Pretty wild stuff.... if we get a call back... we may get a call back.... uh.... we'll give it a try.... that lasted about five minutes...
This is the experience they've had locally too, where they were able to call out....( music begins ) Oops, we'll be back after this break....
After commercials, Bryant resumed:
John: Well, we're back, Walter and I. Mr. Landers is not. Maybe he'll be able to call back.
Walter Bowart: Let's hope so. That was interesting.
John: No kidding.
Walter: Now, who's Landers? He's a lawyer?
John: No, he is in the Justice Township, west of Jordan, Montana. He is inside the township. This is the first folks... They've had a call out on... well, two nights ago to their friends and family... they've apparently kept a mobile or cellular phone, I'm not sure whether it's the old style technology or a cell phone... and they used it for the first time on Tuesday night... looks like we've got a call coming in now, so maybe we... I knew this would happen... They've got just a few minutes before it's cut off... put the caller on.... here we go... hello, Russell?
Russ: Yeah.
John: Oh, you're back, good...
Russ: Yeah. We got cut off there.
John: We sure did. Hey, take this any direction you want to and if I think of a pertinent question, I'll ask....
Russ: That sounds fine. In fact, this whole ploy about the children is all a big hoax. We're not dealing with a compound here, the only danger that's being presented to the people of Justice Township, men, women or children -- is the threat from the outside.
Right now we're living with a threat of loss of power. That is a frivolous move on their part because frankly we have more than adequate supplies and knowledge to remain on the ranch for the next several years without power. So, that's really a silly ploy.
But I do want to return to senator Charlie Duke.
We were extremely disappointed for quite some time. My wife and I, all over this country, supported his Tenth Amendment Resolution, we promoted it heavily. We promoted him as a individual who was standing for Americans and their rights. And we were sadly disappointed with his performance at Montana. In fact, his performance was just the opposite. He seemed very corporate, very corporate minded. His closing words to Rodney Skurdal as we presented him with the law and a simple demand that they comply with the law in order to show good faith and continue... his response was, "To hell with due process of law..."
John: He attributed that statement to the situation with the two young girls in the custody fight.
Russ: Yes. And you've taken a very good point there. The law is the law one-hundred percent of the time. And the emotions of the parties never overshadow the necessity to stand on the law. The people that he is purporting to go around due process of law on are entitled to their
defense of the law one-hundred percent of the time. And sometimes, our emotions would dictate that we would do something other than what the law would dictate, but frankly, everyone is entitled to their due process. And it was a summary and an expression of his entire demeanor here as he met with us here. He was to come here and act as an intermediary carrying our response to the FBI and vice versa. And, in fact, he failed to do so on every count. In fact his whole demeanor here was one of coming in and representing the FBI as opposed to representing us and carrying our message to them.
He agreed to meet with us, with Gene Schroder, with Walker Todd, and Nord Davis. For some reason Mr. Duke took it upon himself to come up here and do this all alone...
John: He apparently was in contact with Gene Schroder through the time over the phone... Russ: Well, he is making a lot of misstatements in public because we've talked with Mr. Davis and he basically sidestepped these other gentlemen and apparently had an agenda that he couldn't live with their presence when he came here. And certainly his agenda was not that of a mediator as he was invited by us.
John: I talked to Dr. Schroder tonight and he had not talked to Senator Duke since he had gotten back.
Russ: One of the things Mr. Davis presented to us is the fact that Mr. Duke is a former Arkansas resident and that he recently gave testimony to Congress about the Whitewater incident on behalf of the FBI. And in fact that testimony was, it appears now, plotted with lies and untruth....
John: Russell,? We've got a bottom of the hour break now that can't be avoided. Can you give us a call back in three minutes? Russ: I certainly can do that.
John: Okay. Thank you. .. You're tuned to the American Freedom Network, the John Bryant Show, we've got Russell Landers calling in from Justice Township in Jordan, Montana, and we've got Walter Bowart with us....
(Cut to Commercials.)
John: Welcome back. You're tuned to the John Bryant show, the American Freedom Network, with Walter Bowart tonight on Operation Mind Control, and we have had a phone call out of Justice Township. Hopefully we'll get a call back here in just a minute...
That was one break that we couldn't skip. It's built into the system and I can't work the computer... so.... uh... Walter?
Walter: Yeah John? That's very interesting. Justice Township, now does that mean he's on the site of the ranch?
John: He is.
Walter: So, he's inside. He sounds like a very level headed man... and he speaks very well. He sounds like a lawyer... actually... to say "misspeak" instead of "lie" and things like that...
John:... and they've been painted to be bumpkins.
Walter: ..oh.. yeah... that's... this is a great education for me, I'll tell you that.
John: ... it is, and it's right down your line...
Walter: Can we put this on the Internet?
John: Fine with me....
Walter: Okay. I wonder of any other news media will pick this up. This is a first, isn't it?
John: Yes it is. It is the first.
Walter: You're making history here...
John: My friends up there... Freeman on the outside with their families who I've been in contact with, they seem to be wonderful people. They've been on the show.
I just want people to see both sides of this thing because the media is just reeking with mind control... Walter... that's true. It's just propaganda. It's totally controlled and slanted. The coverage on this story is pathetic....
John: It just slapped me in the face the other day with the statements were being made after the break-off of the talks... and I just... I couldn't .. it just wouldn't compute. I just thought, there's something awry here.... and he's back... Hello Russell?
Russ: Hi. How ya doin'
John: We've got Walter Bowart on the show with you tonight who has written Operation Mind Control. Russ: Right.
John: This man has studied this for 25 years intensely. And it's appropriate that you're both....
Russ: He's obviously familiar with California vs. Hooker.
Walter: Yeah. You're very well educated and I'm impressed by what you're saying. This news has got to get out to the country...
Russ: Absolutely... Absolutely. America is on the line right now. And, you know, it's really unfortunate that a lot of side issues are used to divert people's attention from what's really happening here in this situation and across the country right?
John: Talk about the bottom line issues. I understand it's the nature of the currency, which is in question and the nature of the instruments that were used, and due process... is that pretty much it?
Russ: Yeah. The situation here is... the issue here is not the purported warrants and charges against the people here at Justice Township. In fact, Charlie Duke was quoted as saying that," every one here is guilty and needs to be prosecuted."
Wait a minute! I thought that we had a basis in law that we're innocent until proven guilty. And something that they do not want to deal with here, is that the courts today are not the courts of the people. They are not the judicial branch of the government. The judicial branch of government was vested in the people. And the court is the people and it's not these administrative courts of the bankruptcy that are being used to purport that they're delivering justice. In fact they're merely an extension of the executive branch of the government.
John: Stewart Waterhouse left there. Is that correct? And they promised him one thing and he got another?
Russ: Absolutely. We haven't been able to verify this today, but it's being verified and, I suspect, he's still incarcerated... Purportedly earlier in these talks he had no charges and he could leave any time he wanted to. In fact that has some bearing on the situation with the children they keep bringing up...
First of all, the children and parents have always been free to go. They came to this area, they came to the ranch, they wanted to live here, they choose to do that today. They've chosen to do that in the past and they continue to choose to do that because they don't feel safe anywhere else, frankly...
And uh... what you get down to here... is like, you know, there in Colorado, my wife and I have been accused of a number of things, but the fact of the matter is the case has already been adjudicated by the court. The court in Colorado has been noted of the acquittal and of the civil damages that were awarded. And that case is now res judicada. Right out here in the Tenth Circuit the court has recognized in a number of cases, it's being recognized all over the country. But we've still got these administrative tribunals attempting to run their Star Chambers and divert themselves from due process in an effort to cover up the truth and stop the people from presenting the truth to other people... It's that simple....
John: I certainly hope your full story gets out here. It's very difficult in sound bites to do it. There's an allegation too... Talk about you idea of what consists of a jury...
Russ: First of all, a jury of our peers as American Sovereigns would have to be other men of free character. And in fact, I'd like to introduce Rod Skurdal, because he has a very good handle on the jury, and I think he could present a better idea... more specifically... of what a juror has to be and how these presents courts are preventing the public from getting that.... Here's Rod Skurdal...
John:Hello Rod, welcome. You're on short-wave at 2.390 out of Nashville. And this is the American Freedom Network. We're broadcasting out of Johnstown, just north of Denver. I'm really glad to have you on.... We asked a question Rod, about the jury, about the nature of the jury that's right in your eyes.
Rod: A common law jury is 12 men who know the law and keep it well. Basically it goes back to Chapter 45 of the Magna Carta.
John: Was that adopted then into the Constitution?
Rod: Our Revised Codes of 1947 here in Montana starts off with the Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence, Constitution... and so forth, right on down the line to the Constitution of Montana... And it is part of the wording of the Constitution basically... it is adopted... our common law goes right back to the Magna Carta and if you take our common law back to its origin it goes right back to the Bible....
Basically anything you cite out of the Constitution, you can take it back to the Bible.... It's not something that we just thought of, it's already been established by the word of Almighty God.
John: Excuse me for a second. We're going to skip this next break. So, as long as you guys can stay on, you're welcome. We won't have this interruption with advertising this time.... So, continue... so what comprises a jury.
Rod: The common law is very consistent: " twelve men who know the law and keep it well." Chapter 45 of the Magna Carta. Okay this is freemen characters, basically your neighbors who know you, know your character, you're standing within the community and so forth. It is not twelve strangers that judge you.
John: I can see where that would work better, because, if your neighbor had something... if you did something that was a crime... your neighbor would certainly want to deal with it more than anyone else. Rod: Correct.
John: Talk about the nature... there was an argument... a position brought up today in a show, and a friend that actually called in that talked about if you dabbled in the UCC instruments, then that removed you from the common law. Is there connection back to the common law.
Rod: Yes. 103.6 out of Anderson, that says a statute cannot be read to preclude a common law action.
John: Very interesting.
Rod: So, every goes right back to the common law because the UCC cannot give you remedies, so therefore you step out of UCC's and go back to common law that gives you remedy. That's why everything is done under UCC 1-103, odd interpretation, coercion, so forth, where you go back to UCC 1-105 under "Conflict of Laws" therefore the rights go back to Common Law.
Walter: Can I ask a question, John?
John: Go right ahead.
Walter: So, what this confrontation is really all about is common law versus federal law?
John: Yeah. Well, and the nature of the currency in this country, just like we were talking about earlier....
Rod: It goes a little bit deeper than that. It's substantially... There's only three jurisdictions granted by the Constitution: One is Common law, the next one is Equity, and the third one is Admiralty where there is a mixture of public law for maritime and equity too. Now all these charges against everyone here are under Admiralty because... they like uh... go to your Title 18 or Title 27 or Title 26 of the United States Code... everything is based on public law, right?
John: Right.
Rod: Anyway, from there, there's a contract. Once you sign that application to get a Social Security application card, a driver's license, a marriage license or anything, that's a quasi contract. where you wave all your constitutional rights and now you're bound by the letter of the law of the contract which holds up any and all quasi contracts one title into another. Once you sign a quasi contract you've waved all your inalienable rights. Now you're bound by the letter of the law of the contract to specific performance. Such as a driver's license it has you say, "I agree to uphold the speed limit."
John: Talk about the influence on the currency. I don't honor it with the term money.
Rod: Credit. It's credit.
John: Talk about what your actions are doing there. What the Freeman's actions... what Leroy's actions.... are you a threat to the system?
Rod: Basically yeah. The nation's in debt to me right now. I'm one of the largest bankers in the nation right now... based on law... and I can take it right back into Biblical law... because even though we talk about gold and silver .... God also said we throw the gold and silver into the streets right? So, what's left? That's credit. It's all civilly correct and constitutionally correct....
John: I was just going to ask about the liens..
Rod: The best way to explain those is like a traffic ticket. Okay, you look at a traffic ticket. You've got a white copy, a blue, pink , green and yellow copy underneath it. Right?
John: Right.
Rod: Okay. The white copy is turned in to the clerk of the court. Basically you never see that again. You go in there and you fight that case and you win it, you never see that white copy --"case dismissed" do you? Or, if you go in there and you pay a $25 fine, you never see that white copy "paid in full." What they do is they take that white copy, a negotiable instrument, and turn it into... as an account receivable, therefore there is an unknown lien placed against you besides the fine or whatever, and they roll it in the banking system.
The same thing. Only on a traffic ticket you have ten days to answer the traffic ticket. Same way with your UCC. If you fail to answer within ten days, you're in default. They are a common law judgment and they are as good as gold....
John: Now, can that be corrected later if someone is not subject to the lien. In other words do they have beyond ten days to go back and correct that?
Rod: You go into a common law court and have that adjudicated there....
John: Okay, so the people who have liens on them could get them removed if they could answer the charges.
Rod: Right. but the thing is the way we write... okay, say you're a public official or a public hireling... okay.... no one here in Montana has an official bond filed with an oath of office, so what we do is write these up as a declaration: "I, Rodney Skurdal, being a duly elected County Sheriff of such-and-such county, did lawfully apply for the office and upon taking my oath of office I knowingly, willingly and intentionally disregard to file my oath of office because I was broke and could not do this and I could not buy insurance and can not go to county officials because that would be misappropriations of public funds, and blablabla....." I write it up as a situation to where he knowingly did this, contrary to his statute limits and his oath of office...
John: And the credit instruments are based on these liens, is that correct?
Rod: Underneath the full faith and credit of the United States,... Everyone in the national government has taken an oath of office on or the judgment of the several states, right?
John: Right.
Rod: Okay, when you look at the word " states" you gotta go to Texas versus White, 7 Wallace ,700-743 which states that the state is a people and not the created form of government. So, we the people are the state, in fact. And if we're going to honor the judgments from a state then, underneath the full faith and credit, it's their duty to pay it. They have no choice in the matter.
John: Oh. What else can we do out here? Is there anything....?
Rod: The main thing is that we want a Grand Jury to where we can present our full story and evidence under due process of law... if they're going to throw away due process of law, they've thrown away everything... We have a right to present out evidence, our exculpatory evidence, and be granted immunity to and from the Grand Jury, until we present everything.... John: What would it take from the FBI... what kind of guarantees..... Can you envision what it would take if they promised you a Grand Jury?
Rod: First off, you've got to realize that the FBI is not a government agency. And I can't cite the court cases right now....
John: We'll accept that for now...
Rod: Anyway they have to have a delegation of authority .... and they have to be registered to do business here in Montana, which they're not under 30-13, 215 and 216... just like the United States is not registered to do business here in Montana... I got a certificate of nonexistence from the Secretary of State, stating that the United States is not registered to do business here. So, the thing is....
John: I know that's alien to a lot of people....
Walter: Ask him what are in those vans, John?
Rod: Any corporation has to be registered when they do any business her in Montana or any of the states. You got to remember, all your statutes in our constitution are basically uniform, which means they are under Admiralty jurisdiction. That's one of the requirements of Admiralty jurisdiction is that all the statutes be uniform from state to state.
