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 6100 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.

Thursday, March 31, 2011


By Eugene J. Koprowski, Esq.

March 31, 2011

President Obama's decision to bomb Libya – and oust dictator Moammar Gadaffi – seems to me imprudent, at best. Certainnly, it is not a piece of finely-honed statecraft shaped from the perspective of a "just war."

To be sure, Gadaffi is a long-time foe of America, and President Ronald Reagan, whose biography the young president is said to have read over Christmas, ordered air strikes on Ghadafi back in 1986. But wanting to look like Reagan, bold in foreign policy, which may be what Obama is doing here, is not a good enough reason, for him to put the U.S. in another war, its third in 10 years.

Read more:

Obama is NOT an "American"

By Coach Dave Daubenmire
March 31, 2011

I know what you are thinking. Coach Dave is finally coming out of the closet as a "Birther." He has joined that '"fringe element" in America that doesn't think that Barack Obama is an United States citizen.

Well, to be perfectly honest, I have been part of that group for quite awhile. I question where the president was born. What is wrong with that? “Trust but verify” a wise man once proclaimed. I think Obama would be wise to come clean on a lot of things.

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Most Criminal agency of the the Federal Government is NOT the IRS.

The ATF is helping arm the drug Cartels in Mexico.

So what might be the problem?

The problem is that the ATF has been caught placing thousands of guns into the hands of the Mexican drug smuggling cartels. And other characters of interest. It’s safe to say that that is indeed a problem.

The first symptom of the problem arose when some of the ATF’s agents in Group VII felt like doing a little bit of old fashioned Oath keeping. Some of the agents and officers saw something very ugly about the ATF helping the Mexican cartels obtain powerful weapons – lots of weapons, with lots of ammo.

You’re reading this correctly –

The ATF has helped “straw buyers” purchase weapons here in the United States and has made notes about the purchases, but the ATF also has allowed the straw buyers to move those guns into Mexico, knowing they would end up in criminal hands.

Neo Cons and Obamites use War Powers Act to Justify Murder AGAIN!

CONGRESS HAS TO DECLARE WAR, and anybody who says differently is wrong, including Fox News and John Bolton et. al.

Being Anti- Muslim Brotherhood does not necessarily make one pro- Isreal, and being Anti-Isreal does NOT necessarliy make one pro- Muslim Brotherhood.
Paul Stramer

Thursday, March 17, 2011

Medical Marijuana is a racket and needs to be repealed!

What do you do when the government becomes the criminal?
Either States have the right to make laws or they don't.

Comments by Daniel Cox of Hamilton Montana
Tuesday, March 15, 2011 11:46 AM

What do you do when your government has become the criminal? If they kicked in your unlocked door at gunpoint and seized your merchandise, money, cars, jewelery etc. without a badge they would be considered criminals. If they do it with a badge then it is called justice. In this country we are innocent until proven guilty. We all have the Constitutional right of NOT being deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. How can the federal government take your property without you being found guilty? How do you pay for a defense if everything you own is seized? Kind of makes it easier for them to get your truck to ride around in?

The federal government never had the power to prohibit alcohol. How can I know this for sure, you might ask. Easy, they needed a Constitutional amendment to prohibit alcohol. Why? Because, they didn't have that power enumerated to them by the states in the Constitution. The tenth amendment gives all powers not given to the federal government or prohibited to the states, to the states or the people. So If the government has no right to prohibit alcohol. (although they think they do now ATF obviously) Where did they get the power to prohibit marijuana? Prohibiting alcohol or medical marijuana is a States rights issue.

Whether you agree with medical marijuana use or not is not the issue here. The issue is how does a federal government who stated they wouldn't arrest medical marijuana patients, growers or providers if they complied with state law, start kicking in doors at gunpoint and stealing peoples possessions. Simple. This is called taxation through citation. They let all of these people believe that they were safe to do business as long as they followed state law. They probably even paid taxes federal and state. As soon as they had enough wealth to go after, like the Mafia they showed up and took their cut.

Congratulations, Obama administration for legally plundering even your own constituents. This is the problem with statists on both sides of the aisle. They don't care who you are. If they can get the government to steal from you and give it to them, that's a plus.

This should be a wake up call to not only freedom loving Americans, but Democrats who want the liberty to smoke medical marijuana.

Did these people break the Montana Medical Marijuana law? Could be. However the Federal Government should check it's Constitution before it comes into our state seizing items it has no Constitutional right to regulate. Not to mention the right of being considered innocent until proven guilty.

Read the article below for background on your Constitutional rights being trampled at gunpoint.
Best regards,
Daniel Cox

The big money needs to be taken out of the marijuana industry. That can only be done by regulating it like alchohol. If alchohol was run like medical marijuana a quart of whisky would be a hundred dollars and there would be a huge black market for the substance. Because there is big money in marijuana it offers irresistable opportunity for the criminal element to create and abuse the lines of distribution outside the law. Don't give me the argument that MJ destroys brain cells and makes people stupid. If it's true of marijuana it's even more true of alchohol. Don't give me the argument that it's more dangerous for people to smoke and drive than to drink and drive. Do you think the answer to people drinking and driving is to outlaw booze? That has been tried and was a dismal failure. It just created a very corrupt bureau that abused it's authority and had to be reigned in by jury nullification. Don't for a minute believe there are not people abusing MJ and then driving under it's influence right now all over the country.

