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, November 29, 2012

What is really law, and what is NOT law?

There is a big contention today about what is really law for you and I to follow. Here is an article and my comment that might clear some of this up.

A teaser from the article:
For if you have a right to something, then by definition you do not require permission to exercise that right. And more – the state (organized force) has no standing – under natural law – to use force to limit the exercise of that right in any way whatsoever. But the reverse is just as true. By having conceded that you need to beg permission, you become party to a binding legal contract – whether you see it that way or not is immaterial.

And my comment is as follows:

Maybe, but here is the caveat.  
The "binding legal contract" is null and void because it was unilateral, and done by fraud and deception, threat, duress, intimidation and coercion. In other words there is no contract and the right stands. In other words, they threaten you if you don't opt to buy into the contract, and in the eyes of the creator of those rights, nobody has the right to threaten anyone into a contract, and the fact that they are applying force and threat NULLIFIES THE CONTRACT ITSELF ON THE FACE OF IT.  THERE IS NO CONTRACT when it is unilateral.  A person so threatened is allowed under natural law to feign compliance to avoid the threat, and then exercise the right as if there is NO contract.  So one can get a concealed carry permit, even though in the eyes of God you have the absolute right to defend yourself without it. You can exercise the right to carry regardless of their Non Laws, as if they didn't exist, even though you have feigned compliance, knowing all along that before God you are NOT complying with their so called "law" because it is not law at all.
Then there is the principle that unconstitutional "laws" are null and void from their inception.
"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury Vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803). "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda Vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491. " An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed." Norton Vs. Shelby County 118 US 425 p. 442
The higher laws always prevail when there is a conflict between them. There never will be a conflict between positive divine law, and natural law.  They are.
1. Positive Divine Law
2. Natural Law
3. Human law   notice it is on the bottom and the least of all law. This includes all civil and criminal "laws" and even cannon law.
Whenever there is a conflict between any of these,  the higher laws are always to prevail in God's eyes and they do.  

I remind you of Patrick Henry's famous quote:
"It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings. ... Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things, which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it. Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. ... Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"

There are many ways to exercise liberty, and some want to be at liberty from God's laws also.
That is nothing but slavery, for if we want to free ourselves from God's laws, we then place ourselves into slavery to Satan.

The only question is the risk factor of disobeying what corrupt judges regard as law. Many of the so called laws are there for nothing more than to create crimes without victims to raise money for the system, fleecing the public because they won't study or take a stand. But there are some issues that are not worth the effort, time and money to fight. One I can think of is the "drivers license".  If you hold that you should go about without one because it would be an abrogation of principle and entering into a contract, then you open yourself up to a fight you can't win and it stops you from fighting something far more important. The same applies to concealed carry and a whole host of other issues. It does me no harm to feign to comply with their non law about concealed carry, not here in the civil law situation, or in the moral law before God almighty.
It's a non law. I know that, God knows that, but the stupid judges who are corrupt and want the money insist that "IT'S THE LAW" so I choose to feign compliance without conceding that it's the law.
I have done this many times on my income tax returns.  I have stamped them over the signature.
" Explicitly Reserving all Rights Without Prejudice"  and UCC 1-207 or 1-308 or both.  Look them up. In effect you have nullified the so called "contract" without effecting any right coming from God, or effecting any other issues in human law. Regarding the instant right you are dealing with, there is no issue because in their eyes you have complied.

Live to fight another day, and to fight the really important issues, WHEN YOU CHOOSE and on your terms rather than their terms and in their corrupt courts.

You will get your chance to prove your metal soon enough, and it will be your life at stake instead of some trumped up charge for some victim less so called "crime".

For further information read my article on "When is it time to fight?" here:

One more thing that is of the utmost importance.

Your jury rights are your most powerful rights. Instead of trying to avoid jury duty, you should be trying to get on every jury you can. That will give you ample opportunity to educate your fellow jurors about their right to nullify bad "laws". It will also get you into a position where you can (all by yourself without another person) nullify bad law by hanging the jury (refusing to apply the so called "law" to the case you are on).
If you don't believe me take a look at this.

LEGAL NOTICE: The Authors specifically invoke the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and of the press, without prejudice, on this website. The information posted on this website is published for informational purposes only under the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution for the United States of America. Images, text and logic are copyright protected. ALL rights are explicitly reserved without prejudice, and no part of this website may be reproduced unless by written consent. You hereby have written consent to post any individual post on this website containing this copyright to any other blog or email only if you post the whole and unaltered article including this copyright, and give proper credit to the author, and a link back to this blog at This applies only to articles written by Paul Stramer. ©2005-2009 by Montana Business Communications (PDS) All rights remain in force. Removing this notice forfeits all rights to recourse. Copyright strictly enforced ©


Christians Have Lost Their Savor
Ultimately, the cultural war is a moral war. It is morality that defines a culture. Changing the morality changes the cultural. Multi-culturalism has done to America what AIDS does to the human body. There is no American culture anymore. Christian morality is the only protection against cultural AIDS. Humanism is to Christianity what kryptonite was to Superman. Have you noticed they are sandblasting the 10 Commandments.....
by Coach Dave Daubenmire

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

Supreme Court rules cops can be filmed

Smile for the camera, coppers — the US Supreme Court has decided to let stand a lesser ruling that allows citizens in the state of Illinois to record police officers performing their official duties.

Monday, November 26, 2012

Natural Law; Right to self defense Judge Napolitano

Your inalienable individual right was clarified forever by the USSC in 2008.
This is settled law.

Remember, "right wing" A.G. John Ashcroft issued an individual right to keep and bear arms written legal opinion, years before Holders DOJ hatched Operation Fast and Furious?

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, in federal enclaves. The decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment extends beyond federal enclaves to the states,[1] which was addressed later by McDonald v. Chicago (2010). It was the first Supreme Court case in United States history to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms.[2]
On June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Heller v. District of Columbia.[3][4] The Court of Appeals had struck down provisions of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 as unconstitutional, determined that handguns are "arms" for the purposes of the Second Amendment, found that the District of Columbia's regulations act was an unconstitutional banning, and struck down the portion of the regulations act that requires all firearms including rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock." "Prior to this decision the Firearms Control Regulation Act of 1975 also restricted residents from owning handguns except for those registered prior to 1975."[5]
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate (but largely discretionary) appellate jurisdiction over all federal courts and over state court cases involving issues of federal law.

My comment is that all these court cases would be moot and unnecessary if the Constitution was still in full force and effect and understood as it was by the people who wrote it.

Obama wants to steal your savings

We have said this before. Obama wants to force you into government bonds, effectively abolishing private savings.
Uh oh. Now Obama wants your RETIREMENT savings
Is there no end to the financial outrages of the Obama administration?

Now it appears your retirement savings such as 401(k) plans are being eyed by you-know-who ...
Read the latest now on

Snipers Wanted -

This article appeared just after the Millennium Summit at the end of 1999 and was published at the beginning of 2000,  and is more true now than ever.
The authors are Jim Searcy and Ed Parker

When and how are we allowed, morally, to use lethal force to defend our lives, loved ones, and property?
If you have been wondering about where to draw those lines this article will help.

Here is the Catholic view of Self Defense:  From the Catholic Encyclopedia of 1917

Ethically the subject of self-defense regards the right of a private person to employ force against any one who unjustly attacks his life or person, his property or good name. While differing among themselves on some of the more subtle and less practical points comprised in this topic, our moralists may be said to be unanimous on the main principles and their application regarding the right of self-defense. The teaching may be summarized as follows:

Defense of life and person

Everyone has the right to defend his life against the attacks of an unjust aggressor. For this end he may employ whatever force is necessary and even take the life of an unjust assailant. As bodily integrity is included in the good of life, it may be defended in the same way as life itself. It must be observed however that no more injury may be inflicted on the assailant than is necessary to defeat his purpose. If, for example, he can be driven off by a call for help or by inflicting a slight wound on him, he may not lawfully be slain. Again the unjust attack must be actually begun, at least morally speaking, not merely planned or intended for some future time or occasion. generally speaking one is not bound to preserve one's own life at the expense of the assailant's; one may, out of charity, forego one's right in the matter. Sometimes, however, one may be bound to defend one's own life to the utmost on account of one's duty of state or other obligations. The life of another person may be defended on the same conditions by us as our own. For since each person has the right to defend his life unjustly attacked, what he can lawfully do through his own efforts he may also do through the agency of others. Sometimes, too, charity,natural affection, or official duty imposed the obligation of defending others. A father ought, for example, to defend the lives of his children; a husband, his wife; and all ought to defend the life of one whose death would be a serious loss to the community. Soldiers, policemen, and private guards hired for that purpose are bound injustice to safeguard the lives of those entrusted to them.

Defense of property

It is lawful to defend one's material goods even at the expense of the aggressor's life; for neither justice nor charity require that one should sacrifice possessions, even though they be of less value than human life in order to preserve the life of a man who wantonly exposes it in order to do an injustice. Here, however, we must recall the principle that in extreme necessity every man has a right to appropriate whatever is necessary to preserve his life. The starving man who snatches a meal is not an unjust aggressor; consequently it is not lawful to use force against him. Again, the property which may be defended at the expense of the aggressor's life must be of considerable value; for charity forbids that in order to protect ourselves from a trivial loss we should deprive a neighbor of his life. Thefts or robberies, however, of small values are to be considered not in their individual, but in their cumulative, aspect. A thief may be slain in the act of carrying away stolen property provided that it cannot be recovered from him by any other means; if, for example, he can be made to abandon his spoil through fright, then it would not be lawful to shoot him. If he has carried the goods away to safety he cannot then be killed in order to recover them; but the owner may endeavor to take them from him, and if the thief resists with violence he may be killed in self-defense.


Since it is lawful to take life in the legitimate defense of one's material goods, it is evidently also lawful to do so in defense of chastity which is a good of a much higher order. With regard to honor or reputation, it is not lawful to kill one to prevent an insult or an attack upon our reputation which we believe he intends, or threatens. Nor may we take a life to avenge an insult already offered. The proceeding would not be defense of our honor or reputation, but revenge. Besides, in the general estimation honor and reputation may be sufficiently protected without taking the life of the offender.

And here is the writing of Saint Thomas Aquinas on the subject:
If you have never read St. Thomas in his Summa Theologica then you need to know the format. Saint Thomas always puts forth the arguments AGAINST the premise, then answers them one by one and with a summation.

Article 7. Whether it is lawful to kill a man in self-defense?

Objection 1. It would seem that nobody may lawfully kill a man in self-defense. For Augustine says to Publicola (Ep. xlvii): "I do not agree with the opinion that one may kill a man lest one be killed by him; unless one be a soldier, exercise a public office, so that one does it not for oneself but for others, having the power to do so, provided it be in keeping with one's person." Now he who kills a man in self-defense, kills him lest he be killed by him. Therefore this would seem to be unlawful.
Objection 2. Further, he says (De Lib. Arb. i, 5): "How are they free from sin in sight of Divine providence, who are guilty of taking a man's life for the sake of these contemptible things?" Now among contemptible things he reckons "those which men may forfeit unwillingly," as appears from the context (De Lib. Arb. i, 5): and the chief of these is the life of the body. Therefore it is unlawful for any man to take another's life for the sake of the life of his own body.
Objection 3. Further, Pope Nicolas [Nicolas I, Dist. 1, can. De his clericis] says in the Decretals: "Concerning the clerics about whom you have consulted Us, those, namely, who have killed a pagan in self-defense, as to whether, after making amends by repenting, they may return to their former state, or rise to a higher degree;know that in no case is it lawful for them to kill any man under any circumstances whatever." Now clerics and laymen are alike bound to observe the moral precepts. Therefore neither is it lawful for laymen to kill anyone in self-defense.
Objection 4. Further, murder is a more grievous sin than fornication or adultery. Now nobody may lawfully commit simple fornication or adultery or any other mortal sin in order to save his own life; since the spiritual life is to be preferred to the life of the body. Therefore no man may lawfully take another's life in self-defense in order to save his own life.
Objection 5. Further, if the tree be evil, so is the fruit, according to Matthew 7:17. Now self-defense itself seems to be unlawful, according to Romans 12:19: "Not defending [Douay: 'revenging'] yourselves, my dearly beloved." Therefore its result, which is the slaying of a man, is also unlawful.
On the contrary, It is written (Exodus 22:2): "If a thief be found breaking into a house or undermining it, and be wounded so as to die; he that slew him shall not be guilty of blood." Now it is much more lawful to defend one's life than one's house. Therefore neither is a man guilty of murder if he kill another in defense of his own life.
I answer that, Nothing hinders one act from having two effects, only one of which is intended, while the other is beside the intention. Now moral acts take their species according to what is intended, and not according to what is beside the intention, since this is accidental as explained above (43, 3; I-II, 12, 1). Accordingly the act of self-defense may have two effects, one is the saving of one's life, the other is the slaying of the aggressor. Therefore this act, since one's intention is to save one's own life, is not unlawful, seeing that it is natural to everything to keep itself in "being," as far as possible. And yet, though proceeding from a good intention, an act may be rendered unlawful, if it be out of proportion to the end. Wherefore if a man, in self-defense, uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repel force with moderation his defense will be lawful, because according to the jurists [Cap. Significasti, De Homicid. volunt. vel casual.], "it is lawful to repel force by force, provided one does not exceed the limits of a blameless defense." Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense in order to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another's. But as it is unlawful to take a man's life, except for the public authority acting for the common good, as stated above (Article 3), it is not lawful for a man to intend killing a man in self-defense, except for such as have public authority, who while intending to kill a man in self-defense, refer this to the public good, as in the case of a soldier fighting against the foe, and in the minister of the judge struggling with robbers, although even these sin if they be moved by private animosity.
Reply to Objection 1. The words quoted from Augustine refer to the case when one man intends to kill another to save himself from death. The passage quoted in the Second Objection is to be understood in the same sense. Hence he says pointedly, "for the sake of these things," whereby he indicates the intention. This suffices for the Reply to the Second Objection.
Reply to Objection 3. Irregularity results from the act though sinless of taking a man's life, as appears in the case of a judge who justly condemns a man to death. For this reason a cleric, though he kill a man in self-defense, is irregular, albeit he intends not to kill him, but to defend himself.
Reply to Objection 4. The act of fornication or adultery is not necessarily directed to the preservation of one's own life, as is the act whence sometimes results the taking of a man's life.
Reply to Objection 5. The defense forbidden in this passage is that which comes from revengeful spite. Hence a gloss says: "Not defending yourselves--that is, not striking your enemy back."

Here is the Catholic view of Just War:  From the Catholic Encyclopedia of 1917

War, in its juridical sense, is a contention carried on by force of arms between sovereign states, or communities having in this regard the right of states. The term is often used for civil strife, sedition, rebellion properly so called, or even for the undertaking of a State to put down by force organized bodies of outlaws, and in fact there is no other proper word for the struggle as such; but as these are not juridically in the same class with contentions of force between sovereign states, the jurist may not so use the term.

However, a people in revolution, in the rare instance of an effort to re-establish civil government which has practically vanished from the community except in name, or to vitalize constitutional rights reserved specifically or residuarily to the people, is conceded to be in like juridical case with a State, as far as protecting its fundamental rights by force of arms.

John Locke on the right of revolution:

The arbitrary use of authority is called tyranny. Such is the tyranny of an absolute monarch, of a council, of a class, or of a majority. The liberty of the subject is based on the doctrine that the State is not omnipotentLegally omnipotent every State must be, but not morally. A legal enactment may be immoral, and then it cannot in conscience be obeyed; or it may be ultra vires, beyond the competence of the authority that enacts it, in which case compliance with the law is not a matter of obedience, but of prudence. In either case the law is tyrannical, and "a tyrannical law, not being according to reason, is not, absolutely speaking, a law, but rather a perversion of law" (St. ThomasSumma Theol., I-II.92.1 ad 4). Man is not all citizen. He is a member, a part of the State, and something else besides. "Man is not subservient to the civil community to the extent of his whole self, all that he is and all that he has" (St. ThomasSumma Theol., I-II.21.4 ad 3). To say nothing of his eternal interests in his relations with his Makerman has even in this life his domestic interests in the bosom of his family, his intellectual and artistic interests, none of which can be called political interestsSocial and political life is not the whole of human lifeMan is not the servant of the State in his every action. The State, the majority, or the despot, may demand of the individual more than he is bound to give. Were human society a conventional arrangement, were man, being perfectly well off in isolation from his fellows, to agree by way of freak to live in community with them, then we could assign no antecedent limits to civil authority. Civil authority would be simply what was bargained for and prescribed in the arbitrary compact which made civil society. As it is, civil authority is a natural means to a natural end and is checked by that end, in accordance with the Aristotelean principle that "the end in view sets limits to the means" (Aristotle, Politics, I, 9). The immediate end of civil authority is well set forth by Francisco Su├írez (De legibus, LII, xi, 7) as "the natural happiness of the perfect, or self-sufficient, human community, and the happiness of individuals as they are members of such a community, that they may live therein peaceably and justly, with a sufficiency of goods for the preservation and comfort of their bodily life, and with so much moral rectitude as is necessary for this external peace and happiness". Happiness is an attribute of individualsIndividuals are not made happy by authority, but authority secures to them that tranquillity, that free hand for helping themselves, that restful enjoyment of their own just winnings, which is one of the conditions of happiness. Nor does authority make men virtuous, except according to that rough-hewn, outline virtue, which is called "social virtue", and consists mainly of justice. When the ancients spoke of "virtue" being the concern of the State, they meant justice and efficiency. Neither the virtue nor the happiness of individuals is cared for by the State except "as they are members of the civil community". In this respect, civil differs from domestic, or paternal, authority. The father cares for the members of his household one by one, singly and individually. The State cares for its members collectively, and for the individual only in his collective aspect. Hence it follows that the power of life and death is inherent in the State, not in the family. A man is hanged for the common good of the rest, never for his own good.

Liberalism Condemned:

Sunday, November 25, 2012

The end of the World

Gospel. Matt. 24, 15-35
At that time, Jesus said to His disciples, When you shall see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place; he that readeth, let him understand: then they that are in Judea, let them flee to the mountains; and he that is on the house-top, let him not come down to take anything out of his house; and he that is in the field, let him not go back to take his coat. And woe to them that are with child, and that give suck, in those days. But pray that your flight be not in the winter, or on the sabbath: for there shall be then great tribulation, such as has not been found from the beginning of the world until now, neither shall be: and unless those days had been shortened, no flesh should be saved; but for the sake of the elect, those days shall be shortened;
Then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; do not believe him: for there shall arise false Crhists and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Behold, I have told it to you beforehand: if they therefore shall say to you, Behold, He is in the desert, go you not out; behold, He is in the closets, believe it not. For as lightning cometh out of the east, and appeareth even into the west, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Wheresoever the body shall be, there shall the eagles also be gathered together.
And immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of heaven shall be moved; and then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven, and then shall all the tribes of earth mourn; and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with much power and majesty: and He shall send His angels with a trumpet and a great voice and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from the farthest parts of the heavens to the utmost bounds of them.
And from the fig-tree learn a parable: when the branch therof is now tender, and the leaves come forth, you know that summer is nigh. So you also, when you shall see all these things, know ye that it is nigh even at the doors. Amen I say to you, that this generattion shall not pass till all these things be done. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My words shall not pass away.

Friday, November 23, 2012

Islam is NOT a religion!


By: Devvy
November 23, 2012

Not only are more Americans coming to understand Islam is not a religion, they are coming out and saying what many of us have for years: The Islamic Movement in this country is sedition.

Black Friday Madness and Insanity from Hell



Who Controls the World's "Money"?

A look at the International Banking Cartel led by the Bank for International Settlement (in Basel, Switzerland) known as the bank of central banks (58 central banks) and The US Federal reserve System. Also a look at banking tycoons: from the Rothschild family in Europe to JP Morgan and others in the US. How banks not only control governments but also appoint politicians through huge campaign donations. Governments at the service of the major banks, the best example: the Obama administration and the history's biggest bail out of the same institutions that caused the Great Recession.

Get out of the banks NOW!

How the banksters control the three most valuable commodities in the world"

Guns, Drugs, and Oil

The Great Thanksgiving Hoax

Each year at this time school children all over America are taught the official Thanksgiving story, and newspapers, radio, TV, and magazines devote vast amounts of time and space to it. It is all very colorful and fascinating.
It is also very deceiving. This official story is nothing like what really happened. It is a fairy tale, a whitewashed and sanitized collection of half-truths which divert attention away from Thanksgiving's real meaning.

Here is the truth of what really happened that they don't want you to know!

Thursday, November 22, 2012

The poisoning of America's soul

How the CIA was hijacked by the Nazis
and their supporters in Corporate America

A three part series based on Dave Emory's interview with veteran Nazi hunter John Loftus. 

This is the story of why America is the way it is. Sadly, the Nazi, or more accurately the people who funded them, won the war. 

Part One: How America Lost Its Way

Part Two: Why the Justice Department doesn't catch banksters or terrorists

Part Three: Americas Nazi Secret Part 3

Wednesday, November 21, 2012

The Left / Right Paradigm Deception

How they steal your power through rigged elections.

In this exclusive 80 minute video interview, legendary conspiracy author G. Edward Griffin explains how his research, which spans no less than 5 decades, has revealed a banking elite obsessed with enforcing a world government under a collectivist model that will crush individualism and eventually institute martial law as a response to the inevitable backlash that will be generated as a result of a fundamental re-shaping of society.

Read it all:

The Forces That Will Push Silver Over $100

One of the best articles I have seen and just out, about why silver will have to go up in price over the next few years. There is no stopping this.

Steve St. Angelo
Monday, November 19th

There are tremendous forces at work that will push silver over $100 an ounce. Very few precious metal analysts understand all the forces that are at work. Some analysts focus on specific areas such as the gold-silver ratio and technical analysis, while others write about future investment and industrial demand. And then of course, we have the more unorthodox analysts who delve into the ongoing manipulation of gold and silver -- a realization shared by the author of this article.

Read it all here:

Then get your silver here:

Using government zoning to control your neighbor for your own benefit

What is the real reason some want a new zoning area around Turtle Lake northwest of Eureka?
Agenda 21 in action

November 14, 2012
Dear Lincoln County Planning Board Members and County Commissioners,
I am writing in opposition of the proposed zoning district overlay for the Turtle Lake area in Lincoln County near Eureka. While I live in Whitefish, I am part of an ownership trust of my mother’s lot GG, and my brother owns, lives and farms on the lot next door, both on the lake. I spend about twenty weekends a year there. I am also a professional land use planner with twenty years experience in the public and private sector, most of those years spent writing and enforcing zoning ordinances in Alaska and Montana. I believe this proposal is inconsistent with the Lincoln County Growth Policy, which I will outline below. I will also include an item by item analysis of the text of the proposed zoning document, which includes comments and concerns on many items which from my experience are inconsistent or would be very difficult to enforce.
Some well meaning neighbors have put together a draft zoning overlay district for the Turtle Lake area. The zoning, which states its primary purpose is to curb people living in RV’s, also attempts to impose some of the owner’s existing covenants on lot owners that currently have no covenants. Establishing covenants for a new subdivision is a method often used to protect property values and increase the value of undeveloped lots by setting ground rules for development. However, trying to impose covenant-like rules on neighbors who have small existing lots with no covenants that don’t want them infringes on property rights and is down-right un-neighborly.
As a planner, I support good planning and believe zoning can be an effective tool for communities to protect property values and amenities while minimizing neighborhood conflicts. However, zoning documents are often challenged. They need to be well written, have clear objectives, be concise, and they must implement the goals of adopted long range plans. If you are creating and imposing zoning from scratch in a rural county like Lincoln where there currently isn’t much zoning, it’s a pretty big deal. Zoning regulations shouldn’t be slipped through over the holidays in the winter when the people most affected can’t be there to protest. That’s not very fair.
Zoning should to be accomplished through a broader, community-wide discussion of goals and objectives for various types of land uses and as a direct implementation of an adopted Growth Policy and an adopted area plan which includes specific land use goals for neighborhoods. This proposed zoning district is not based on a long range plan. It is poorly written, over-reaching, difficult to enforce, and most importantly, and inconsistent with the zoning chapter of Lincoln County’s own Growth Policy.
Montana Law and the Growth Policy
In order to enact zoning in the State of Montana, State Statute 76 says that all zoning regulations adopted must be consistent with an adopted County Growth Policy.
MCA 76-2-203. Criteria and guidelines for zoning regulations.
(1) Zoning regulations must be: (a) made in accordance with the growth policy

In response to the article on proposed zoning…

  Emerson would be upset to know this zoning document would forbid him from building his rustic cabin on Walden’s pond. Ms. James is quite correct in stating that this came about as a way for the lots on the Turtle estates second subdivision to enforce their covenants on the first subdivision owners(Lots A,B,C,D) and actually the rest of the owners on Turtle Lake. By creating a zoning district this places enforcement directly on the county and thus the tax payers of Lincoln County. If this document was only about RV’s and lot densities, it would read, minimum lot sizes for divisions and minimum square footage for single family dwellings, period. This document goes far beyond their supposed intent and is a direct attack on property rights, small businesses and agriculture in Lincoln County.  In order to impose this mob rule (60%) and poorly written zoning on their neighbors, the lots in the first subdivision had to be gerrymandered eliminating lots A and B (the founding lots) from a vote or participation. They may argue that they do not have lake front, but neither does lot AA on their side. As a third generation Montanan and third generation farmer I have some serious problems with their zoning regulations. My grandparents made it through the great depression (Highwood Mt.) by having a subsistence farm as opposed to a citified “hobby farm” as proposed.” 1 large hoofed and 2 small hoofed animals per acre, all animals fenced and or caged, no pigs, no cows, no dairy”. As a retired licensed and insured building contractor in Mt. I’m wondering who is going to enforce the building codes proposed, but mostly, who is going to pay for this building inspector ? (That’s right tax payers of Lincoln county! ) In the article I was quoted as saying I was going to build an earthship home when actually I used this as an example of a 15,000 sq ft mansion built by Denis Weaver in Colorado with no cement foundation. What about sono tubes/post and pole foundations? Or slab on grade shops? Or post and pole barns…etc…Having built multi - million dollar alternative energy mansions in the Flathead for 20 years, I find their proposed ticky tacky stick framed vinyl clad low efficiency dwellings to be an affront to the new alternative green technologies and detrimental  to my property values and the environment. As to businesses, no manufacturing, does this include signs? Wood products ? Nope just hotrods, farms, hmmm doesn’t sound personal, just like chain sawing down my solar greenhouse, attempting to burn me out or desecrating my pet graves…OK…now for legal control paid for by my good friends and other neighbors who pay taxes and live here or moved here to get away from this same BS elsewhere. Just wait till zoning comes for you!!!

Taxed enough already

Dan Taylor

This zoning is how liberals and one worlders think. If they don't like guns, nobody can have one. If they want to build lavish and expensive homes, then everyone around them has to go into debt and build beyond their means, or give up their land and be driven out.
This kind of collectivism is what is ruining this country and destroying freedom, AND IT'S BEING DONE DELIBERATELY TO REMOVE THE MIDDLE CLASS FROM THE LAND.
This is part and parcel of what Agenda 21 is all about and it's happening right here in Lincoln County.
How about it Mike Cole?  Are you going to stand up for Freedom, or are  you going down the road to allowing zoning in the middle of the county engineered by a few hot shots who have big ideas about the values of their own property at the expense of their neighbors and are willing to gerrymander the line of a zoning district to get their way?
Are you going to stand up for freedom and liberty, or are you going to be part of the problem of too much government that is killing America?
Are you going to keep your OATH OF OFFICE BEFORE GOD ALMIGHTY TO THE CONSTITUTION or are you going to become an oathbreaker right out of the box? Read the Constitution and find out your duty to protect Freedom and Liberty and your neighbor's God given rights to own property.
You said during the campaign that you didn't think as county commissioner you would have to spend much time on Agenda 21. Well here is your first dose.  You don't even know what Agenda 21 is or does do you?  It's time you get Glenn Beck's new book "Agenda 21 and get your education. Earn your pay Mike. Keep your oath.
The classic definition of ignorance is "Not knowing what is required by one's station in life".  How about starting out your new job with making that not apply to you?
If you need some help in getting up to speed on that score feel free to call me. I have lots of materials for you to study on Agenda 21.
Here are some links to get you started educating yourself.
Paul Stramer
SLC Distributing
PO Box 116
Eureka MT 59917
800 889 2839

Tuesday, November 20, 2012

We found more frequency hopping spread spectrum radios in Canada

TSX300r-2VP Tri Square spread spectrum frequency hopping radios.
We have exhausted our supply in America and have now found a supply in Canada for the
TSX300r-2VP radios.
Because the Tri Square company is now out of this model, and it seems this Canadian supplier
has bought all remaining stock we are now importing these back into the US and have had to raise
the price to $130 per pair plus shipping.
Here is where to order:
We still are able to get the smaller TSX100 for the same price it was before from our American supplier.
See it and order here:
We are still able to get the spare charger with batteries and earpiece mics from the same American supplier.
See it and order here:
If you don't know what these special radios are or will do here is the original factory website. They are now completely
sold out of product and won't be producing any more of these radios in either model. All their previous dealers are also
now out of these.
We have done some serious range tests with this radio and find that either model has the same range.
They really excel for close in tactical use. The range is very effective out to over 1 mile with some obstruction like
trees and low rolling hills, and will talk line of sight over 7 miles. I have no hesitation in saying these will probably talk
over 10 miles line of sight.
They have the ability to use 3 AA alkaline instead of the lithium battery pack in an emergency.
All the specs are on the company website.
These radios are absolutely secure and private, and require NO license. That means no scanner can listen, no cops, no
feds, NOBODY can listen. Even if they get the same radio, they need to know what channel number to put in it, between
1 and 10 BILLION. Chances of that happening are almost none.
For more information call me at 800 889 2839
Paul Stramer
SLC Distributing
PO Box 116
Eureka MT 59917
800 889 2839

Monday, November 19, 2012

The most important book this Century. The Mystery of Iniquity

The Mystery of Iniquity  
By Fr. Paul Kramer

Book Review:

This book, available on for $18.98, is a complete and very well documented history of the takeover of finance and power by the bankster cabal and those who want total world control with their "new world order" and what they have planned for you and your children in the very near future.

While I might disagree with some of the conclusions he comes to having to do with the solution to this problem, I agree very much with the premise that the only true solution is to change the hearts and minds of the people toward humility and repentance as the only path toward the right solution. 

The vast majority of the people on this planet are simply NOT WORTHY OF FREEDOM because they do not value it's prerequisite of personal responsibility to find the truths of why we are here. This is the purpose for which  Jesus Christ came to this world in the first place. He stated He was here to testify to the truth. In fact He is Truth personified. He is the eternal Word of God made man. He is God's eternal truth, made into our own flesh and blood to pay the price we could never pay for redeeming all mankind. Notice I did not say Saving.

Salvation and Redemption are two different things. Redemption did NOT require our participation, but Salvation certainly does!

If you want to understand how evil works, and why God allows it, this is the book for you.
If you want to understand the history of how evil has perverted the world, and why it is coming to it's inevitable end, this is the book for you.
If you want to know what to do about it, and you want to have the right tools to combat it and win, this book is for you.
If you want to understand the term "New World Order" as it has been understood by the secret societies throughout the centuries, this book is your best way.
If you want to understand WHAT DRIVES THESE PEOPLE TO THEIR EVIL ENDS, there is no better book on the market.

And finally, if you want to know what you need to do to get out from under the evil empire and their eternal shame get this book, read it, and then call me.  800 889 2839

Saturday, November 17, 2012

10 Days after the Election Sham

22 Signs That Voter Fraud Is Wildly Out Of Control And The Election Was A Sham


By Jag Hunter
Nov 8th 2012

This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is perhaps, the end of the beginning.”.
-Sir Winston Churchill  speaking  on 9 November 1942
The latest formal criminal complaint naming OBAMA in TREASON was filed this morning at 1131 hours local (11: 31 a.m. EST).
The TREASON complaint is copied below for your convenience.
Now, as is assiduously, urgently importuned since 17 March 2009 it is going to take a very large number of people, acting in groups and in a coordinated way, to advance this formal criminal complaint naming OBAMA in TREASON so as to take effect. Individuals must file individual complaints in the same way this complaint was administered. Then the individual complaints must be collected up and submitted in mass everywhere possible across the United States. OBAMA can and must be removed from his residence in the White House as a common thug, punk street wise criminal. I’m not talking impeachment, I’m talkin’ ’bout OBAMA being taken down as any other accused felon. It can be accomplished if enough people get behind the effort in a way that soars over any gathering or group action before. FIND A WAY OR MAKE ONE!DO IT NOW!
Thursday, 8 November 2012 – 70th Anniversary OPERATION TORCH – World War II Northwest Africa – Casablanca
From: Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III United States Navy Retired
  • Robert Swan Mueller, III, Director – Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington D.C. (ORIGINAL)
  • The Foreman of the two sitting Federal Grand Juries sitting in Knoxville, Tennessee via William C. Killian, U.S. Attorney for Tennessee’s Easter District
                       OF TREASON
1. OBAMA represents a clear and present danger to U.S. national security, to the U.S. Constitution and to our Republican form of government. OBAMA IS A FOREIGN BORN DOMESTIC ENEMY! OBAMA is working assiduously to destroy America! No document record exists showing Barack Hussein OBAMA to be a United States citizen.
2. OBAMA paid money and aided and abetted Al-Qaeda members and groups that attacked Americans on U.S. territory in Benghazi, Libya on 11 and 12 September 2012. Al-Qaeda is the jihadist terrorist organization that attacked the United States on 11 September 2001.
3. Pro-jihadist and Islamist OBAMA personally denied frantic cries for help from Americans in mortal danger throughout a 7-hour attack by approximately 150 heavily armed known jihadists. OBAMA watched four Americans die in real time. OBAMA is allowing our enemies to slaughter our servicemen piecemeal at the same time ordering our troops to disarm.
4. OBAMA lies to the American people about his TREASON with every opportunity. OBAMA is lying to the American people about the 11-12 September attack in Benghazi, Libya in a cover story intended to protect OBAMA from facing a criminal prosecution and conviction.
5. OBAMA is personally responsible for OBAMA  the 6 August 2011 shoot-down of an Army CH-47D Chinook helicopter in Afghanistan. 17 Navy SEALS died. All 5 men of the Chinook crew died. 3 Air Force special tactics airmen died. 5 men of a Navy support force died. OBAMA and his gang of outlaws lie to the America people about that.
6. In commission of TREASON In commission OBAMA is engaged in purchasing and supplying guns, heavy weapons, high-powered munitions and explosives to foreign aggressors—AMERICA’S ENEMIES—around the globe. OBAMA has and continues to ship weapons from Libya to Syria through Turkey. Some weapons may be being directly shipped to Syria. Christopher Stevens was OBAMA’s point man of this operation when Stevens was murdered in Benghazi during the attack of 11-12 September 2012. In this TREASON OBAMA is arming America’s enemies: Al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood connected Syrian rebels.
7. As an Act of TREASON OBAMA provides safe-haven and sanctuary to those bent on the destruction of the United States, its people, and its form of government. OBAMA encourages, facilitates and arms our enemies to carry out a WAR on the United States from enemy bases set up in the homeland and around the globe. OBAMA aids and abets these known enemy forces to establish and strike from strongholds OBAMA allows established on American soil.
8. OBAMA refuses to pledge his allegiance to the United States.OBAMA conspires with leaders of countries, groups and organizations bent upon the destruction of America. By so doing OBAMA engages in TREASON against the United States in every aspect of TREASON.
9. As an Act of TREASON OBAMA  broke into and occupies the White House by force of contrivance, concealment, conceit, dissembling and deceit. OBAMA is an undocumented illegal alien and spy. Posing as an imposter president and commander-in-chief OBAMA strips civilian command and control over the military establishment. Known military criminal actors—command racketeers such as Martin Dempsey—are free in the exercise of an extra-military government intent upon the destruction of our Republican, constitutional form of governance. There are dozens of senior military commanders no more obedient to the United States Constitution than is OBAMA.
10. OBAMA  is joined in his TREASON by a raft of civilian criminal assistants too numerous to name in this submission. I leave it to the Grand Jury, in the conduct of an independent, autonomous, and unfettered investigation, to assign specificity and particularity to the list of OBAMA’S co-conspiring outlaws.
11. OBAMA is  a FOREIGN BORN DOMESTIC ENEMY, an infiltrator, a traitor and a spy. OBAMA installed and operates a government that rivals and competes with our U.S. Constitution. OBAMA operates government not found in our United States Constitution. If not arrested OBAMA will continue to commit TREASON. OBAMA is emboldened now and more dangerous to this country’s survival as a constitutional Republic than any other threat the United States faces in the world.
12.  We come now to this reckoning: I accuse Barack Hussein OBAMA of TREASON. I accuse OBAMA’S military-political criminal   assistants of TREASON. Their criminal mischief is recognized as TREASON in pure form. I expose and identify OBAMA and his criminal associates as TRAITORS (Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Leon Panetta, Susan Rice, David Petraeus and Martin Dempsey but a few).
13.  It needs be said out loud and relentlessly: OBAMA is aiding and abetting America’s enemies. OBAMA is lying to the American people in every regard going to OBAMA’S TREASONOUNS escapades. OBAMA IS A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO THESE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!
14. This submission renews and extends all previous filings naming OBAMA in commission of TREASON dating from 17 March 2009. The list of ACTS of OBAMA’S TREASON found in this formal criminal complaint is not exhaustive. Far from it.
15.  My sworn duty is to stand against everything OBAMA stands for. The  FOREIGN BORN DOMESTIC ENEMY OBAMA IS NOT MY PRESIDENT! HE IS NOT MY COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF!
     “This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is perhaps, the end of the beginning.”
Obedient to my oath to the United States Constitution in submission of this criminal complaint for TREASON I remain stead fast and,
Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III
United States Navy Retired

Distribution wide 
Sworn and issued before me
Ashlei D. Lawson this 8th day of November 2012
at 1003 hours local (10: o3 a.m. EST)
My commission expires: 23 April 2013