John: Rod, what would it take to get things corrected there? What kind of circumstances. Like a guarantee... what kind of signatures or whatever?
Rod: Okay. What we want is full immunity for everyone to and from the Grand Jury where we can testify and present our own evidence and everything to show that these statutes not only don't apply to us, but have never applied to anyone....
John: Okay. What to and from the grand jury...
Rod: Immunity... full immunity with the release of the people who've been kidnapped already so that they can also prepare their evidence... and the thing is, a Grand Jury would have to be involved...
John: Okay... Would you need signatures from officials? What sort of guarantees would you need here?
Rod: I'd like to see it in black and white, but they won't... I doubt if there's anyone out there that will actually do it.
John: Okay Rod, we've got a break now that we can't skip now. If you can stay with us, please do it. We've got a two minute break and then we're just about to the end of the show. We'll have four minutes after this two minutes...
Rod: I'll let you talk to Russell for a while here...
John: Okay We'll be back in two minutes. You're tuned to the American Freedom Network. This is the John Bryant Show. We've got Walter Bowart and we've got Rod Skurdal and Russell Landers with us out of Justice Township.
(Cut to Commercial.)
John: Welcome back. Are we still on with the Justice Township?>
Russ: Hey! We certainly are! John: Right on! That's great. And who's with us now?
Russ: This is Russ.
John: Hi Russ. Okay. What do you see would be necessary that would bring things to a conclusion that is acceptable here with a Grand Jury. Russ: First of all the FBI or anyone who purported to represent the United States would have to present their written delegation of authority. Once they did that, they would be in compliance with the law as far as their requirements to meet with us on a good faith basis. Then of course from the very beginning, we have presented the FBI, the United States Attorney, etc. with the 19 pages and points of law which reference the decisions already made with regard to ingress upon us by the ah... these pages reference those elements of law that have already been decided with reference to that ingress..... If they can show specifically that they are in compliance with every one of their actions, uh, that would end this thing peacefully at that point...
John: That document... could that be made available?
Russ: Oh yeah. Absolutely. The only problem I would have would be in getting it to you. But that has already been presented to the FBI, it has been presented to a number of members of the media, and it can be presented to someone again, and in fact, provided your freedom and liberty weren't ingressed upon, someone from your station or someone from this type of media is more than welcome to come here and get this information....
The public has to be aware that everything they've heard has been presented by the other side, because they will not let us produce any evidence... they will not let us produce any kind of information out of Justice Township whatsoever other than what they want to design their presentation with...
And we'll certainly get it out if that's at all possible...
John: Well, we're in communication with people in Billings.... and we've just got about a minute and thirty seconds.... You're welcome to contact us here, if something has got to get out, as long as you can...
Russ: Okay.
John: And anything that we can do, we'll certainly make an attempt to do.
Russ: This challenge should be put before the public in every way. You know the public needs to be asking the questions, "What is the FBI and everyone hiding? Why don't they want to let the people of Justice Township present the evidence and get the evidence out?
John: Do you see the two issues as Due Process( of Law )and the nature of the currency?
Russ: Absolutely. They're still attempting to hide this fraud of the Federal Reserve and everything that ties into that with the UCC.
John: You've taken on the whole beast.
Russ: Absolutely. Well, we haven't really. You know, God is our maker and he's standing behind us 100 percent.
John: It sure makes for a whole different approach, that's for sure. We certainly wish you the best. Like I said, anytime, anything we can attempt to do here, I'd certainly entertain it. Thank you for coming on. We need to keep the word getting out and, if you can communicate with any of those people, Kevin or Randy, they can always get ahold of us.
Russ: And we appreciate this, and the American people need to be looking at this in the light of their own freedom.
The American Freedom Network broadcasts shortwave programs Monday through Friday from 11 a.m. to 12 noon and from 2 to 3 p.m. Mountain Time on 9.475. Then it switches to 7.435 and broadcasts from 3 to 7 p.m. Mountain Time. From 8 to 10 p.m. Mountain Time it broadcasts on 2.350. Tapes of this program can be ordered from American Freedom Network at P.O. Box 430, Johnstown, Colorado 80534, or by calling toll free to: 1-800-205-6245.
Spelling of names was provided by John Bryant.
---------------------------------------------------
Read original article here: http://www.iahushua.com/T-L-J/innerview.html
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. 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.
The following is a transcript of a live radio broadcast conducted by telephone during the 81 day standoff in 1996 of the Montana Freemen near Jordan Montana. Most people have never seen anything that came directly from any of their side of the story. This is presented for your information only without comment. Read this and make up your own mind. You have heard much negative comment from mainstream media calling these people criminals and many other demonizing words. Now you can read their own words and make up your own mind if they are criminals or "political prisoners".
By T. Kirby March 23, 1996
During an interview with W.H. Bowart, author of OPERATION MIND CONTROL on the satellite-linked American Freedom Network, talk radio host John Bryant took a surprise call from Freemen while they were surrounded by Federal agents at their farm in Jordan, Justice Township, Montana. It was the first time the Freemen had been able to call from the compound without getting jammed.
When the call came, the so-called Freemen "standoff " with the feds was in its 60th day. The story was being poorly covered by the media -- so poorly covered in fact that Patriots had reason to be convinced that there was federal manipulation and control of the media in place. What the "standoff" was apparently really all about was that the Freemen, who, to their way of thinking , have legally severed all contracts with the federal government, seek protection under the common law which they believe takes precedence over federal law. Under common law, the Freemen maintain, among other things, the FBI has no right to operate in the State of Montana.
There are other points of common law which might create a powerful motive for the Freemen's side of the story to get suppressed -- points of law which would make the Federal Reserve Act and the National Security Act illegal and unconstitutional. These and other points of common law have made for an ever-widening gap between the federal government and Freemen whose stand represents a growing number of individuals who have severed their individual ties with federal authority to claim human rights provided under common law since the Magna Carta and before.
Shortly before the program was aired ( at 8 p.m. M.S.T) the computer service, America On Line, carried the following report from REUTER
"...the FBI said Thursday it set up equipment to sever power to the remote Montana ranch were the group is holed up.
"The activity came a few days after talks broke down and the mediator, Colorado state Sen. Charles Duke, flew home, saying "the time for negotiation is over."
"Agents trucked in generators late Wednesday, which would allow other farms in the region to receive electricity fi the Freemen were cut off. In Washington, Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick told reporters that FBI agents have not yet decided whether to cut off power. "Gorelick said the FBI remained interested in a peaceful resolution of the dispute and in settling the matter through negotiations, even though the latest round of talks collapsed. The Freemen have refused to talk directly with the FBI.
"We are keeping all lawful options open," Gorelick said. A woman, identified by local residents as Janet Clark, wife of Freeman Edwin Clark, was driven to the compound by two FBI agents. She was believed to be delivering medicine to a teen-age boy on the ranch.
"Activity was otherwise quiet.
"State Sen. Duke, who has links to the right-wing Patriot movement, suggested that authorities make life a little more difficult on the ranch, which is believed to be heavily armed.
"Moving in the generators appeared to be the first step, although federal authorities have been cautious since the standoff began March 25 when two Freemen leaders were arrested. " The FBI, criticized for its handling of previous confrontations with militant groups, has 100 agents ringing the ranch.
"The two leaders and several others among the 20 or so Freemen on the ranch are accused of taking part in a financial scheme to defraud businesses and public agencies of more than $1.8 million, stealing television news equipment and threatening a federal judge.
"The Freemen do not recognize government authority, refuse to pay taxes and hold white supremacist views."
Many have said that this is an example of biased reportage.
A photo on America On Line showed three large semi-trucks carrying what was supposed to be electrical generating equipment moving toward the Freemen farm in Justice Township.
W.H. Bowart, author of Operation Mind Control was being interviewed by John Bryant, the moderator of the call-in talk show. As their conversation approached the kind of Psyops used against the captive people at Waco, Bryant took a call to discover that Russell Landers was calling from the surrounded Freeman ranch for the first time. The exchange lasted for almost one half hour, with Landers and Rod Skurdal speaking in calm, even tones. They cited case law, offering examples of their side of the argument against the federal government in a lawyerly fashion, even-tempered and correct.
After Landers identified himself as the caller, Bryant asked how everybody was at the ranch.
Russell Landers: Everybody's perfectly all right.
John Bryant: Well, a lot of people are concerned about you, even though you've been deamonized royally out here.
Russ: Well, we expected that. When you can't win it straight up and down, you have to go the other way, I guess. That seems to be the way they play the game.
John: Senator Charles Duke was just there and he is a man that was well respected -- or is well respected -- in Colorado. And some of the statements he made... and apparently he is very frustrated and what can you tell us about the negotiations. Do you think there's a chance of continuation.
Russ: Well, first of all... there's never been any problem with them, with the exception with the fact that they are not negotiations. They are talks to resolve the matter lawfully.
John: ... right... thank you...
Russ: ... and the problem that we're facing here is the FBI and anyone that has come in to talk, first of all don't understand the law and second of all, have no intention of living by the law. And, for example, the FBI, in order to deal with any issue in good faith would have to present a written delegation of authority signed by the president.
That's not something I dreamt up. That's the only way you'll know that they're in good faith. And it's already been decided in the case of California Bankers Association vs. Shultz...
Furthermore, Treasury Decision 95-A specifically states that any agency that purports to represent the United States has to have such a certified delegation of authority or they have no authority.
In the absence of any authority. I can't imagine where any of us would benefit from talking to someone who had no authority to enter into any type of negotiations.
John: Russell, the biggest complaint of Charles Duke.... He was on the show the first hour, seven till eight mountain time, which is not on short wave yet, but he said that there were demands made... he took them out and the FBI agreed to them... he brought them back and then the people that were involved there, um... went back on their word...
Russ: Absolutely not. On the contrary, the demands that were made were outside of the law. And they used the negotiating skills that they had to manipulate a couple of us at the gate. And they almost got us to act outside of the law.
Frankly, the law provides some very important protections for people who are pending extradition, and they were demanding the extradition of a man here who has no charges against him, and who has every right to be wherever he wants to be. But there were some very nasty allegations being made. He was being purported to be a child molester and etc. There is no evidence here of that and there has been no due process of law to establish that fact. And there's been no due process that would warrant an extradition in that case.
We simply came back with our responsibility to live within the law and demanded that if these allegations were in fact well founded they should proceed with the legal avenues necessary for extradition, and hearing would be heard here of the proper paperwork were presented. John: Can you talk about what happened during the negotiations or talks there the last five days or so?
Russ: Yes. We came back to the point we've had since the very beginning. That point is we have presented them with a proposal. We have presented the law... the decisions that have already been made by the Supreme Court of The United States of America.... As to the conduct of the Federal Courts and as to the conduct of parties in these types of situations... and we have told the F's and anyone else who has come in... that if they can produce the evidence that all of their actions thus far are specifically in compliance with the law, every man woman and child at Justice Township will come out. It's not a problem with the law.
John: Senator Duke mentioned, too, there were children and, of course, there's stress on the safety of the children... and it was his personal thing to try to get them out and that ... I believe, one of the Wards' daughters was a 13 year-old, married to... or paired off a 40 year-old man by her mother, and in any case, what do you have to say about all that?
Russ: It's a lot of deamonizing and their using these children as a front.
John: We've seen that before with Waco... (click) ... Oops, are we still connected?
Apparently not. Apparently that was the end of our conversation... Oh... Pretty wild stuff.... if we get a call back... we may get a call back.... uh.... we'll give it a try.... that lasted about five minutes...
This is the experience they've had locally too, where they were able to call out....( music begins ) Oops, we'll be back after this break....
After commercials, Bryant resumed:
John: Well, we're back, Walter and I. Mr. Landers is not. Maybe he'll be able to call back.
Walter Bowart: Let's hope so. That was interesting.
John: No kidding.
Walter: Now, who's Landers? He's a lawyer?
John: No, he is in the Justice Township, west of Jordan, Montana. He is inside the township. This is the first folks... They've had a call out on... well, two nights ago to their friends and family... they've apparently kept a mobile or cellular phone, I'm not sure whether it's the old style technology or a cell phone... and they used it for the first time on Tuesday night... looks like we've got a call coming in now, so maybe we... I knew this would happen... They've got just a few minutes before it's cut off... put the caller on.... here we go... hello, Russell?
Russ: Yeah.
John: Oh, you're back, good...
Russ: Yeah. We got cut off there.
John: We sure did. Hey, take this any direction you want to and if I think of a pertinent question, I'll ask....
Russ: That sounds fine. In fact, this whole ploy about the children is all a big hoax. We're not dealing with a compound here, the only danger that's being presented to the people of Justice Township, men, women or children -- is the threat from the outside.
Right now we're living with a threat of loss of power. That is a frivolous move on their part because frankly we have more than adequate supplies and knowledge to remain on the ranch for the next several years without power. So, that's really a silly ploy.
But I do want to return to senator Charlie Duke.
We were extremely disappointed for quite some time. My wife and I, all over this country, supported his Tenth Amendment Resolution, we promoted it heavily. We promoted him as a individual who was standing for Americans and their rights. And we were sadly disappointed with his performance at Montana. In fact, his performance was just the opposite. He seemed very corporate, very corporate minded. His closing words to Rodney Skurdal as we presented him with the law and a simple demand that they comply with the law in order to show good faith and continue... his response was, "To hell with due process of law..."
John: He attributed that statement to the situation with the two young girls in the custody fight.
Russ: Yes. And you've taken a very good point there. The law is the law one-hundred percent of the time. And the emotions of the parties never overshadow the necessity to stand on the law. The people that he is purporting to go around due process of law on are entitled to their
defense of the law one-hundred percent of the time. And sometimes, our emotions would dictate that we would do something other than what the law would dictate, but frankly, everyone is entitled to their due process. And it was a summary and an expression of his entire demeanor here as he met with us here. He was to come here and act as an intermediary carrying our response to the FBI and vice versa. And, in fact, he failed to do so on every count. In fact his whole demeanor here was one of coming in and representing the FBI as opposed to representing us and carrying our message to them.
He agreed to meet with us, with Gene Schroder, with Walker Todd, and Nord Davis. For some reason Mr. Duke took it upon himself to come up here and do this all alone...
John: He apparently was in contact with Gene Schroder through the time over the phone... Russ: Well, he is making a lot of misstatements in public because we've talked with Mr. Davis and he basically sidestepped these other gentlemen and apparently had an agenda that he couldn't live with their presence when he came here. And certainly his agenda was not that of a mediator as he was invited by us.
John: I talked to Dr. Schroder tonight and he had not talked to Senator Duke since he had gotten back.
Russ: One of the things Mr. Davis presented to us is the fact that Mr. Duke is a former Arkansas resident and that he recently gave testimony to Congress about the Whitewater incident on behalf of the FBI. And in fact that testimony was, it appears now, plotted with lies and untruth....
John: Russell,? We've got a bottom of the hour break now that can't be avoided. Can you give us a call back in three minutes? Russ: I certainly can do that.