Then there is the temptation for government officials to play favorites as to who can be a medical marijuana provider. I won't say any more about that than, "you know who you are".  Are there some kickbacks going on about those licences? I don't know, but I know there is a lot of money floating around, and there is a lot of temptation.

So repeal and replace the current law with something that really does the job and decriminalize the substance so it's cheap. Then if law enforcement catches somebody driving under the influence treat them exactly the same as with alchohol.

Beyond that, educate the public about the bad effects of the substance, refuse to allow it to be advertised on TV and radio like with cigarettes, and make it clear that it's the parents job to educate their children about the serious harmful effects of both booze and MJ.

Please comment on this debate below.

Paul Stramer
LEGAL NOTICE: The Authors specifically invoke the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and of the press, without prejudice (UCC 1-308), on this website. The information posted on this website is published for informational purposes only under the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America. Images, text and logic are copyright protected. ALL rights are explicitly reserved without prejudice, and no part of this website may be reproduced unless by written consent. You hereby have written consent to post any individual post from this website containing this copyright to any other blog or email only if you post the whole and unaltered article including this copyright, and give proper credit to the author, and a link back to this blog at This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2010 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.

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Inevitable War with China? Here is one opinion. Can this be true?

The Explanation of WHY the CHINESE launched a Missile off of Los Angeles...Part 1

The Most Critical & Urgent Information for Every American to Understand. If you understand China's game plan, you will understand the reason why China would have a submarine launch a missile off the coast of Los Angeles. It was simply a test for what is coming next.

Part 2...more of MUST WATCH CRITICAL/URGENT NEWS FOR ALL AMERICANS. Another excerpt from The Coming World Wars presentation... More details about Chinese war preparations.

See this and comments here:
and here:

Monday, March 7, 2011


By Attorney Jonathan Emord

Author of "The Rise of Tyranny" and,
"Global Censorship of Health Information"
March 7, 2011

The Taylor Law in New York bans strikes by public employees. It is a good law. Unlike private sector employees, those in the public sector perform service that is necessary to fulfill a legal obligation (educate students in the public schools; extinguish fires; arrest criminals; collect garbage, or renew drivers’ licenses, etc.). Public employees are, thus, instrumentalities of the state who perform essential state functions mandated by law for the benefit of the public. As such, it is an appropriate condition of their employment that they relinquish the right to strike.

Unlike private sector employees whose wages reflect the value of their services to willing buyers in a free market, public sector employees feed off the taxed wages of those who generate wealth in our society. Consequently, public sector employees have a certain fiduciary duty to taxpayers that is unique. Because the payment of taxes is obligatory, not volitional, public employee service, correspondingly, must be obligatory, not volitional. It is not possible for us to withdraw from the public trough the funds we pay in taxes because we are dissatisfied with the quality of public education, the adequacy of garbage retrieval, or the efficiency of driver’s license renewal. If that were our right, many now paid for public service would be unemployed. Correspondingly, it should not be possible for public employees to shirk their duties because they think the amount of pay and benefits lawmakers provide them is inadequate.

Read the entire article and get some real answers here:

MAD AS HELL money bomb. Watch this movie.

Sunday, March 6, 2011

Criminal treason at the BATFE!

Helping arm Mexican gangsters!

From the folks who brought you Waco

Part of the classic definition of treason is "giving aid and comfort to the enemy".
If this isn't treason I would like someone to tell me what it is.

John Doddson: There are a few decent, courageous men in law enforcement. Sadly too few and too far between.

Why would the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms allow US weapons to be illegally shipped to Mexico? It's pretty simple.
They want to generate more reasons to make it difficult to impossible for Americans to own weapons. (See the video below that documents that extensive program of government lying on this point.)

Wake up. Defend the 2nd Amendment while you still can.

More background on this story from our partner channel
Details: The truth about US-Mexico arms smuggling

Gun grabbers will say anything.
The Truth About Arms Trafficking in Mexico
and the lies designed to demonize YOUR guns.
More background on this story from:The truth about US-Mexico arms smuggling


Saturday, March 5, 2011

Death Penalty should be abolished! Courts not to be trusted.

More people are weighing in on this death penalty issue than I expected so here is a comment from

Elias Alias of Oathkeepers.


I will offer my initial thoughts on this.

I've got to agree with you. I'm seeing the same abuses of the legal system, and innocent people being released after new DNA evidence, sometimes after years of incarceration. That's bad enough, but now we have a President who insists he has a right to assassinate Americans whom he names on a secret list, without a trial or any sign of due process. As the liberty movement seeks a truer adhesion to the Constitution in political practice, the liberty movement naturally is drawn into the crosshairs of government "COG" (continuity of government) programs, (which include DHS incursions) and we now know that some government perspectives are fed into government policy through the private sector think tanks at the ADL and SPLC - which means that in the foreseeable future we might expect to all be targets, accused of death-penalty "crimes" simply because of our beliefs regarding the Constitution.

