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