John: Okay. Thank you. .. You're tuned to the American Freedom Network, the John Bryant Show, we've got Russell Landers calling in from Justice Township in Jordan, Montana, and we've got Walter Bowart with us....
(Cut to Commercials.)
John: Welcome back. You're tuned to the John Bryant show, the American Freedom Network, with Walter Bowart tonight on Operation Mind Control, and we have had a phone call out of Justice Township. Hopefully we'll get a call back here in just a minute...
That was one break that we couldn't skip. It's built into the system and I can't work the computer... so.... uh... Walter?
Walter: Yeah John? That's very interesting. Justice Township, now does that mean he's on the site of the ranch?
John: He is.
Walter: So, he's inside. He sounds like a very level headed man... and he speaks very well. He sounds like a lawyer... actually... to say "misspeak" instead of "lie" and things like that...
John:... and they've been painted to be bumpkins.
Walter: ..oh.. yeah... that's... this is a great education for me, I'll tell you that.
John: ... it is, and it's right down your line...
Walter: Can we put this on the Internet?
John: Fine with me....
Walter: Okay. I wonder of any other news media will pick this up. This is a first, isn't it?
John: Yes it is. It is the first.
Walter: You're making history here...
John: My friends up there... Freeman on the outside with their families who I've been in contact with, they seem to be wonderful people. They've been on the show.
I just want people to see both sides of this thing because the media is just reeking with mind control... Walter... that's true. It's just propaganda. It's totally controlled and slanted. The coverage on this story is pathetic....
John: It just slapped me in the face the other day with the statements were being made after the break-off of the talks... and I just... I couldn't .. it just wouldn't compute. I just thought, there's something awry here.... and he's back... Hello Russell?
Russ: Hi. How ya doin'
John: We've got Walter Bowart on the show with you tonight who has written Operation Mind Control. Russ: Right.
John: This man has studied this for 25 years intensely. And it's appropriate that you're both....
Russ: He's obviously familiar with California vs. Hooker.
Walter: Yeah. You're very well educated and I'm impressed by what you're saying. This news has got to get out to the country...
Russ: Absolutely... Absolutely. America is on the line right now. And, you know, it's really unfortunate that a lot of side issues are used to divert people's attention from what's really happening here in this situation and across the country right?
John: Talk about the bottom line issues. I understand it's the nature of the currency, which is in question and the nature of the instruments that were used, and due process... is that pretty much it?
Russ: Yeah. The situation here is... the issue here is not the purported warrants and charges against the people here at Justice Township. In fact, Charlie Duke was quoted as saying that," every one here is guilty and needs to be prosecuted."
Wait a minute! I thought that we had a basis in law that we're innocent until proven guilty. And something that they do not want to deal with here, is that the courts today are not the courts of the people. They are not the judicial branch of the government. The judicial branch of government was vested in the people. And the court is the people and it's not these administrative courts of the bankruptcy that are being used to purport that they're delivering justice. In fact they're merely an extension of the executive branch of the government.
John: Stewart Waterhouse left there. Is that correct? And they promised him one thing and he got another?
Russ: Absolutely. We haven't been able to verify this today, but it's being verified and, I suspect, he's still incarcerated... Purportedly earlier in these talks he had no charges and he could leave any time he wanted to. In fact that has some bearing on the situation with the children they keep bringing up...
First of all, the children and parents have always been free to go. They came to this area, they came to the ranch, they wanted to live here, they choose to do that today. They've chosen to do that in the past and they continue to choose to do that because they don't feel safe anywhere else, frankly...
And uh... what you get down to here... is like, you know, there in Colorado, my wife and I have been accused of a number of things, but the fact of the matter is the case has already been adjudicated by the court. The court in Colorado has been noted of the acquittal and of the civil damages that were awarded. And that case is now res judicada. Right out here in the Tenth Circuit the court has recognized in a number of cases, it's being recognized all over the country. But we've still got these administrative tribunals attempting to run their Star Chambers and divert themselves from due process in an effort to cover up the truth and stop the people from presenting the truth to other people... It's that simple....
John: I certainly hope your full story gets out here. It's very difficult in sound bites to do it. There's an allegation too... Talk about you idea of what consists of a jury...
Russ: First of all, a jury of our peers as American Sovereigns would have to be other men of free character. And in fact, I'd like to introduce Rod Skurdal, because he has a very good handle on the jury, and I think he could present a better idea... more specifically... of what a juror has to be and how these presents courts are preventing the public from getting that.... Here's Rod Skurdal...
John:Hello Rod, welcome. You're on short-wave at 2.390 out of Nashville. And this is the American Freedom Network. We're broadcasting out of Johnstown, just north of Denver. I'm really glad to have you on.... We asked a question Rod, about the jury, about the nature of the jury that's right in your eyes.
Rod: A common law jury is 12 men who know the law and keep it well. Basically it goes back to Chapter 45 of the Magna Carta.
John: Was that adopted then into the Constitution?
Rod: Our Revised Codes of 1947 here in Montana starts off with the Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence, Constitution... and so forth, right on down the line to the Constitution of Montana... And it is part of the wording of the Constitution basically... it is adopted... our common law goes right back to the Magna Carta and if you take our common law back to its origin it goes right back to the Bible....
Basically anything you cite out of the Constitution, you can take it back to the Bible.... It's not something that we just thought of, it's already been established by the word of Almighty God.
John: Excuse me for a second. We're going to skip this next break. So, as long as you guys can stay on, you're welcome. We won't have this interruption with advertising this time.... So, continue... so what comprises a jury.
Rod: The common law is very consistent: " twelve men who know the law and keep it well." Chapter 45 of the Magna Carta. Okay this is freemen characters, basically your neighbors who know you, know your character, you're standing within the community and so forth. It is not twelve strangers that judge you.
John: I can see where that would work better, because, if your neighbor had something... if you did something that was a crime... your neighbor would certainly want to deal with it more than anyone else. Rod: Correct.
John: Talk about the nature... there was an argument... a position brought up today in a show, and a friend that actually called in that talked about if you dabbled in the UCC instruments, then that removed you from the common law. Is there connection back to the common law.
Rod: Yes. 103.6 out of Anderson, that says a statute cannot be read to preclude a common law action.
John: Very interesting.
Rod: So, every goes right back to the common law because the UCC cannot give you remedies, so therefore you step out of UCC's and go back to common law that gives you remedy. That's why everything is done under UCC 1-103, odd interpretation, coercion, so forth, where you go back to UCC 1-105 under "Conflict of Laws" therefore the rights go back to Common Law.
Walter: Can I ask a question, John?
John: Go right ahead.
Walter: So, what this confrontation is really all about is common law versus federal law?
John: Yeah. Well, and the nature of the currency in this country, just like we were talking about earlier....
Rod: It goes a little bit deeper than that. It's substantially... There's only three jurisdictions granted by the Constitution: One is Common law, the next one is Equity, and the third one is Admiralty where there is a mixture of public law for maritime and equity too. Now all these charges against everyone here are under Admiralty because... they like uh... go to your Title 18 or Title 27 or Title 26 of the United States Code... everything is based on public law, right?
John: Right.
Rod: Anyway, from there, there's a contract. Once you sign that application to get a Social Security application card, a driver's license, a marriage license or anything, that's a quasi contract. where you wave all your constitutional rights and now you're bound by the letter of the law of the contract which holds up any and all quasi contracts one title into another. Once you sign a quasi contract you've waved all your inalienable rights. Now you're bound by the letter of the law of the contract to specific performance. Such as a driver's license it has you say, "I agree to uphold the speed limit."
John: Talk about the influence on the currency. I don't honor it with the term money.
Rod: Credit. It's credit.
John: Talk about what your actions are doing there. What the Freeman's actions... what Leroy's actions.... are you a threat to the system?
Rod: Basically yeah. The nation's in debt to me right now. I'm one of the largest bankers in the nation right now... based on law... and I can take it right back into Biblical law... because even though we talk about gold and silver .... God also said we throw the gold and silver into the streets right? So, what's left? That's credit. It's all civilly correct and constitutionally correct....
John: I was just going to ask about the liens..
Rod: The best way to explain those is like a traffic ticket. Okay, you look at a traffic ticket. You've got a white copy, a blue, pink , green and yellow copy underneath it. Right?
John: Right.
Rod: Okay. The white copy is turned in to the clerk of the court. Basically you never see that again. You go in there and you fight that case and you win it, you never see that white copy --"case dismissed" do you? Or, if you go in there and you pay a $25 fine, you never see that white copy "paid in full." What they do is they take that white copy, a negotiable instrument, and turn it into... as an account receivable, therefore there is an unknown lien placed against you besides the fine or whatever, and they roll it in the banking system.
The same thing. Only on a traffic ticket you have ten days to answer the traffic ticket. Same way with your UCC. If you fail to answer within ten days, you're in default. They are a common law judgment and they are as good as gold....
John: Now, can that be corrected later if someone is not subject to the lien. In other words do they have beyond ten days to go back and correct that?
Rod: You go into a common law court and have that adjudicated there....
John: Okay, so the people who have liens on them could get them removed if they could answer the charges.
Rod: Right. but the thing is the way we write... okay, say you're a public official or a public hireling... okay.... no one here in Montana has an official bond filed with an oath of office, so what we do is write these up as a declaration: "I, Rodney Skurdal, being a duly elected County Sheriff of such-and-such county, did lawfully apply for the office and upon taking my oath of office I knowingly, willingly and intentionally disregard to file my oath of office because I was broke and could not do this and I could not buy insurance and can not go to county officials because that would be misappropriations of public funds, and blablabla....." I write it up as a situation to where he knowingly did this, contrary to his statute limits and his oath of office...
John: And the credit instruments are based on these liens, is that correct?
Rod: Underneath the full faith and credit of the United States,... Everyone in the national government has taken an oath of office on or the judgment of the several states, right?
John: Right.
Rod: Okay, when you look at the word " states" you gotta go to Texas versus White, 7 Wallace ,700-743 which states that the state is a people and not the created form of government. So, we the people are the state, in fact. And if we're going to honor the judgments from a state then, underneath the full faith and credit, it's their duty to pay it. They have no choice in the matter.
John: Oh. What else can we do out here? Is there anything....?
Rod: The main thing is that we want a Grand Jury to where we can present our full story and evidence under due process of law... if they're going to throw away due process of law, they've thrown away everything... We have a right to present out evidence, our exculpatory evidence, and be granted immunity to and from the Grand Jury, until we present everything.... John: What would it take from the FBI... what kind of guarantees..... Can you envision what it would take if they promised you a Grand Jury?
Rod: First off, you've got to realize that the FBI is not a government agency. And I can't cite the court cases right now....
John: We'll accept that for now...
Rod: Anyway they have to have a delegation of authority .... and they have to be registered to do business here in Montana, which they're not under 30-13, 215 and 216... just like the United States is not registered to do business here in Montana... I got a certificate of nonexistence from the Secretary of State, stating that the United States is not registered to do business here. So, the thing is....
John: I know that's alien to a lot of people....
Walter: Ask him what are in those vans, John?
Rod: Any corporation has to be registered when they do any business her in Montana or any of the states. You got to remember, all your statutes in our constitution are basically uniform, which means they are under Admiralty jurisdiction. That's one of the requirements of Admiralty jurisdiction is that all the statutes be uniform from state to state.
John: Rod, what would it take to get things corrected there? What kind of circumstances. Like a guarantee... what kind of signatures or whatever?
Rod: Okay. What we want is full immunity for everyone to and from the Grand Jury where we can testify and present our own evidence and everything to show that these statutes not only don't apply to us, but have never applied to anyone....
John: Okay. What to and from the grand jury...
Rod: Immunity... full immunity with the release of the people who've been kidnapped already so that they can also prepare their evidence... and the thing is, a Grand Jury would have to be involved...
John: Okay... Would you need signatures from officials? What sort of guarantees would you need here?
Rod: I'd like to see it in black and white, but they won't... I doubt if there's anyone out there that will actually do it.
John: Okay Rod, we've got a break now that we can't skip now. If you can stay with us, please do it. We've got a two minute break and then we're just about to the end of the show. We'll have four minutes after this two minutes...
Rod: I'll let you talk to Russell for a while here...
John: Okay We'll be back in two minutes. You're tuned to the American Freedom Network. This is the John Bryant Show. We've got Walter Bowart and we've got Rod Skurdal and Russell Landers with us out of Justice Township.
(Cut to Commercial.)
John: Welcome back. Are we still on with the Justice Township?>
Russ: Hey! We certainly are! John: Right on! That's great. And who's with us now?
Russ: This is Russ.
John: Hi Russ. Okay. What do you see would be necessary that would bring things to a conclusion that is acceptable here with a Grand Jury. Russ: First of all the FBI or anyone who purported to represent the United States would have to present their written delegation of authority. Once they did that, they would be in compliance with the law as far as their requirements to meet with us on a good faith basis. Then of course from the very beginning, we have presented the FBI, the United States Attorney, etc. with the 19 pages and points of law which reference the decisions already made with regard to ingress upon us by the ah... these pages reference those elements of law that have already been decided with reference to that ingress..... If they can show specifically that they are in compliance with every one of their actions, uh, that would end this thing peacefully at that point...
John: That document... could that be made available?
Russ: Oh yeah. Absolutely. The only problem I would have would be in getting it to you. But that has already been presented to the FBI, it has been presented to a number of members of the media, and it can be presented to someone again, and in fact, provided your freedom and liberty weren't ingressed upon, someone from your station or someone from this type of media is more than welcome to come here and get this information....
The public has to be aware that everything they've heard has been presented by the other side, because they will not let us produce any evidence... they will not let us produce any kind of information out of Justice Township whatsoever other than what they want to design their presentation with...
And we'll certainly get it out if that's at all possible...
John: Well, we're in communication with people in Billings.... and we've just got about a minute and thirty seconds.... You're welcome to contact us here, if something has got to get out, as long as you can...
Russ: Okay.
John: And anything that we can do, we'll certainly make an attempt to do.
Russ: This challenge should be put before the public in every way. You know the public needs to be asking the questions, "What is the FBI and everyone hiding? Why don't they want to let the people of Justice Township present the evidence and get the evidence out?
John: Do you see the two issues as Due Process( of Law )and the nature of the currency?
Russ: Absolutely. They're still attempting to hide this fraud of the Federal Reserve and everything that ties into that with the UCC.
John: You've taken on the whole beast.
Russ: Absolutely. Well, we haven't really. You know, God is our maker and he's standing behind us 100 percent.
John: It sure makes for a whole different approach, that's for sure. We certainly wish you the best. Like I said, anytime, anything we can attempt to do here, I'd certainly entertain it. Thank you for coming on. We need to keep the word getting out and, if you can communicate with any of those people, Kevin or Randy, they can always get ahold of us.
Russ: And we appreciate this, and the American people need to be looking at this in the light of their own freedom.
The American Freedom Network broadcasts shortwave programs Monday through Friday from 11 a.m. to 12 noon and from 2 to 3 p.m. Mountain Time on 9.475. Then it switches to 7.435 and broadcasts from 3 to 7 p.m. Mountain Time. From 8 to 10 p.m. Mountain Time it broadcasts on 2.350. Tapes of this program can be ordered from American Freedom Network at P.O. Box 430, Johnstown, Colorado 80534, or by calling toll free to: 1-800-205-6245.
Spelling of names was provided by John Bryant.
---------------------------------------------------
Read original article here: http://www.iahushua.com/T-L-J/innerview.html
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. 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.
Nullification of Obama's "Death Care Bill"
How do we get rid of the Unconstitutional
"Death Care" monster without a war?
See the comments section below this video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPDRrj0sPKE
"Death Care" monster without a war?
See the comments section below this video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPDRrj0sPKE
Militia Probe Included Undercover FBI Agent
You have probably heard of the raids and arrests over the weekend.
You need to read the comments section of this article to get a perspective.
http://republicbroadcasting.org/?p=7714
I have no comments on this, but read it and draw your own conclusions.
You need to read the comments section of this article to get a perspective.
http://republicbroadcasting.org/?p=7714
I have no comments on this, but read it and draw your own conclusions.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Ron Paul: The “Right” to Healthcare is Based on Theft and Coercion
Healthcare and Economic Realities
by Ron Paul
With passage of last week’s bill, the American people are now the unhappy recipients of Washington’s disastrous prescription for healthcare “reform.” Congressional leaders relied on highly dubious budget predictions, faulty market assumptions, and outright fantasy to convince a slim majority that this major expansion of government somehow will reduce federal spending. This legislation is just the next step towards universal, single payer healthcare, which many see as a human right. Of course, this “right” must be produced by the labor of other people, meaning theft and coercion by government is necessary to produce and distribute it.
Those who understand Austrian economic theory know that this new model of healthcare will cause major problems down the road, as it has in every nation that ignores economic realities. The more government involves itself in medicine, the worse healthcare will get: quality of care will diminish as the system struggles to contain rising costs, while shortages and long waiting times for treatment will become more and more commonplace.
Consider what would happen if car insurance worked the way health insurance does. What if it was determined that gasoline was a right, and should be covered by your car insurance policy? Perhaps every gas station would have to hire a small army of bureaucrats to file reimbursement claims to insurance companies for every tank of gas sold! What would that kind of system do to the costs of running a gas station? How would that affect the prices of both gasoline and car insurance? Yet this is exactly the type of system Congress is now expanding in health insurance. In a free market system, health insurance would serve as true insurance against serious injuries or illness, not as a convoluted system of third party payments for routine doctor visits and every minor illness.
While proponents of this reform continue to defy all logic and reason by claiming it will save money, I worry about cataclysmic economic events. Already investors are more reluctant to buy US Treasuries, fearing that the healthcare bill, along with other spending, will cause government debt to explode to default levels. I had the opportunity last week to address my concerns with both Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, especially about the potential for the coming serious inflation. I am not optimistic that these important decision makers truly understand what is coming, why it is coming, and how best to deal with it.
The Federal Reserve finds itself in an unprecedented and unenviable position. To keep up with government spending and corporate irresponsibility, it has increased the monetary base by nearly $1.5 trillion since September of 2008. Excess bank reserves remain at historically high levels, and the Fed’s balance sheet has ballooned to over $2 trillion. If the Fed pulls this excess liquidity out of the system, it risks collapsing banks that rely on the newly created money. However, if the Fed fails to pull this excess liquidity out of the system we risk tipping into hyperinflation. This is where central banking inevitably has led us.
The idea that a handful of brilliant minds can somehow steer an economy is fatal to economic growth and stability. The Soviet Union’s economy failed because of its central economic planning, and the U.S. economy will suffer the same fate if we continue down the path toward more centralized control. We need to bring back sound money and free markets – yes, even in healthcare – if we hope to soften the economic blows coming our way.
Ron Paul
More: http://www.ronpaul.com/
Monatanans oppose Attorney General's decision.
The Helena Independent Record is running a poll asking Montanan's if they agree with Steve Bullock's decision to not join the lawsuit against the "death care bill".
The poll is running 84% that they don't agree.
Vote here: http://www2.helenair.com/poll/
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. 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.
The poll is running 84% that they don't agree.
Vote here: http://www2.helenair.com/poll/
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. 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, March 25, 2010
Montana's Attorney General cops out on the health care suit.
Here is the thread by email from the Montana Attorney General Steve Bullock when I challenged him on his refusal to join the lawsuit. Read it and judge for yourself if he deserves to continue to be in the office.
From: Paul Stramer at Eurekadsl.net [mailto:pstramer@eurekadsl.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 10:02 AM
To: Contact DOJ
Subject: change your mind
You need to change your mind and file against the health care unconstitutional so called law.
It's null and void from it's inception. We will throw you out next time you run if you don't.
Paul Stramer
Eureka Montana
-------------------------------------------
From: Paulsen, Linda
To: 'Paul Stramer at Eurekadsl.net'
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 8:34 AM
Subject: RE: change your mind
March 25, 2010
Thanks for expressing your concerns about the constitutionality of the recent health care legislation.
We have reviewed the legal arguments that are being used to challenge the legislation, and have concluded that it is highly unlikely it will be found unconstitutional. This is a conclusion that is shared by the vast majority of legal scholars, liberal and conservative, who have reviewed the issues. As a result, Montana will not be joining the lawsuit that several state Attorneys General have brought.
People can certainly disagree over whether the health care legislation is good policy. That does not mean, however, that the State of Montana should spend taxpayer money to file a lawsuit that we do not believe has legal merit. Like the Republican and Democratic Montana Attorneys General who served before me, I try hard to keep my personal political beliefs out of legal decisions.
My staff and I are busy and working hard to protect the interests of Montanans. The courts will have the opportunity to judge the merits of the challenges to the health care legislation without the involvement of Montana. If we are correct and the courts reject the challenges, we will have saved valuable Montana taxpayer resources. In the unlikely event that the Courts declare the legislation unconstitutional, their decision will apply to all Americans - including all Montanans - even though we weren't a party to the lawsuit.
Sincerely,
STEVE BULLOCK
Attorney General
------------------------------------------------
March 25th 2010,
Mr. Bullock
What a cop out. You just don't want to rock the boat or put your career on the line.
But by not joining the lawsuit you are putting your career on the line.
The people of Montana don't want this.
You are NOT "working hard to protect the interests of Montanans". Since when are you Democrats so interested in saving money?
If enough states join in, IT WILL BE UNENFORCEABLE whether it's declared unconstitutional or not.
If ever there was a worthy cause for the Montana Attorney General to use to stand up for the people in Montana it's this one.
You are just proving yourself to be another puke politician rather than the statesman you should be.
Not only are you violating your oath, but you have now shown us who you really are, a radical leftist socialist who goes along with the destruction of our country. Are you one of those who believe like our last president that the US Constitution is just another "goddamn piece of paper"????
Yes this is strong language, and yes I am threatening you with removal from office. You will be removed from office over this issue if you don't immediately change your stand and stand up for the people of Montana.
And that goes for everyone that helps you. The tide is already turning in the political scene, and this issue is the turning point.
It doesn't matter how many times you say you are trying to keep your personal politics out of your office. That doesn't work.
You are responsible. It's how your ACTIONS are perceived that counts. What you do with your office is what counts. We value what you do much more than what you say.
And this stinks.
You need to take your oath seriously, I am publishing your response and this letter on my blog.
Thank you for responding so quickly.
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 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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. 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.
From: Paul Stramer at Eurekadsl.net [mailto:pstramer@eurekadsl.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 10:02 AM
To: Contact DOJ
Subject: change your mind
You need to change your mind and file against the health care unconstitutional so called law.
It's null and void from it's inception. We will throw you out next time you run if you don't.
Paul Stramer
Eureka Montana
-------------------------------------------
From: Paulsen, Linda
To: 'Paul Stramer at Eurekadsl.net'
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 8:34 AM
Subject: RE: change your mind
March 25, 2010
Thanks for expressing your concerns about the constitutionality of the recent health care legislation.
We have reviewed the legal arguments that are being used to challenge the legislation, and have concluded that it is highly unlikely it will be found unconstitutional. This is a conclusion that is shared by the vast majority of legal scholars, liberal and conservative, who have reviewed the issues. As a result, Montana will not be joining the lawsuit that several state Attorneys General have brought.
People can certainly disagree over whether the health care legislation is good policy. That does not mean, however, that the State of Montana should spend taxpayer money to file a lawsuit that we do not believe has legal merit. Like the Republican and Democratic Montana Attorneys General who served before me, I try hard to keep my personal political beliefs out of legal decisions.
My staff and I are busy and working hard to protect the interests of Montanans. The courts will have the opportunity to judge the merits of the challenges to the health care legislation without the involvement of Montana. If we are correct and the courts reject the challenges, we will have saved valuable Montana taxpayer resources. In the unlikely event that the Courts declare the legislation unconstitutional, their decision will apply to all Americans - including all Montanans - even though we weren't a party to the lawsuit.
Sincerely,
STEVE BULLOCK
Attorney General
------------------------------------------------
March 25th 2010,
Mr. Bullock
What a cop out. You just don't want to rock the boat or put your career on the line.
But by not joining the lawsuit you are putting your career on the line.
The people of Montana don't want this.
You are NOT "working hard to protect the interests of Montanans". Since when are you Democrats so interested in saving money?
If enough states join in, IT WILL BE UNENFORCEABLE whether it's declared unconstitutional or not.
If ever there was a worthy cause for the Montana Attorney General to use to stand up for the people in Montana it's this one.
You are just proving yourself to be another puke politician rather than the statesman you should be.
Not only are you violating your oath, but you have now shown us who you really are, a radical leftist socialist who goes along with the destruction of our country. Are you one of those who believe like our last president that the US Constitution is just another "goddamn piece of paper"????
Yes this is strong language, and yes I am threatening you with removal from office. You will be removed from office over this issue if you don't immediately change your stand and stand up for the people of Montana.
And that goes for everyone that helps you. The tide is already turning in the political scene, and this issue is the turning point.
It doesn't matter how many times you say you are trying to keep your personal politics out of your office. That doesn't work.
You are responsible. It's how your ACTIONS are perceived that counts. What you do with your office is what counts. We value what you do much more than what you say.
And this stinks.
You need to take your oath seriously, I am publishing your response and this letter on my blog.
Thank you for responding so quickly.
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 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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. 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.
Obamacare, Medical Marijuana and Nullification
Freedom in One Word
By Michael Boldin
Published 03/25/10 on Campaign for Liberty
Now that Heath Care legislation has passed, the obvious question for opponents is this: Now What? My answer is best summed up with just one word:
Marijuana.
No, I don't mean that you should go out and smoke away your anger and frustration. Instead, you should feel empowered. The best way to explain this is by telling the story of a disabled mother from Northern California.
ANGEL'S STORY
Angel Raich has been permanently disabled since 1995. She has an inoperable brain tumor, a seizure disorder and other serious medical conditions. In 1997, her doctor felt that marijuana would be an effective medication.
Angel used homegrown marijuana, and she and her physician claim that it's helped significantly. You may not agree with Angel's choice, but it's one made in accordance with California state law, which allows for such use. The federal government, however, has not shown much respect for state laws in recent decades, and chose to take action. After DEA agents seized and destroyed all six of her marijuana plants, she sued to stop them from doing so again.
The suit went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in Gonzales v Raich, Angel lost. The 2005 ruling made clear that the federal government did not recognize state laws authorizing the use of marijuana -- in any situation.
THE COMMERCE CLAUSE
The court ruled that control over a plant grown and consumed on one's own property was authorized under the "Interstate Commerce Clause" of the Constitution. Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution empowers Congress to "regulate. . . commerce among the several states." It has never been amended.
Read more: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php
By Michael Boldin
Published 03/25/10 on Campaign for Liberty
Now that Heath Care legislation has passed, the obvious question for opponents is this: Now What? My answer is best summed up with just one word:
Marijuana.
No, I don't mean that you should go out and smoke away your anger and frustration. Instead, you should feel empowered. The best way to explain this is by telling the story of a disabled mother from Northern California.
ANGEL'S STORY
Angel Raich has been permanently disabled since 1995. She has an inoperable brain tumor, a seizure disorder and other serious medical conditions. In 1997, her doctor felt that marijuana would be an effective medication.
Angel used homegrown marijuana, and she and her physician claim that it's helped significantly. You may not agree with Angel's choice, but it's one made in accordance with California state law, which allows for such use. The federal government, however, has not shown much respect for state laws in recent decades, and chose to take action. After DEA agents seized and destroyed all six of her marijuana plants, she sued to stop them from doing so again.
The suit went all the way to the Supreme Court, and in Gonzales v Raich, Angel lost. The 2005 ruling made clear that the federal government did not recognize state laws authorizing the use of marijuana -- in any situation.
THE COMMERCE CLAUSE
The court ruled that control over a plant grown and consumed on one's own property was authorized under the "Interstate Commerce Clause" of the Constitution. Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution empowers Congress to "regulate. . . commerce among the several states." It has never been amended.
Read more: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php
13 STATES SUE THE FEDS OVER THE HEALTH CARE CRIME
Violating the US Constitution is a crime.
Read the lawsuit filed by 13 States right here.
http://www.lincolncountywatch.org/Thomma-healthcarelawsuit.pdf
The issues are clear and the answer is unavoidable. The only question is if the judges are going to also violate their oath and refuse to hear this, just as the Attorney General of Montana, Steve Bullock refuses to join the lawsuit with the false excuse that the lawsuit "has no merit". Who the H--- does he think he is?
Steve you need to change your mind and ignore the pressure from Baucus et al, and join this suit or we will throw you out, maybe BEFORE you run again.
Steve, you have nothing to lose by ignoring the pressure from Baucus not to join the suit, because if you don't join it we are going to throw you out anyway.
We mean business on this. There has never been a more clear violation of the commerce clause or the direct tax clause, and if you don't recognize that you have no business in the office you hold.
The classic definition of ignorance is "not knowing what is required by one's station in life".
If the shoe fits wear it.
You can't fool us this time with bull like that statement that "it has no merit". We know better and we have your number.
http://media.mcclatchydc.com/static/pdf/Thomma-healthcarelawsuit.pdf
Paul Stramer
Eureka Montana
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. 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.
Read the lawsuit filed by 13 States right here.
http://www.lincolncountywatch.org/Thomma-healthcarelawsuit.pdf
The issues are clear and the answer is unavoidable. The only question is if the judges are going to also violate their oath and refuse to hear this, just as the Attorney General of Montana, Steve Bullock refuses to join the lawsuit with the false excuse that the lawsuit "has no merit". Who the H--- does he think he is?
Steve you need to change your mind and ignore the pressure from Baucus et al, and join this suit or we will throw you out, maybe BEFORE you run again.
Steve, you have nothing to lose by ignoring the pressure from Baucus not to join the suit, because if you don't join it we are going to throw you out anyway.
We mean business on this. There has never been a more clear violation of the commerce clause or the direct tax clause, and if you don't recognize that you have no business in the office you hold.
The classic definition of ignorance is "not knowing what is required by one's station in life".
If the shoe fits wear it.
You can't fool us this time with bull like that statement that "it has no merit". We know better and we have your number.
http://media.mcclatchydc.com/static/pdf/Thomma-healthcarelawsuit.pdf
Paul Stramer
Eureka Montana
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. 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.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
DATES THAT DESTROYED AMERICA
By Chuck Baldwin
March 24, 2010
NewsWithViews.com
Passage of the so-called "health care reform" bill in the House of Representatives this past Sunday, March 21 (I won't even address the inferred unconstitutionality of Congress doing business on the Lord's Day. See Article. I. Section. 7. Paragraph. 2.) drove yet another stake into the heart of America. For all intents and purposes, it is the health of the United States that is in dire need of healing. In fact, the US has been on extended life-support for decades. With its condition being rendered critical, and absent major surgery, its days are numbered. The passage of this bill only serves to further weaken an already frail Constitution. In fact, this one may prove to be the fatal blow. Lady Liberty may never recover.
The decision by Congress to socialize medicine in the US ranks among the most draconian, most egregious, most horrific actions ever taken by the central government in Washington, D.C. This bill rocks the principles of liberty and constitutional government to the core. It changes fundamental foundations; it repudiates historical principle. Oh! The same flag may fly on our flagpoles, the same monuments may grace our landscape, and the same National Anthem may be sung during our public ceremonies, but it is not the same America. The Congress of the United States has now officially turned America into a socialist state.
On March 23, 2010, President Barack Obama signed the health care bill into law, and as such, this date--along with March 21--joins a list of dates that have each inflicted unconstitutional, socialistic, and sometimes even tyrannical action against the States United and have, therefore, contributed to the destruction of a free America.
See all the dates that destroyed America here:
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin577.htm
March 24, 2010
NewsWithViews.com
Passage of the so-called "health care reform" bill in the House of Representatives this past Sunday, March 21 (I won't even address the inferred unconstitutionality of Congress doing business on the Lord's Day. See Article. I. Section. 7. Paragraph. 2.) drove yet another stake into the heart of America. For all intents and purposes, it is the health of the United States that is in dire need of healing. In fact, the US has been on extended life-support for decades. With its condition being rendered critical, and absent major surgery, its days are numbered. The passage of this bill only serves to further weaken an already frail Constitution. In fact, this one may prove to be the fatal blow. Lady Liberty may never recover.
The decision by Congress to socialize medicine in the US ranks among the most draconian, most egregious, most horrific actions ever taken by the central government in Washington, D.C. This bill rocks the principles of liberty and constitutional government to the core. It changes fundamental foundations; it repudiates historical principle. Oh! The same flag may fly on our flagpoles, the same monuments may grace our landscape, and the same National Anthem may be sung during our public ceremonies, but it is not the same America. The Congress of the United States has now officially turned America into a socialist state.
On March 23, 2010, President Barack Obama signed the health care bill into law, and as such, this date--along with March 21--joins a list of dates that have each inflicted unconstitutional, socialistic, and sometimes even tyrannical action against the States United and have, therefore, contributed to the destruction of a free America.
See all the dates that destroyed America here:
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin577.htm
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
THE PROBLEM and THE PEACEMAKERS SOLUTION
The Problem is Corruption!
Here is the Solution! THE PEACEMAKERS are at work!
They are working for you! They are working for Liberty, and Freedom.
http://www.lincolncountywatch.org Watch in Windows Media Format
Or you can watch each part of this video one at a time by clicking this link.
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=EB5ECAFB26E11088
Or go to each video when you have time here:
Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9zldMZujyw
Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYBaykrTLtY
Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsJHz1JGxDg
Part 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiKPrM47ldc
Part 5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sttWX2pmArU
Part 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyKk6tAlrow
Part 7 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6ydcxvM6e8
Part 8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFmUPemI-iU
Part 9 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pa2oysInIj4
Part10 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JC1CcSj5qo
Part11 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PPbPv0bemw
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. 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.
Here is the Solution! THE PEACEMAKERS are at work!
They are working for you! They are working for Liberty, and Freedom.
http://www.lincolncountywatch.org Watch in Windows Media Format
Or you can watch each part of this video one at a time by clicking this link.
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=EB5ECAFB26E11088
Or go to each video when you have time here:
Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9zldMZujyw
Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYBaykrTLtY
Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsJHz1JGxDg
Part 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiKPrM47ldc
Part 5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sttWX2pmArU
Part 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyKk6tAlrow
Part 7 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6ydcxvM6e8
Part 8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFmUPemI-iU
Part 9 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pa2oysInIj4
Part10 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JC1CcSj5qo
Part11 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PPbPv0bemw
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. 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, March 19, 2010
Exposing the Southern Poverty Law Center... Now It's Personal!
The Montana Human Right Network takes it's cue from this radical leftist organization. PS
By Debbie Morgan, staff writer, www.TakeBackWashington.com,
Edited by Gary Franchi www.RestoreTheRepublic.com
"March 18, 2010 - After recovering from the "news" that the new film Camp FEMA is somehow racist, I thought it might behoove me to take another look. Maybe the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) knows something I don't about "racism." After exploring their interesting site, it has become even more clear that they are not on the side of We-the-People. In fact, they may have been founded on some very sound principles, but their present-day agenda is profoundly more nefarious.
Indulge me for a minute please...my family has fought racism throughout our generations. My grandfather preached equality for ALL in churches in the South. How easy do you think that was to do? My parents did not allow us to use derogatory words, even going so far as to not allow us to use a person's skin color to describe them. I am still scarred from a battle I had at a United Methodist church in Louisiana, as a seventeen-year old girl, trying to fight racism and politics. Did the Southern Poverty Law Center bother to ask me any questions? No, they didn't. Believe me, growing up in the South in the '60's and '70's, I know a thing or two about racism!
Many news outlets use the Southern Poverty Law Center to comment on racial issues. There are several; CBS, FoxNews, CNN, the New York Times, Newsweek, the Washington Post, the Associated Press, and more. A group that focuses on hate, The SPLC issues quarterly "reports" about hate...groups, actions, people. In its Spring 2010 Intelligence Report, they claim to have identified 512 "Patriot" groups in the US. (What is wrong with a "Patriot" group?) In their defense, the SPLC does say that being categorized as a "patriot group" does not mean these "groups" advocate violence or hate. Why, then, list them at all? Are they trying to put something in the public's mind about these "groups?"
The SPLC, the MIAC Report and the Federal government have perverted the true definition of patriot. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a "patriot" as someone "who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests." The SPLC says that these groups "define themselves" as "opposed to the 'New World Order,' engage in groundless conspiracy theorizing, or advocate or adhere to extreme antigovernment doctrines."
Shouldn't Americans be opposed to a "New World Order"? A "New World Order" would be against our sovereignty as both a free country and free individuals. It has also been presented time and again by US officials, as well as foreign leaders, including Gordon Brown of England, who alluded to, and outright commented on, the New World Order many times. In 1991, Former President Bush, Sr. gave a speech in which we would be "forging for ourselves and others a New World Order," where, oddly enough, he says the "rule of law" will govern. He further talks about the United Nations. The United States has a great "Rule of Law," the Constitution, yet our elected officials ignore, circumvent, and issue "Presidential Signing Statements" to avoid that law, and have, since the beginning of our country. This idea is not as far-fetched as the SPLC would have you believe and the SPLC would have you look the other way while they defame the true defenders of the "Rule of Law".
Engaged in "groundless conspiracy theories" is the SPLC's opinion and lacks the journalistic integrity to be included in an "intelligence report". Plus, exactly to which "conspiracy theories" do they refer...or are they referring to ANY questioning of the Federal Government as conspiracy theories? I hate to point it out, but in the United States, we are governed by the consent of the people, so the people are supposed to be in charge, and it is our duty to question what we 1) think does not add up, 2) do not understand, and 3) anything else that threatens our inherent rights granted to us by our Creator.
Of course, one of the "theories" to which they refer has to be the questions surrounding September 11, 2001. There are legitimate questions surrounding that particular event, and if the government wanted to shut up these particular "conspiracies," all they would have to do is provide answers. In a BBC production from several years ago, Former Florida Senator Bob Graham (who co-chaired the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11) said, "I can just state that within 9/11 there are too many secrets, that is information that has not been made available to the public for which there are specific, tangible, credible answers and that withholding of those secrets has eroded public confidence in their government as it relates to their own security." Graham was/is right, of course, as the numbers of those who have honest questions about 9/11 are still growing.
Another "groundless conspiracy theory" is that surrounding the afore-mentioned New World Order. At the Spring 2009 G20 Summit, England's Brown pushed the global community into a New World Order. The discussion of our financial system coming under the regulation of the International Monetary Fund had Dick Morris and Sean Hannity realizing that one of the concerns of the "New World Order conspiracy theorists" was actually happening. In affect, these "theorists" had been "right" all along.
Yet another "conspiracy theory" was "Gulf War Illness." Since the first Gulf War, veterans have been extremely ill and the government steadily denied "gulf war syndrome," favoring to diagnosing these extremely ill men and women with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). But the government could no longer deny the existence of "Gulf War Illness," almost 20 years later, when a federal report published in December 2008 acknowledged that there was, indeed, an actual illness related to the 1990/91 Gulf War. From an article revealing the report: "The 452-page report states that 'scientific evidence leaves no question that Gulf War illness is a real condition with real causes and serious consequences for affected veterans.'"
Let's move on to the SPLC's claim of "antigovernment" extremism. One of the things that those so-called "antigovernment" agendas have in common is their love for country, love for freedom and love for our "Founding Documents," which includes the Constitution. One must wonder how the SPLC can possibly think these groups are antigovernment when they hold so dearly to the Constitution! What these groups are against is an over-reaching, power-grabbing, intrusive government, a government that will not uphold the "rule of law!" What these groups are looking for is the government as defined in the Constitution of the United States of America. What is so wrong with that? It's what our Founding Fathers fought and died for! Isn't that the government that spurred the forging and forming of our country?
It is worth mentioning that maybe the SPLC got its definition of "antigovernment" or better yet, "patriot" from the government itself. In 2001, a pamphlet originating from the Phoenix FBI Office shocked people everywhere. This pamphlet tries to make us think that those who "defend the US Constitution" or those who "make numerous references to the US Constitution" are potentially dangerous. Even so, can't an organization that is looked to for information make an educated decision about who could be dangerous without relying on an out-of-control government?
This brings me to what happened last summer. While the SPLC was investigating organizations like the Oath Keepers, the Liberty Restoration Project and We are Change, or people like Alex Jones, Gary Franchi and others, why wasn't the SPLC "investigating" the FBI? Did they forget about radio host Hal Turner? Turner was a white supremacist that happened to be an asset to the federal government. When is the SPLC planning to investigate Federal government? If there is one "Hal Turner," there must be others. Who are they? How many more "Hal Turners" are inciting hate and violence at the Government's direction? Does the SPLC know the answer? Are they "investigating" that?
Recent comments made by Dr Heidi Beirich lead me to now ask, is the SPLC going to investigate one of their own? Dr. Beirich took the "opportunity" to call Gary Franchi "insane" and Alex Jones a "lunatic" and accuse Jones of "inspiring" the murder of three police officers in Pittsburgh last year. In response, Franchi says, "It is irrational to assume that because you are unhappy with the government you encourage people to become violent towards individual government employees." When did questioning the government make you racist or a promoter of hate, and, now, someone who inspires murder? AND, what did Turner inspire, BACKED BY the government?
What is SPLC's real agenda? They obviously do not promote freedom of speech unless you agree with their rhetoric. Maybe I will borrow words from readers of SPLC's Spring article slamming Camp FEMA and Colorado's KBDI: "How does wanting a new 9/11 investigation equate to hate speech?" or "What does Camp FEMA have to do with hate? It actually exposes hate" or "Those who feel this is hatred must also feel our founding fathers were bigots" or better yet, if you "don't like programs that edge towards the truth keep listening to your elected officials and the mainstream media!" (Remembering that the approval rating for both is EXTREMELY low!) People should demand that the Southern Poverty Law Center come clean with their new agenda of pushing hate, because it is clear the SPLC has strayed far from the sound principles of their founding."
---------------------------------------------------------
Full Story Here:
http://restoretherepublic.com/top-stories/exposing-the-southern-poverty-law-center-now-its-personal.html
Original SPLC story here:
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/spring/active-patriot-groups-in-the-united-s
I am proud to say that Lincoln County Watch made this list. When you are telling the truth it's powerful, and when you are really getting something done you will incure the wrath of the radical left. Thanks SPLC for spreading our name around the country. As PT Barnum said "Any publicity is good publicity"
Don't stop now. Truth always goes through three stages.
1. It's denied and disbelieved.
2. It's violently opposed
3. It's finally accepted for what it is.
Thanks again SPLC. We are in good company with the other organizations you listed, such as "Celebrating Conservatism, The John Birch Society, The Constitution Party, Militia of Montana, Oath Keepers, We Are Change, and We the People, and that is just in Montana.
It must be frustrating for you to see all the people rising up and throwing off your propaganda. As more and more truth comes out you will lose your influence just like the newspapers that are going broke across American because they won't tell the truth.
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2010 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.
By Debbie Morgan, staff writer, www.TakeBackWashington.com,
Edited by Gary Franchi www.RestoreTheRepublic.com
"March 18, 2010 - After recovering from the "news" that the new film Camp FEMA is somehow racist, I thought it might behoove me to take another look. Maybe the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) knows something I don't about "racism." After exploring their interesting site, it has become even more clear that they are not on the side of We-the-People. In fact, they may have been founded on some very sound principles, but their present-day agenda is profoundly more nefarious.
Indulge me for a minute please...my family has fought racism throughout our generations. My grandfather preached equality for ALL in churches in the South. How easy do you think that was to do? My parents did not allow us to use derogatory words, even going so far as to not allow us to use a person's skin color to describe them. I am still scarred from a battle I had at a United Methodist church in Louisiana, as a seventeen-year old girl, trying to fight racism and politics. Did the Southern Poverty Law Center bother to ask me any questions? No, they didn't. Believe me, growing up in the South in the '60's and '70's, I know a thing or two about racism!
Many news outlets use the Southern Poverty Law Center to comment on racial issues. There are several; CBS, FoxNews, CNN, the New York Times, Newsweek, the Washington Post, the Associated Press, and more. A group that focuses on hate, The SPLC issues quarterly "reports" about hate...groups, actions, people. In its Spring 2010 Intelligence Report, they claim to have identified 512 "Patriot" groups in the US. (What is wrong with a "Patriot" group?) In their defense, the SPLC does say that being categorized as a "patriot group" does not mean these "groups" advocate violence or hate. Why, then, list them at all? Are they trying to put something in the public's mind about these "groups?"
The SPLC, the MIAC Report and the Federal government have perverted the true definition of patriot. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a "patriot" as someone "who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests." The SPLC says that these groups "define themselves" as "opposed to the 'New World Order,' engage in groundless conspiracy theorizing, or advocate or adhere to extreme antigovernment doctrines."
Shouldn't Americans be opposed to a "New World Order"? A "New World Order" would be against our sovereignty as both a free country and free individuals. It has also been presented time and again by US officials, as well as foreign leaders, including Gordon Brown of England, who alluded to, and outright commented on, the New World Order many times. In 1991, Former President Bush, Sr. gave a speech in which we would be "forging for ourselves and others a New World Order," where, oddly enough, he says the "rule of law" will govern. He further talks about the United Nations. The United States has a great "Rule of Law," the Constitution, yet our elected officials ignore, circumvent, and issue "Presidential Signing Statements" to avoid that law, and have, since the beginning of our country. This idea is not as far-fetched as the SPLC would have you believe and the SPLC would have you look the other way while they defame the true defenders of the "Rule of Law".
Engaged in "groundless conspiracy theories" is the SPLC's opinion and lacks the journalistic integrity to be included in an "intelligence report". Plus, exactly to which "conspiracy theories" do they refer...or are they referring to ANY questioning of the Federal Government as conspiracy theories? I hate to point it out, but in the United States, we are governed by the consent of the people, so the people are supposed to be in charge, and it is our duty to question what we 1) think does not add up, 2) do not understand, and 3) anything else that threatens our inherent rights granted to us by our Creator.
Of course, one of the "theories" to which they refer has to be the questions surrounding September 11, 2001. There are legitimate questions surrounding that particular event, and if the government wanted to shut up these particular "conspiracies," all they would have to do is provide answers. In a BBC production from several years ago, Former Florida Senator Bob Graham (who co-chaired the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11) said, "I can just state that within 9/11 there are too many secrets, that is information that has not been made available to the public for which there are specific, tangible, credible answers and that withholding of those secrets has eroded public confidence in their government as it relates to their own security." Graham was/is right, of course, as the numbers of those who have honest questions about 9/11 are still growing.
Another "groundless conspiracy theory" is that surrounding the afore-mentioned New World Order. At the Spring 2009 G20 Summit, England's Brown pushed the global community into a New World Order. The discussion of our financial system coming under the regulation of the International Monetary Fund had Dick Morris and Sean Hannity realizing that one of the concerns of the "New World Order conspiracy theorists" was actually happening. In affect, these "theorists" had been "right" all along.
Yet another "conspiracy theory" was "Gulf War Illness." Since the first Gulf War, veterans have been extremely ill and the government steadily denied "gulf war syndrome," favoring to diagnosing these extremely ill men and women with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). But the government could no longer deny the existence of "Gulf War Illness," almost 20 years later, when a federal report published in December 2008 acknowledged that there was, indeed, an actual illness related to the 1990/91 Gulf War. From an article revealing the report: "The 452-page report states that 'scientific evidence leaves no question that Gulf War illness is a real condition with real causes and serious consequences for affected veterans.'"
Let's move on to the SPLC's claim of "antigovernment" extremism. One of the things that those so-called "antigovernment" agendas have in common is their love for country, love for freedom and love for our "Founding Documents," which includes the Constitution. One must wonder how the SPLC can possibly think these groups are antigovernment when they hold so dearly to the Constitution! What these groups are against is an over-reaching, power-grabbing, intrusive government, a government that will not uphold the "rule of law!" What these groups are looking for is the government as defined in the Constitution of the United States of America. What is so wrong with that? It's what our Founding Fathers fought and died for! Isn't that the government that spurred the forging and forming of our country?
It is worth mentioning that maybe the SPLC got its definition of "antigovernment" or better yet, "patriot" from the government itself. In 2001, a pamphlet originating from the Phoenix FBI Office shocked people everywhere. This pamphlet tries to make us think that those who "defend the US Constitution" or those who "make numerous references to the US Constitution" are potentially dangerous. Even so, can't an organization that is looked to for information make an educated decision about who could be dangerous without relying on an out-of-control government?
This brings me to what happened last summer. While the SPLC was investigating organizations like the Oath Keepers, the Liberty Restoration Project and We are Change, or people like Alex Jones, Gary Franchi and others, why wasn't the SPLC "investigating" the FBI? Did they forget about radio host Hal Turner? Turner was a white supremacist that happened to be an asset to the federal government. When is the SPLC planning to investigate Federal government? If there is one "Hal Turner," there must be others. Who are they? How many more "Hal Turners" are inciting hate and violence at the Government's direction? Does the SPLC know the answer? Are they "investigating" that?
Recent comments made by Dr Heidi Beirich lead me to now ask, is the SPLC going to investigate one of their own? Dr. Beirich took the "opportunity" to call Gary Franchi "insane" and Alex Jones a "lunatic" and accuse Jones of "inspiring" the murder of three police officers in Pittsburgh last year. In response, Franchi says, "It is irrational to assume that because you are unhappy with the government you encourage people to become violent towards individual government employees." When did questioning the government make you racist or a promoter of hate, and, now, someone who inspires murder? AND, what did Turner inspire, BACKED BY the government?
What is SPLC's real agenda? They obviously do not promote freedom of speech unless you agree with their rhetoric. Maybe I will borrow words from readers of SPLC's Spring article slamming Camp FEMA and Colorado's KBDI: "How does wanting a new 9/11 investigation equate to hate speech?" or "What does Camp FEMA have to do with hate? It actually exposes hate" or "Those who feel this is hatred must also feel our founding fathers were bigots" or better yet, if you "don't like programs that edge towards the truth keep listening to your elected officials and the mainstream media!" (Remembering that the approval rating for both is EXTREMELY low!) People should demand that the Southern Poverty Law Center come clean with their new agenda of pushing hate, because it is clear the SPLC has strayed far from the sound principles of their founding."
---------------------------------------------------------
Full Story Here:
http://restoretherepublic.com/top-stories/exposing-the-southern-poverty-law-center-now-its-personal.html
Original SPLC story here:
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/spring/active-patriot-groups-in-the-united-s
I am proud to say that Lincoln County Watch made this list. When you are telling the truth it's powerful, and when you are really getting something done you will incure the wrath of the radical left. Thanks SPLC for spreading our name around the country. As PT Barnum said "Any publicity is good publicity"
Don't stop now. Truth always goes through three stages.
1. It's denied and disbelieved.
2. It's violently opposed
3. It's finally accepted for what it is.
Thanks again SPLC. We are in good company with the other organizations you listed, such as "Celebrating Conservatism, The John Birch Society, The Constitution Party, Militia of Montana, Oath Keepers, We Are Change, and We the People, and that is just in Montana.
It must be frustrating for you to see all the people rising up and throwing off your propaganda. As more and more truth comes out you will lose your influence just like the newspapers that are going broke across American because they won't tell the truth.
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2010 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.
Resistance - Tim Baldwin nails it!
"Please do not misunderstand me. By resisting, I do not mean helping to get a Republic elected into a federal position. I do not mean simply sending out some email to their constituents to inform them of their position on the matter. I do not mean, encouraging people to “go out and vote.” I do not mean sending a letter of correspondence from a state house representative to the U.S. President.
By resisting, I mean the state representatives passing laws, the governor entering orders and the courts rendering judgments, preventing the federal government from attempting to tax their people for that federal power and from implementing their procedures upon the people of that state. I mean actually and physically resisting the federal government from occupying the state’s territory to execute those unlawful actions. I mean publically calling to its defense the other states in the union who stand firm upon the same fundamental principles of self-government, federalism, constitutional government and freedom to resist these ghastly attempts to reduce the people to despotism. I mean county sheriff’s arresting federal agents who are attempting to execute and enforce unlawful and unconstitutional procedures and laws upon the citizens of their counties. I mean actively and meaningfully using the sovereign powers retained under the tenth amendment of the U.S. Constitution and under the Laws of Nations."
http://www.newswithviews.com/Timothy/baldwin127.htm
"If you think that the federal government is going to be stopped by voting into office the next batch of corruptors and encroachers, you are dead wrong. This belief has been proven fruitless at least since the early 1900s. The fact that people in the U.S. still believe that this method is the only effectual and available method of preserving freedom confounds me. "
By resisting, I mean the state representatives passing laws, the governor entering orders and the courts rendering judgments, preventing the federal government from attempting to tax their people for that federal power and from implementing their procedures upon the people of that state. I mean actually and physically resisting the federal government from occupying the state’s territory to execute those unlawful actions. I mean publically calling to its defense the other states in the union who stand firm upon the same fundamental principles of self-government, federalism, constitutional government and freedom to resist these ghastly attempts to reduce the people to despotism. I mean county sheriff’s arresting federal agents who are attempting to execute and enforce unlawful and unconstitutional procedures and laws upon the citizens of their counties. I mean actively and meaningfully using the sovereign powers retained under the tenth amendment of the U.S. Constitution and under the Laws of Nations."
http://www.newswithviews.com/Timothy/baldwin127.htm
"If you think that the federal government is going to be stopped by voting into office the next batch of corruptors and encroachers, you are dead wrong. This belief has been proven fruitless at least since the early 1900s. The fact that people in the U.S. still believe that this method is the only effectual and available method of preserving freedom confounds me. "
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Timeline for the New World Order?
Many ask me what the timeline is for Hyperinflation, the solidification of the police state, the New World Order stranglehold on America, and Martial Law.
I don't know if Lindsey Williams has this right, and there are many critics of his work, but I know this. He has been right about the price of oil and what it was going to do.
So my purpose here is to let you watch and make up your own mind. This is just for your information. I am not saying you should believe everything he says. But I will say that it seems to fit with what I have been thinking about the time line, and Lindsey has been right many times before now. Notice what he says about Gold and Silver.
My opinion is that America has backed up the timeline of the elite before several times by telling the truth.
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2010 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.
I don't know if Lindsey Williams has this right, and there are many critics of his work, but I know this. He has been right about the price of oil and what it was going to do.
So my purpose here is to let you watch and make up your own mind. This is just for your information. I am not saying you should believe everything he says. But I will say that it seems to fit with what I have been thinking about the time line, and Lindsey has been right many times before now. Notice what he says about Gold and Silver.
My opinion is that America has backed up the timeline of the elite before several times by telling the truth.
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2010 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.
Obama wants your DNA - SPLC Exposed - IRS pinching pennies
Does Obama want your DNA? How far will the IRS go to extract the peoples blood? What the heck is Chris Dodd thinking about the FED's monetary power? Gary answers those questions and welcomes SpyChips co-author and RFID expert Katherine Albrecht to the show to discuss the latest in RFID and implantable human tracking technology? Full Katherine Albrecht interview:
http://realityreport.blip.tv/file/3354587/
http://blip.tv/file/3354323
Monday, March 15, 2010
The Missing 13th Amendment - "TITLES OF NOBILITY" AND "HONOR"
Corruption is old and entreched. This fraud was done durring the Civil War. You won't believe what you are about to discover, but it's absolutely true and documented. Just follow the links below the article and you will see that evil has been at work on our founding documents for a very long time.
David Dodge, Researcher
Alfred Adask, Editor
The "missing" 13th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:
If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them." [Emphasis added.}
http://www.w3f.com/patriots/13/13th-01.html
http://www.w3f.com/patriots/13/13th-02.html
http://www.w3f.com/patriots/13/13th-03.html
David Dodge, Researcher
Alfred Adask, Editor
The "missing" 13th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:
If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them." [Emphasis added.}
http://www.w3f.com/patriots/13/13th-01.html
http://www.w3f.com/patriots/13/13th-02.html
http://www.w3f.com/patriots/13/13th-03.html
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Iceland, the Mouse that Roared
| by Szandor Blestman On Silverbear Cafe |  |
I thought I heard something the other night. It was a distant sound, a low rumbling, a roar from some far off beast that had finally pronounced its presence. It woke me for a second, but it was so distant I felt no threat and simply rolled over and went back to sleep. The next morning I learned that Iceland was taking a stand. It was refusing to pay its British and Dutch debts. It is claiming the debts are a result of fraud, and it's right. They have made the offer to pay some years from now, if they can afford it at that time, and only as a percentage of their GDP. This offer has been, of course, declined by Iceland's creditor banks as they demand payment in the form of real assets.
The Icelanders have grown a pair, so to speak. They are doing something I wish Americans would have done, or will do in the future. They are standing up to the privately owned banks that seem to think they are above the law, that they can change the rules at their whim, and that they alone know what's best for the world, which of course happens to empower them and help their profits. I may not agree with all the politics of Iceland. It might not be the bastion of freedom one looking to get away from intrusive government might run to, but I do admire their stance against the banksters.
See this very informative and hard hitting article here:
http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/03.10/roared.html
Sunday Prayers for Patriots Luke 6, 17-23
At that time, Jesus coming down from the mountain, stood in a plain place, and the company of his disciples, and a very great multitude of people from all Judea and Jerusalem, and the sea coast both of Tyre and Sidon, Who were come to hear him, and to be healed of their diseases. And they that were troubled with unclean spirits, were cured. And all the multitude sought to touch him, for virtue went out from him, and healed all. And he, lifting up his eyes on his disciples, said: Blessed are ye poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.
Blessed are ye that hunger now: for you shall be filled. Blessed are ye that weep now: for you shall laugh. Blessed shall you be when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake. Be glad in that day and rejoice; for behold, your reward is great in heaven. For according to these things did their fathers to the prophets.
Blessed are ye that hunger now: for you shall be filled. Blessed are ye that weep now: for you shall laugh. Blessed shall you be when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake. Be glad in that day and rejoice; for behold, your reward is great in heaven. For according to these things did their fathers to the prophets.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Don't Tread On Me - The new movie coming soon.
From the makers of "Camp FEMA"
Get on the notification system to be one of the first to see it.
http://www.donttreadonmemovie.com/index.html
Get on the notification system to be one of the first to see it.
http://www.donttreadonmemovie.com/index.html
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
The RED AMENDMENT - How your freedom was STOLEN to benefit the world's elite!
How your liberty was subverted by fraud and deception, before you were born, and how the corrupt judicial system perpetuates the fraud, and sucks your livelyhood and heritage for their own profit.
Listen to the audio: http: http://www.lincolncountywatch.org/audios.html Look for The Red Amendment and pick your format.
Read the documentation: http://www.lincolncountywatch.org/us_citizen_examined.pdf
You have contracts with the corporate United States de facto government which you were tricked into participating in. You have no freedoms under their judicial system, because you have unwittingly traded them for privileges and benefits which are man made. Did you ever sign under the penalties of perjury? Do you have a birth certificate? Did you ever read it? Do you have a drivers license? Did you trade your right to travel in for a privilege of driving?
How was this done?
It's all fraud. Did they have your permission? Well yes and no. On paper maybe, but we have all been told we have a Constitution that is supposed to guarantee our God given rights. That's what they tell you. That is a lie in practice. That is why you can't get justice in any court in the land. That is why they tell you that you have no standing.
The question you have to answer for yourself is this: Did you VOLUNTEER to give up your rights in favor of privileges and benefits, and what are you going to do about it?
If we once realize the fraud, what can we do to correct and remedy the problem? After 140 years of the fraud, how can it be corrected and fixed?
Are we going to continue to participate and associate with "criminals and insurgents" that have subverted and continue to subvert the Supreme Law of our land? We all have some decisions to make soon.
At what point does the "Rule of Law" become a liability because of the subversion of the law itself?
When these laws increase at the rate of 15,000 new "laws" per year are they really binding in God's eyes?
When does it become manditory to obey God's laws rather than human law that has been subverted by criminals in government and the judicial system? At what point does the old addage of "ignorance of the law is no excuse" become evil? How could anyone be required to keep up with all the so called "laws" (codes and statutes) since the beginning, let alone the 15,000 new codes and statutes put on the books each and every year just in this country? How, in God's Holy Name, can perfectly law abiding people be made into "criminals" at the stroke of a pen? The fact is they can't, and God knows it.
In the end there will be JUSTICE delivered by the perfect Judge, Jesus Christ, and all the corruption will be ended. So pick a side and live accordingly. When judges want you to worship them, refuse, or take a chance on offending the real and supreme judge!
For some solutions: http://www.lincolncountywatch.org/ Watch the videos!
From the Information furnished with the above video:
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. 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.
Listen to the audio: http: http://www.lincolncountywatch.org/audios.html Look for The Red Amendment and pick your format.
Read the documentation: http://www.lincolncountywatch.org/us_citizen_examined.pdf
You have contracts with the corporate United States de facto government which you were tricked into participating in. You have no freedoms under their judicial system, because you have unwittingly traded them for privileges and benefits which are man made. Did you ever sign under the penalties of perjury? Do you have a birth certificate? Did you ever read it? Do you have a drivers license? Did you trade your right to travel in for a privilege of driving?
How was this done?
It's all fraud. Did they have your permission? Well yes and no. On paper maybe, but we have all been told we have a Constitution that is supposed to guarantee our God given rights. That's what they tell you. That is a lie in practice. That is why you can't get justice in any court in the land. That is why they tell you that you have no standing.
The question you have to answer for yourself is this: Did you VOLUNTEER to give up your rights in favor of privileges and benefits, and what are you going to do about it?
If we once realize the fraud, what can we do to correct and remedy the problem? After 140 years of the fraud, how can it be corrected and fixed?
Are we going to continue to participate and associate with "criminals and insurgents" that have subverted and continue to subvert the Supreme Law of our land? We all have some decisions to make soon.
At what point does the "Rule of Law" become a liability because of the subversion of the law itself?
When these laws increase at the rate of 15,000 new "laws" per year are they really binding in God's eyes?
When does it become manditory to obey God's laws rather than human law that has been subverted by criminals in government and the judicial system? At what point does the old addage of "ignorance of the law is no excuse" become evil? How could anyone be required to keep up with all the so called "laws" (codes and statutes) since the beginning, let alone the 15,000 new codes and statutes put on the books each and every year just in this country? How, in God's Holy Name, can perfectly law abiding people be made into "criminals" at the stroke of a pen? The fact is they can't, and God knows it.
In the end there will be JUSTICE delivered by the perfect Judge, Jesus Christ, and all the corruption will be ended. So pick a side and live accordingly. When judges want you to worship them, refuse, or take a chance on offending the real and supreme judge!
For some solutions: http://www.lincolncountywatch.org/ Watch the videos!
From the Information furnished with the above video:
http://www.redamendment.net/home/
Prior to the alleged ratification of the 14th Amendment, there was no legal definition of a "citizen of the United States", as everyone had primary citizenship in one of the several states. The Constitution referred to the sovereign state citizen, and no one else. Those who went to Washington, D.C. or outside the several states were commonly called "citizens of the United States." In the Constitution for the United States, the term was used to identify state citizens who were eligible under the suffrage laws to hold office, and they were required under the Constitution to have primary allegiance to one of the several states.
Since that term was not specifically defined in the U.S. Constitution, Congress in 1868 took advantage of this term and utilized it in the so-called 14th Amendment to describe a NEW type of "citizen" whose primary allegiance was to the federal government, i.e. Washington, D.C. and not to one of the several states of the union. Thus, using the term as used in the U.S. Constitution to mislead and confuse the people as to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution.
Many people have mistaken the citizen as denominated in the 14th Amendment to mean the same one in the original constitution, this is in error. The "citizen of the united states" as used in the constitution is not the same as the citizen of the United States used after the 14th Amendment. So all the elected officials are NOT sitting in the office constitutionally, they are merely impostors created by the 14th Amendment. The current President Clinton, is a U.S. citizen, and therefore not the "citizen of the united states" defined in the Constitution for the United States, neither the federal senators nor any congressmen are seated constitutionally. These facts being true, then all the federal laws are invalid for want of constitutionality.
The 14th Amendment creates and defines citizenship of the United States. It had long been contended, and had been held by many learned authorities, and had never been judicially decided to the contrary, that there was no such thing as a citizen of the United States, except by first becoming a citizen of some state. United States v. Anthony (1874), 24 Fed. Cas. 829 (No. 14,459), 830.
We have in our political system a government of the United States and a government of each of the several states. Each one of these governments is distinct from the others, and each has citizens of its own who owe it allegiance, and whose rights, within its jurisdiction, it must protect. The same person may be at the same time a citizen of the United States and a citizen of a state, but his rights of citizenship under one of these governments will be different from those he has under the other. U. S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875).
In other words, you do not have to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a state citizen. This was held to be true by the Maryland Supreme Court in 1966 wherein the state:
Both before and after the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution, it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a citizen of his state. Crosse v. Bd. of Supvr,s of Elections, 221 A.2d. 431 (1966)
The federal government was never given any authority to encroach upon the private affairs of the citizens in the several states of the union, unless they were involved in import or export activity, neither were they given authority to reach a citizen of Germany living in Germany. In fact, the states could refuse to enforce any act of congress, that they felt was outside the intent of the granting of limited powers to the federal government. This is called interposition or nullification. Several state supreme courts have in the past refused to uphold federal laws within their states.
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. 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, March 8, 2010
Worms in the clothing of Wolves. Your life in danger?
The articles here describe serious and dangerous crimes perpetrated by people in power.
If you think ignorance is bliss you should not read the following, but if you want to be aware of a serious danger to your life or health you need to investigate this subject.
The people in charge of wolf re-introduction were warned this might happen. It has happened in Montana and the consequences are in progress. What will the outcome be? Only time will tell.
http://www.newswithviews.com/Stuter/stuter175.htm
http://www.newswithviews.com/Stuter/stuter176.htm
Wolves are much more dangerous than ever now that the Canadian Gray Wolf has been introduced into Montana by your all knowing government agents. Were you consulted before they did this? No.
Wolves carry disease and the Feds knew about it all along.
http://www.saveelk.com/wolf_042.htm
http://www.saveelk.com/index.html
http://www.mtssa.org/wolfdelist.phtml
63% of wolves tested in Montana carry Hydatid disease.
http://idahohuntingtoday.com/blog/index.php/2009/12/10/a-warning-to-outdoor-users-about-echinococcus-from-worms/
This disease is spread into Moose, Elk, and other animals, and humans can contract it also.
Let me ask you a question. Do you really trust the "experts" who say this disease does not represent a danger to you and your livestock? I don't.
Remember where they get their paycheck!
Since when did government agents or employees ever give you the truth about anything? How about JFK, or Pearl Harbor, or Waco, or Ruby Ridge, or Vietnam, or dozens of other events like 9/11 etc.
What makes you think this is any different?
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. 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.
If you think ignorance is bliss you should not read the following, but if you want to be aware of a serious danger to your life or health you need to investigate this subject.
The people in charge of wolf re-introduction were warned this might happen. It has happened in Montana and the consequences are in progress. What will the outcome be? Only time will tell.
http://www.newswithviews.com/Stuter/stuter175.htm
http://www.newswithviews.com/Stuter/stuter176.htm
Wolves are much more dangerous than ever now that the Canadian Gray Wolf has been introduced into Montana by your all knowing government agents. Were you consulted before they did this? No.
Wolves carry disease and the Feds knew about it all along.
http://www.saveelk.com/wolf_042.htm
http://www.saveelk.com/index.html
http://www.mtssa.org/wolfdelist.phtml
63% of wolves tested in Montana carry Hydatid disease.
http://idahohuntingtoday.com/blog/index.php/2009/12/10/a-warning-to-outdoor-users-about-echinococcus-from-worms/
This disease is spread into Moose, Elk, and other animals, and humans can contract it also.
Let me ask you a question. Do you really trust the "experts" who say this disease does not represent a danger to you and your livestock? I don't.
Remember where they get their paycheck!
Since when did government agents or employees ever give you the truth about anything? How about JFK, or Pearl Harbor, or Waco, or Ruby Ridge, or Vietnam, or dozens of other events like 9/11 etc.
What makes you think this is any different?
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 http://www.paulstramer.net/. 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.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Sunday Prayers for Patriots - 3rd Sunday of Lent
Rev. Fr. Leonard Goffine's
The Church's Year 1875
The Introit of this day's Mass, which begins with the word Oculi, is the prayer of a soul imploring deliverance from the snares of the devil:
INTROIT My eyes are ever towards the Lord: for he shall pluck my feet out of the snare: look thou upon me, and have mercy on me, for I am alone and poor. To thee, O Lord, have I lifted up my soul: in thee, O my God, I put my trust: let me not be ashamed. (Fs. XXIV.) Glory be to the Father, etc.
COLLECT We beseech Thee, Almighty God, regard the desires of the humble, and stretch forth the right hand of Thy majesty to be our defence. Through Jesus Christ, our Lord, etc.
EPISTLE (Ephes. V. 1-9.) Brethren, be ye followers of God, as most dear children; and walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath delivered himself for us, an oblation and a sacrifice to God, for an odor of sweetness. But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not so much as be named among you, as becometh saints; nor obscenity, nor foolish talking, nor scurrility, which is to no purpose; but rather giving of thanks: for know ye this, and understand, that no fornicator, nor unclean, nor covetous person, which is a serving of idols, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no man deceive you with vain words; for because of these things cometh the anger of God upon the children of unbelief. Be ye not therefore partakers with them. For you were heretofore darkness; but now light in the Lord. Walk, then, as children of the light: for the fruit of the light is in all goodness, and justice, and truth.
EXPLANATION The apostle requires us to imitate God, as good children imitate their father in well-doing and in well-wishing; besides he declares that all covetousness, fornication, all disgraceful talk and equivocal jokes should be banished from Christian meetings, even that such things should not be so much as mentioned among us; because these vices unfailingly deprive us of heaven. He admonishes us not to let ourselves be deceived by the seducing words of those who seek to make these vices appear small, nothing more than pardonable human weaknesses; those who speak thus are the children of darkness and of the devil, they bring down the wrath of God upon themselves, and all who assent to their words. A Christian, a child of light, that is, of faith, should regard as a sin that which faith and conscience tell him is such, and must live according to their precepts and not by false judgment of the wicked. Should any one seek to lead you away, ask yourself, my Christian soul, whether you would dare appear with such a deed before the judgment-seat of God. Listen to the voice of your conscience, and let it decide, whether that which you are expected to do is good or bad, lawful or unlawful.
ASPIRATION Place Thy fear, O God, before my mouth, that I may utter no vain, careless, much less improper and scandalous words, which may be the occasion of sin to my neighbor. Strengthen me, that I may not be deceived by flattering words, and become faithless to Thee.
GOSPEL (Luke XI. 14.-28.) At that time, Jesus was casting out a devil, and the same was dumb. And when he had cast out the devil, the dumb spoke, and the multitudes were in admiration at it. But some of them said: He casteth out devils by Beelzebub the prince of devils. And others tempting, asked of him a sign from heaven. But he seeing their thoughts, said to them: Every kingdom divided against itself shall be brought to desolation, and house upon house shall fall. And if Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? because you say, that through Beelzebub I cast out devils. Now if I cast out devils by Beelzebub, by whom do your children cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. But if I by the finger of God cast out devils, doubtless the kingdom of God is come upon you. When a strong man armed keepeth his court, those things which he possesseth are in peace; but if a stronger than he come upon him, and overcome him, he will take away all his armor wherein he trusted, and will distribute his spoils. He that is not with me, is against me; and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth. When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through places without water, seeking rest; and not finding, he saith, I will return into my house whence I came out: and when he is come, he findeth it swept and garnished. Then he goeth, and taketh with him seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and entering in they dwell there. And the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. And it came to pass, as he spoke these things, a certain woman from the crowd, lifting up her voice, said to him: Blessed is the womb that bore thee, and the paps that gave thee suck. But he said: Yea rather blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it.
Can a man be really possessed of a devil?
It is the doctrine of the Catholic Church that the evil spirit most perniciously influences man in a twofold manner: by enticing his soul to sin, and then influencing his body which he often entirely or partially possesses, manifesting himself by madness, convulsions, insanity, etc. Many texts of Scripture, and the writings of the Fathers speak of this possession. St. Cyprian writes: "We can expel the swarms of impure spirits, who for the ruin of the soul, enter into the bodies of men, and we can compel them to acknowledge their presence, by the force of powerful words." Possession takes place by the permission of God either for trial or as a punishment for sin committed, (I. Cor. V. 5.) and the Church from her Head, Jesus, who expelled so many devils, has received the power of casting them out as He did. (Mark XVI. 17.; Acts V. 16., VIII. 6. 7., XVI. 18. &c.) She however warns her ministers, the priests, who by their ordination have received the power to expel the evil spirits, to distinguish carefully between possession and natural sickness, that they may not be deceived, (Rit. ROM. §. 3. §. 5-10.) and the faithful should guard against looking upon every unusual, unhealthy appearance as an influence of Satan, and should give no ear to impostors, but in order not to be deceived, should turn to an experienced physician or to their pastor.
What is understood by a dumb devil?
The literal meaning of this is the evil enemy, who some times so torments those whom he possesses that they lose the power of speech; in a spiritual sense, we may understand it to mean the shame which the devil takes away from the sinner, when he commits the sin, but gives back again, as false shame, before confession, so that the sinner conceals the sin, and thereby falls deeper.
How does Christ still cast out dumb devils?
By His grace with which He inwardly enlightens the sinner, so that he becomes keenly aware that the sins which he has concealed in confession, will one day be known to the whole world, and thus encourages him to overcome his false shame. - "Be not ashamed to confess to one man," says St. Augustine, "that which you were not ashamed to do with one, perhaps, with many." Consider these words of the same saint: "Sincere confession subdues vice, conquers the evil one, shuts the door of hell, and opens the gates of paradise."
How did Christ prove, that He did not cast out devils by Beelzebub?
By showing that the kingdom of Satan could not stand, if one evil spirit were cast out by another; that they thus reproached their own sons who also cast out devils, and had not been accused of doing so by power from Beelzebub; by His own life and works which were in direct opposition to the devil, and by which the devil's works were destroyed. - There is no better defence against calumny than an innocent life, and those who are slandered, find no better consolation than the thought of Christ who, notwithstanding His sanctity and His miracles, was not secure against calumniation.
What is meant by the finger of God?
The power of God, by which Christ expelled the evil spirits, proved himself God, and the promised Redeemer.
Who is the strong man armed?
The evil one is so called, because he still retains the power and intellect of the angels, and, practiced by long experience, seeks in different ways to injure man if God permits.
How is the devil armed?
With the evil desires of men, with the perishable riches, honors, and pleasures of this world, with which he entices us to evil, deceives us, and casts us into eternal fire.
Who is the stronger one who took away the devil's armor?
Christ the Lord who came into this world that He might destroy the works and the kingdom of the devil, to expel the prince of darkness, (John XII. 31.) and to redeem us. from his power. "The devil," says St. Anthony, "is like a dragon caught by the Lord with the fishing-hook of the cross, tied with a halter like a beast of burden, chained like a fugitive slave, and his lips pierced through with a ring, so that he may not devour any of the faithful. Now he sighs, like a miserable sparrow, caught by Christ and turned to derision, and thrown under the feet of the Christians. He who flattered himself that he would possess the whole orbit of the earth, behold, he has to yield!"
Why does Christ say: He who is not with me, is against me?
These words were intended in the first place for the Pharisees who did not acknowledge Christ as the Messiah, would not fight with Him against Satan's power, but rather held the people back from reaching unity of faith and love of Christ. Like the Pharisees, all heretical teachers who, by their false doctrines, draw the faithful from communion with Christ and His Church, are similar to the devil, the father of heresy and lies. May all those, therefore, who think they can serve Christ and the world at the same time, consider that between truth and falsehood, between Christ and the world, there is no middle path; that Christ requires decision, either with Him, or against Him , either eternal happiness with Him, or without Him, everlasting misery.
Who are understood by the dry places through which the evil spirit wanders and finds no rest?
"The dry places without water," says St. Gregory, "are the hearts of the just, who by the force of penance have drained the dampness of carnal desires." In such places the evil -one indeed finds no rest, because there his malice finds no sympathy, and his wicked will no satisfaction.
Why does the evil spirit say: I will return into my house?
Because he is only contented there where he is welcomed and received: those who have purified their heart by confession, and driven Satan from it, but labor not to amend, again lose the grace of the Sacraments by sin, and thus void of virtue and grace, offer a beautiful and pleasant dwelling to the devil.
Why is it said: The last state becomes worse than the first?
Because a relapse generally draws more sins with it, and so it is said: the devil will return with seven other spirits more wicked than himself, by which may be understood the seven deadly sins, because after a relapse into sin conversion to God becomes more difficult, as a repeated return of the same sickness makes it harder to regain health; because by repetition sin easily becomes a habit and renders conversion almost impossible; because repeated relapses are followed by blindness of intellect, hardness of heart, and in the end eternal damnation.
Why did the woman lift up her voice?
This was by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost to shame the Pharisees who, blinded by pride, neither professed nor acknowledged the divinity of Christ, whilst this humble woman not only confessed Jesus as God, but praised her who carried Him, whom heaven and earth cannot contain. Consider the great dignity of the Blessed Virgin, Mother of the Son of God, and hear her praises from the holy Fathers. St. Cyril thus salutes her: "Praise to thee, Blessed Mother of God: for thou art virginity itself, the sceptre of the true faith!" and St. Chrysostom: "Hail, O Mother, the throne, the glory, the heaven of the Church!" St. Ephrem: "Hail, only hope of the Fathers, herald of the apostles, glory of the martyrs, joy of the saints, and crown of the virgins, because of thy vast glory, and inaccessible light!"
Why did Christ call those happy who hear the word of God and keep it?
Because, as has been already said, it is not enough for salvation to hear the word of God, but it must also be practiced. Because Mary, the tender Mother of Jesus, did this most perfectly, Christ terms her more happy in it, than in having conceived, borne, and nursed Him.
SUPPLICATION O Lord Jesus! true Light of the world, enlighten the eyes of my soul, that I may never be induced by the evil one to conceal a sin, through false shame, in the confessional, that on the day of general judgment my sins may not be published to the whole world. Strengthen me, O Jesus, that I may resist the arms of the devil by a penitent life, and especially by scorning the fear of man and worldly considerations, and guard against lapsing into sin, that I may not be lost, but through Thy merits maybe delivered from, all dangers and obtain heaven
The Church's Year 1875
The Introit of this day's Mass, which begins with the word Oculi, is the prayer of a soul imploring deliverance from the snares of the devil:
INTROIT My eyes are ever towards the Lord: for he shall pluck my feet out of the snare: look thou upon me, and have mercy on me, for I am alone and poor. To thee, O Lord, have I lifted up my soul: in thee, O my God, I put my trust: let me not be ashamed. (Fs. XXIV.) Glory be to the Father, etc.
COLLECT We beseech Thee, Almighty God, regard the desires of the humble, and stretch forth the right hand of Thy majesty to be our defence. Through Jesus Christ, our Lord, etc.
EPISTLE (Ephes. V. 1-9.) Brethren, be ye followers of God, as most dear children; and walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath delivered himself for us, an oblation and a sacrifice to God, for an odor of sweetness. But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not so much as be named among you, as becometh saints; nor obscenity, nor foolish talking, nor scurrility, which is to no purpose; but rather giving of thanks: for know ye this, and understand, that no fornicator, nor unclean, nor covetous person, which is a serving of idols, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no man deceive you with vain words; for because of these things cometh the anger of God upon the children of unbelief. Be ye not therefore partakers with them. For you were heretofore darkness; but now light in the Lord. Walk, then, as children of the light: for the fruit of the light is in all goodness, and justice, and truth.
EXPLANATION The apostle requires us to imitate God, as good children imitate their father in well-doing and in well-wishing; besides he declares that all covetousness, fornication, all disgraceful talk and equivocal jokes should be banished from Christian meetings, even that such things should not be so much as mentioned among us; because these vices unfailingly deprive us of heaven. He admonishes us not to let ourselves be deceived by the seducing words of those who seek to make these vices appear small, nothing more than pardonable human weaknesses; those who speak thus are the children of darkness and of the devil, they bring down the wrath of God upon themselves, and all who assent to their words. A Christian, a child of light, that is, of faith, should regard as a sin that which faith and conscience tell him is such, and must live according to their precepts and not by false judgment of the wicked. Should any one seek to lead you away, ask yourself, my Christian soul, whether you would dare appear with such a deed before the judgment-seat of God. Listen to the voice of your conscience, and let it decide, whether that which you are expected to do is good or bad, lawful or unlawful.
ASPIRATION Place Thy fear, O God, before my mouth, that I may utter no vain, careless, much less improper and scandalous words, which may be the occasion of sin to my neighbor. Strengthen me, that I may not be deceived by flattering words, and become faithless to Thee.
GOSPEL (Luke XI. 14.-28.) At that time, Jesus was casting out a devil, and the same was dumb. And when he had cast out the devil, the dumb spoke, and the multitudes were in admiration at it. But some of them said: He casteth out devils by Beelzebub the prince of devils. And others tempting, asked of him a sign from heaven. But he seeing their thoughts, said to them: Every kingdom divided against itself shall be brought to desolation, and house upon house shall fall. And if Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? because you say, that through Beelzebub I cast out devils. Now if I cast out devils by Beelzebub, by whom do your children cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. But if I by the finger of God cast out devils, doubtless the kingdom of God is come upon you. When a strong man armed keepeth his court, those things which he possesseth are in peace; but if a stronger than he come upon him, and overcome him, he will take away all his armor wherein he trusted, and will distribute his spoils. He that is not with me, is against me; and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth. When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through places without water, seeking rest; and not finding, he saith, I will return into my house whence I came out: and when he is come, he findeth it swept and garnished. Then he goeth, and taketh with him seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and entering in they dwell there. And the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. And it came to pass, as he spoke these things, a certain woman from the crowd, lifting up her voice, said to him: Blessed is the womb that bore thee, and the paps that gave thee suck. But he said: Yea rather blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it.
Can a man be really possessed of a devil?
It is the doctrine of the Catholic Church that the evil spirit most perniciously influences man in a twofold manner: by enticing his soul to sin, and then influencing his body which he often entirely or partially possesses, manifesting himself by madness, convulsions, insanity, etc. Many texts of Scripture, and the writings of the Fathers speak of this possession. St. Cyprian writes: "We can expel the swarms of impure spirits, who for the ruin of the soul, enter into the bodies of men, and we can compel them to acknowledge their presence, by the force of powerful words." Possession takes place by the permission of God either for trial or as a punishment for sin committed, (I. Cor. V. 5.) and the Church from her Head, Jesus, who expelled so many devils, has received the power of casting them out as He did. (Mark XVI. 17.; Acts V. 16., VIII. 6. 7., XVI. 18. &c.) She however warns her ministers, the priests, who by their ordination have received the power to expel the evil spirits, to distinguish carefully between possession and natural sickness, that they may not be deceived, (Rit. ROM. §. 3. §. 5-10.) and the faithful should guard against looking upon every unusual, unhealthy appearance as an influence of Satan, and should give no ear to impostors, but in order not to be deceived, should turn to an experienced physician or to their pastor.
What is understood by a dumb devil?
The literal meaning of this is the evil enemy, who some times so torments those whom he possesses that they lose the power of speech; in a spiritual sense, we may understand it to mean the shame which the devil takes away from the sinner, when he commits the sin, but gives back again, as false shame, before confession, so that the sinner conceals the sin, and thereby falls deeper.
How does Christ still cast out dumb devils?
By His grace with which He inwardly enlightens the sinner, so that he becomes keenly aware that the sins which he has concealed in confession, will one day be known to the whole world, and thus encourages him to overcome his false shame. - "Be not ashamed to confess to one man," says St. Augustine, "that which you were not ashamed to do with one, perhaps, with many." Consider these words of the same saint: "Sincere confession subdues vice, conquers the evil one, shuts the door of hell, and opens the gates of paradise."
How did Christ prove, that He did not cast out devils by Beelzebub?
By showing that the kingdom of Satan could not stand, if one evil spirit were cast out by another; that they thus reproached their own sons who also cast out devils, and had not been accused of doing so by power from Beelzebub; by His own life and works which were in direct opposition to the devil, and by which the devil's works were destroyed. - There is no better defence against calumny than an innocent life, and those who are slandered, find no better consolation than the thought of Christ who, notwithstanding His sanctity and His miracles, was not secure against calumniation.
What is meant by the finger of God?
The power of God, by which Christ expelled the evil spirits, proved himself God, and the promised Redeemer.
Who is the strong man armed?
The evil one is so called, because he still retains the power and intellect of the angels, and, practiced by long experience, seeks in different ways to injure man if God permits.
How is the devil armed?
With the evil desires of men, with the perishable riches, honors, and pleasures of this world, with which he entices us to evil, deceives us, and casts us into eternal fire.
Who is the stronger one who took away the devil's armor?
Christ the Lord who came into this world that He might destroy the works and the kingdom of the devil, to expel the prince of darkness, (John XII. 31.) and to redeem us. from his power. "The devil," says St. Anthony, "is like a dragon caught by the Lord with the fishing-hook of the cross, tied with a halter like a beast of burden, chained like a fugitive slave, and his lips pierced through with a ring, so that he may not devour any of the faithful. Now he sighs, like a miserable sparrow, caught by Christ and turned to derision, and thrown under the feet of the Christians. He who flattered himself that he would possess the whole orbit of the earth, behold, he has to yield!"
Why does Christ say: He who is not with me, is against me?
These words were intended in the first place for the Pharisees who did not acknowledge Christ as the Messiah, would not fight with Him against Satan's power, but rather held the people back from reaching unity of faith and love of Christ. Like the Pharisees, all heretical teachers who, by their false doctrines, draw the faithful from communion with Christ and His Church, are similar to the devil, the father of heresy and lies. May all those, therefore, who think they can serve Christ and the world at the same time, consider that between truth and falsehood, between Christ and the world, there is no middle path; that Christ requires decision, either with Him, or against Him , either eternal happiness with Him, or without Him, everlasting misery.
Who are understood by the dry places through which the evil spirit wanders and finds no rest?
"The dry places without water," says St. Gregory, "are the hearts of the just, who by the force of penance have drained the dampness of carnal desires." In such places the evil -one indeed finds no rest, because there his malice finds no sympathy, and his wicked will no satisfaction.
Why does the evil spirit say: I will return into my house?
Because he is only contented there where he is welcomed and received: those who have purified their heart by confession, and driven Satan from it, but labor not to amend, again lose the grace of the Sacraments by sin, and thus void of virtue and grace, offer a beautiful and pleasant dwelling to the devil.
Why is it said: The last state becomes worse than the first?
Because a relapse generally draws more sins with it, and so it is said: the devil will return with seven other spirits more wicked than himself, by which may be understood the seven deadly sins, because after a relapse into sin conversion to God becomes more difficult, as a repeated return of the same sickness makes it harder to regain health; because by repetition sin easily becomes a habit and renders conversion almost impossible; because repeated relapses are followed by blindness of intellect, hardness of heart, and in the end eternal damnation.
Why did the woman lift up her voice?
This was by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost to shame the Pharisees who, blinded by pride, neither professed nor acknowledged the divinity of Christ, whilst this humble woman not only confessed Jesus as God, but praised her who carried Him, whom heaven and earth cannot contain. Consider the great dignity of the Blessed Virgin, Mother of the Son of God, and hear her praises from the holy Fathers. St. Cyril thus salutes her: "Praise to thee, Blessed Mother of God: for thou art virginity itself, the sceptre of the true faith!" and St. Chrysostom: "Hail, O Mother, the throne, the glory, the heaven of the Church!" St. Ephrem: "Hail, only hope of the Fathers, herald of the apostles, glory of the martyrs, joy of the saints, and crown of the virgins, because of thy vast glory, and inaccessible light!"
Why did Christ call those happy who hear the word of God and keep it?
Because, as has been already said, it is not enough for salvation to hear the word of God, but it must also be practiced. Because Mary, the tender Mother of Jesus, did this most perfectly, Christ terms her more happy in it, than in having conceived, borne, and nursed Him.
SUPPLICATION O Lord Jesus! true Light of the world, enlighten the eyes of my soul, that I may never be induced by the evil one to conceal a sin, through false shame, in the confessional, that on the day of general judgment my sins may not be published to the whole world. Strengthen me, O Jesus, that I may resist the arms of the devil by a penitent life, and especially by scorning the fear of man and worldly considerations, and guard against lapsing into sin, that I may not be lost, but through Thy merits maybe delivered from, all dangers and obtain heaven
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)