That one consideration right there is enough to cause me to wish to see the people themselves forever ban the government, any government, from having the power of life-or-death over a human being. I think this is a 'plank' which conservative constitutionalists might want to reconsider, given present circumstances. Granting the state the power to take a person's life may be said to be tantamount to blasphemy, as it seeks to share a power which properly belongs only to God or Nature's God.


On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Paul Stramer at wrote:

Be careful. I can not support the death penalty considering our corrupt judicial system as we know it today.

In previous times I would have supported the death penalty without question for capital crimes, but now the courts, prosecutors, police and other government agents are so corrupt and the system is so far away from actual justice being served most of the time that it might result in innocent people dying because of trumped up charges and over zealous and corrupt prosecutions of real American patriots who try their best to be law abiding and only want to be free from the control of satanic laws and government agents.

Remember there are over 60,000 laws on the books in the USA, and how many of them are actually just laws in God's eyes?

I therefore want this bill to pass, and I don't really care what it costs. How many times do we see on television now where DNA testing frees people who have spent much time in jail when in fact they were innocent all along.

Be careful what you wish for. Get a gun and get some training and protect yourself and your family and don't wait for the police or any court to protect you from criminals. If the whole population were armed and the criminals didn't know who was carrying we would have much more deterrent against crime than any death penalty ever could produce.

At some point you might be the target of government. They may want to make a criminal out of you with the stroke of a pen on some unconstitutional anti-gun statute (non-law because of it's unconstitutionality) and technically you will be in violation.

That is where truly informed juries could correct the problem, but sadly we don't have many people who really understand their ability to nullify bad law as a juror. If you don't believe you can vote your conscience in the jury room, you need to study more.

We disagree with Lark about this bill and want it passed!
Paul Stramer

From: Gary Marbut/MSSA/TOS

To: Paul Stramer at ; >> Lark
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2011 8:14 PM
Subject: Re: Death Penalty in Montana - at risk


I agree with Paul, but for a slightly different reason.

I don't dispute that there are absolute evil scumbags out there who we would be better off without, but think about this:

According to our system of political thought, all political power is inherent in individual people. Montana Constitution, Article II, Section 1. "Popular sovereignty. All political power is vested in and derived from the people."

People surrender some of their individual political power to government so government may do for us collectively what people cannot do well alone. However, government can legitimately have no power other than that surrendered to it by individuals.

Individuals have the morel authority to take other life only in legitimate defense of self and others. Individuals do not have the authority to take other life in vengeance, for prophylaxis, as a deterrent, or in settlement of debt.

Since people do not have this authority, they cannot surrender it to government. Therefore, government cannot legitimately have the power to apply a death sentence, no matter how much some individuals may appear to deserve it.

It is very bad - VERY BAD - to allow government to assume powers it cannot legitimately have.

I'm with Paul that the person who needs to administer the death penalty is the would-be victim.

Gary Marbut, president

Montana Shooting Sports Association
Author, Gun Laws of MOntana

We disagree with Lark about this bill and want it passed!

Paul Stramer

----- Original Message -----

From: Lark
To: 'ME'
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2011 12:17 PM
Subject: Death Penalty in Montana - at risk

Bill Type - Number: SB 185
Action: (H) Hearing
Date: 03/15/2011
Hearing Room: 137
Hearing Time: 8:00 AM
Committee: (H) Judiciary

Capitol Switchboard - 406-444-4800 – [leave message for the House Judiciary Committee]
OPPOSE - SB 185 - Abolish death penalty and replace with life in prison w/o parole
Or email web form - - [to the House Judiciary Committee]

Lark Chadwick
PO Box 1867
Tompson Falls, MT 59873
State Sovereignty
Limited Government
Local Control

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

Montana's governor needs to study the Constitution.

There are none so blind as those who would not see!

The classic definition of ignorance is "not knowing what is required by one's station in life".
The classic definition of insanity is "doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result".

People of Montana, are you tired yet of your elected legislators fiercely defending their own ignorance?

People of Montana, are you tired of your elected representatives trying to apply the same old remedies while expecting somehow, a miraculous new and different result?

Read below one very informed analysis of the current "freedom phobia" of some legislators.
From: Elias Alias
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 12:14 AM
Subject: Republican Betrayal

The depth of ignorance regarding what is happening to our beloved America, and by extension what is happening to our beloved Montana, is staggering. I have said often that the elections of 2010 were a Tea Party victory, not a Republican victory. But as I watch how so many RINO Republicans continue to vote with the progressive statists against the array of liberty bills in the current legislative session, I begin to realize that there was no victory at all, or precious little, in the 2010 election in Montana. Maybe a small handful of truly Republican Tea Party candidates managed to get elected, and each of those who remain loyal to the nation's founding principles is indeed a blessing to our State. But obviously some candidates were elected (and more were re-elected) who have no clue about our impending fate as Montanans caught up in the destruction of America.

Read the entire hard hitting article here: