The Solution to our Nation’s ‘Gun Problem’

We need some public executions to send a message.

Thieves don’t care about laws against theft, and rapists don’t care about laws against rape. The same is true about drinking and driving.

Schools should immediately develop a program where every teacher is trained in how to handle a firearm. 
Read more: 

http://politicaloutcast.com/2012/12/the-solution-to-our-nations-gun-problem/#ixzz2FHDav7fj

Take Your Precious Children Out of Government Schools

Take Your Precious Children Out of Government Schools
Have parents lost their minds? What will it take before they get their kids out of the government hell-hole? How about Christian parents for God’s sake!! How could a Christian ever put his/her child in a secular-training center? The media wants to blame guns, but no one wants to blame the schools. Let me paint a picture......
http://www.newswithviews.com/Daubenmire/dave304.htm
by Coach Dave Daubenmire

Wanta-Reagan-Mitterrand Protocols

I have been following the international currency wars for 2 years now, and this email needs your attention. If the Deutsche Bank, which some say is the primary bank the Nazi machine is still using, although covertly, is now frozen, then there is about to be a huge upheaval in the European banking cabal, and the effects will be without precedent in all of history.

These banks are all interconnected with all the banksters in Amerika and this might be the first domino.

Pay attention to this and read the entire article about Leo Wanta. He is another  person that has been lied about on a  global basis for years. Even on the internet there are many articles that try to smear this guy. I am just saying that this needs to be watched continuously for the next while.

Paul

Here are some important links on this subject.

http://theglobalnewsandviews.com/lee-wanta-bio/introduction/

http://theglobalnewsandviews.com/lee-wanta-bio/publication-decision/

And from the Idaho Observer

http://proliberty.com/observer/20070119.htm

The first 10 chapters of the new book are available under the Lee Wanta Biography here:

http://theglobalnewsandviews.com/lee-wanta-bio/

This is from one of the people that I know who have bought Iraqi Dinars in anticipation of a currency revaluation world wide. 12-12-12

It can now be reported that on the direct orders of the IMF (International Monetary Fund), the U.S. Provost Marshal, European INTERPOL and the German Police, all Deutsche Bank derivative-riddled proprietary accounts were frozen today on 12-12-12.

Item: The crooked U.S. Federal Reserve has now been totally neutralized by what took place in Europe today.

The announcement by Fed Chairman Bernard Bernanke of his program QE Infinity is not a stimulus but the continuation of a ponzi scheme to buy back toxic assets aka worthless mortgage-backed securities tied to major U.S. financial giants (gangster banks) and none other than their underwriter, the Nazi "Skull and Bones" Deutsche Bank.

P.S. Now that the Deutsche Bank has had their derivative accounts frozen there are really no derivatives outstanding for the crooked Fed to prop up.

Translation: QE4 is now Titanic5.

P.P.S. At this hour we can also divulge that gangster U.S. banks like Goldman Sachs and U.S. Bank are now totally exposed in new illegally cross-collateralized derivative positions aka written call options in crude oil and unleaded gasoline futures markets, which were designed to protect their already undermargined naked long positions in natural gas.

P.P.P.S. So, at this hour, the IMF and the U.S. Provost Marshal continue to order massive asset redemption and repatriation of collateralized assets aka precious and industrial metals.

Introduction

Wanta-Reagan-Mitterrand Protocolshttp://theglobalnewsandviews.com/lee-wanta-bio/introduction/

In closing, we can now directly report that after the freezing of the Deutsche Bank proprietary accounts that took place today, 12-12-12, the IMF is now prepared to fully implement the Wanta-Reagan-Mitterrand Protocols with the Obama Administration absent.

Finally, it is time to buy the black gold and sell the yellow gold.
Deutsche Bank is down. OMG OMG Bye bye Bushes and shrubs
This is huge news people!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The biggest bank that is in with the Fed scum bags has just been neutered. The Reagan Wanta Protocols are done. WOW WEE Public RV is around the corner.

And if you don't know what a Provost Marshall is this is from Wikipedia:

In the United States Army and United States Marine Corps, the senior military police officer is the Provost Marshal General (PMG) (Army) or Provost Marshal (USMC). The PMG was a post that was reinstated in 2003, having been abolished for 29 years. The PMG is in charge the United States Army Military Police Corps, U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (CID) and United States Army Corrections Command (ACC) policy and procedures from an office in The Pentagon.

The senior MP officer at the theater, corps, division, and brigade level and for each garrison is known as a provost marshal. In many US Army garrisons, a provost marshal is at times also responsible for the provision of fire and physical security as well as law enforcement services and thus is also referred to as the Director of Emergency Services.

2ND BITE TO CHALLENGE OBAMA'S ELIGIBILITY?

A longstanding eligibility case challenging Barack Obama’s presence in the White House soon could be headed to the state Supreme Court in Alabama, where one justice already in a court filing has questioned the authenticity of Obama’s documentation, and the incoming chief justice is a dyed-in-the-wool Constitution supporter with little tolerance for those who want to bypass the document.

The move is pending in an eligibility challenge brought by Hugh McInnish and others against the Alabama Secretary of State Beth Chapman.

Read more at 

http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/2nd-bite-to-challenge-obamas-eligibility/#PPSj6BPhObEWidP7.99 

The Blind Lead the Blind and both fall into the pit!

Sex charges rock Purpose Driven 'healthy church'.

For there shall be a time when they will not endure sound doctrine but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables.  2 Timothy 4


Read more at

 http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/sex-charges-rock-purpose-driven-healthy-church/#Jrdvw0AjKSP60m4u.99 

The Real Terrorists are in GOVERNMENT

THIS CRAP WILL STOP when the American people have the guts to stop it, and not until then.

Ask yourself this question. WHAT WAS THE SECOND AMENDMENT ALL ABOUT?

War on terror????   What about the terrorists in the federal government?

With the corruption in the judicial system and NO justice being available to the little guy the only hope to stop this short of blood is for the people to understand their rights as a juror and nullify (refuse to apply) these bad laws supposedly justifying these raids.

During prohibition the courts no longer could get convictions because jurors refused to convict.
They were forced to take those bad laws off the books.

Try these links.
http://www.paulstramer.net/2012/11/what-is-really-law-and-what-is-not-law.html

http://www.paulstramer.net/2012/10/major-victory-for-jury-nullification.html

http://www.paulstramer.net/2009/12/juries-can-stop-runaway-government-you.html

http://juryrights.info/

Rand Paul blows it again!

Rand Paul is supporting this amendment to NDAA that falls far short of fixing the problem.
In fact it might make things worse by muddying the water legally.

http://app.streamsend.com/private/urb99fh41u/U7V/MLwjYWL/browse/17560639

From Devvy.com

There is a new effort and PAC underway to run Sen. Rand Paul for president in 2016. No thank you. He continues to blunder on too many things.

This Week In News For Senator Rand Paul - November 30, 2012

"Please allow me to update you on this week's events here in our nation's capital and on a very important issue back home in Kentucky.

"A Victory for Americans' Right to Trial by Jury

"This week I took to the Senate floor to voice my support for an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) sponsored by Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah).

"The amendment would invoke the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution with regard to indefinite detention of American citizens. I indicated my intention to push for a vote on this amendment and has threatened to filibuster the NDAA bill until a vote is granted. Click HERE or below to watch my speech in support of the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution and the Feinstein-Lee NDAA Amendment.

"Finally that evening, the Senate voted on the Feinstein-Lee Amendment to the NDAA that I co-sponsored. It would protect the rights prescribed to all Americans in the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution with regard to indefinite detention and the right to a trial by jury. Moments before the vote, I spoke on the Senate floor to again voice my support for the amendment and inspire my Senate colleagues to do the same."

Wrong, again, Dr. Paul.

http://app.streamsend.com/private/urb99fh41u/U7V/MLwjYWL/browse/17526595

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/congress/item/13789-feinstein-lee-ndaa-amendment-passes-but-is-it-enough

Bombshell case, CA Supreme Court to rule on Obama Eligibility

Press release from the Law Offices of Dr. Orly Taitz

Breaking news! Supreme Court of CA to rule whether Obama should be declared illegitimate for the U.S. Presidency due to his use of forged IDs and a fraudulently obtained CT Social Security number. Loss of 55 CA electoral votes will certainly mean new elections in the U.S.

After originally refusing to hear the case under the original jurisdiction, Supreme Court of California was persuaded by Attorney and Candidate for the U.S. Senate Dr. Orly Taitz to take on a case Noonan, Judd, MacLaren, Taitz v Bowen under the provisions of the California Constitution, which allow Supreme Court of California to hear special cases under the Original Jurisdiction. Docket excerpt is below. Case number is S 207078 Noonan v Bowen. Attorney Orly Taitz.

This case is brought on behalf of four plaintiffs, all of whom have perfect standing. Edward Noonan won the American Independent Party Presidential Primary   in CA and certificate of his win was submitted to the court. Keith Judd is a Democratic Party candidate for the U.s. Presidency, registered with the FEC, he was a runner up to Barack Obama in West Virginia Democratic Party Primary with 40% of the vote, Thomas Gregory Macleran was a Republican candidate for President, registered with the FEC. Attorney and Doctor Orly Taitz was a candidate for the U.S. Senate in CA.

This case has two premises.  

First.  Plaintiffs provided the court with evidence of nearly One and a half million invalid voter registrations in the state of California. Such a large number of invalid votes justifies STAY of certification of the results.

Second.  Plaintiffs provided evidence of Candidate Barack Obama committing massive elections fraud by using  forged IDs and a fraudulently obtained Connecticut Social Security number 042-68-4425, which was never assigned to Obama and using a name, which is not legally his, as he is listed under the last name Soebarkah in his mother’s U.S. Passport and there is no evidence of him ever legally changing his name from Barack Obama Soebarkah to Barack Obama. Additionally, in his school records in Indonesia his citizenship is listed as Indonesian, not American. There is no record of him relinquishing his Indonesian citizenship and gaining the U.S. citizenship. Even if one were to believe that he arguendo changed his citizenship from Indonesian to American later in life, he would be a naturalized citizen and not natural born. Additionally, plaintiffs provided the courts with a  sworn affidavits of Maricopa county, AZ investigator Mike Zullo, who is currently conducting a criminal investigation of forgeries in Obama’s IDs, and who attested that Obama’s birth certificate, Selective Service certificate and Social Security card represent forgeries.  Similarly, Plaintiffs provided affidavits of   Sheriff Joseph Arpaio, Senior Deportation Officer John Sampson, experts Paul Irey, Douglas Vogt and Felicito Papa and investigator Susan Daniels, all of whom are attesting that Obama’s IDs are forgeries. Affidavit of Assistant Clerk for the City of Honolulu Timothy Adams attests to the fact that there is no birth certificate for Barack Obama in any hospital in Hawaii.  Statement of the Minister of Health of Kenya, James Orenga attesting to Obama’s birth in Kenya and Obama’s own biography submitted by him to his literally agent in 1991, stating that he was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia.    Plaintiffs are stating that if this court does not STAY the certification of the election results, this court will commit treason against the United States of America by allowing a foreign national, a citizen of Indonesia and possibly still citizen of Kenya to get in the position of the U.S. President and Commander n Chief by virtue of fraud and use of forged IDs and a stolen Social Security number.

Read more here:

http://beforeitsnews.com/obama-birthplace-controversy/2012/12/ca-supreme-court-to-rule-on-obama-eligibility-2450604.html

Who is the real Santa Claus

Yes he is real. I can tell you where he lived and where he lives now.

His name is Saint Nicholas, and he was the Bishop of Myra in Asia Minor, and today we celebrate his heavenly birthday. Yes he now lives in heaven, and from there he is really watching not only the children, but everyone of good heart that really believes in his life and teachings

He is NOT magic (there is no such thing), but he does work miracles. In fact he has worked so many miracles that nobody can count them.

What he wants is for all of us, children and everyone TO BE GOOD, AND NOT DO EVIL.

Here is the real story of his life from the "New Roman Missal by the Reverend Fr. F. X. Lasance 1937. 
December 6th. 
St. Nicholas Archbishop of Myra in  Asia Minor, from the childlike innocence of his own life, and his devout care for the young, is looked upon as the patron of children. He died in the middle of the Fourth Century, and seven hundred years later his holy relics were translated to Bari in Italy. Because of the power he exercised over flames, we pray that through his intercession we may be preserved from the flames of hell. He is remembered for the money which he threw in a window that three young girls might have a dowry for their marriage. Because of this gift his name has become associated with giving and children thank Santa Claus (or St. Nicholas) for their presents at Christmastime.

And from the Lives of the Saints, by Omer Englebert, 1951

Few saints enjoy such great popularity and few are credited with so many miracles. Sts. John Chrysostom, Peter Damian, and Bonaventure have vied in eloquence with one another in telling of the merits and the goodness of Saint Nicholas. Born at Patara in Lycia, he visited the Thebaid, ruled the great monastery, was imprisoned for a time for his faith, and ended his life as archbishop of Myra.
It is doubtless the story of his restoring life to the children put in the salting tub which caused him to become the patron and the annual benefactor of school children. St. Bonaventure tells the story in a sermon. St. Nicholas was, it seems, on his way to the Council of Nicaea, when he entered an inn whose owner, not content with having killed two young boys for the sake of their meagre purse, had cut them up and was about to sell them piecemeal to his clients. The bishop restored them to life and then converted this murderer.
Another famous tale is that of the three marriageable girls who did not succeed in getting married. Poor and not knowing what to do with them, their father was about to put them into a house of ill fame. Nicholas took advantage of the fact that this odious man slept with his window open, to go one night and throw a purse filled with gold into his room. A few days later, the eldest daughter was married. In the same way, Nicholas delivered to the second the dowry she needed. Soon she, too, found a husband. The saint was discovered at the moment when he was throwing up from the street the purse destined for the third. The father, who had been hiding in the shadow, recognized him; he fell at his feet, weeping in penitence and gratitude, and from then on did not cease to sing his praises everywhere.
____________________________________

So the tradition is based on real events about a real person who set an example of generosity, morality, and giving for all of us to follow. Pray to him and ask him to obtain for you what you really need both in temporal and especially spiritual gifts.

So today is the yearly feast of Saint Nicholas, Bishop and Confessor, and Cannonized Saint of the Catholic Church.

Sales through the roof at the gun shows

This article was written by my Silver associate in Denver and is what you should be watching in the coming few weeks and months.

The Gobal financial system is failing RIGHT NOW and there is no way mathematically possible to save it EVEN IF WE WANTED TO.

We need to start over with currency with intrinsic value like precious metals - gold, silver, lead, brass, copper etc.

Silver is flat flying out the door right now. Time is short. Everything I sell at the gun shows is moving really well and setting records for sales.

Solar Equipment, fuel preservative, radios, silver, and the new little stove that charges your batteries while it cooks your meals in camp are

generating a lot of interest and sales.

 

I will be in Bozeman this weekend for the final 3 day show of the year, then I am done with shows until February in Butte.

 

We just had a barn burner of a show in Kalispell. It was the best show of the year there for many of the vendors including me.

I don't know how much longer we will be able to do the gun shows, but I will be riding that ship when it goes down.

If you want some silver before it's too late look here and then call for the best price.

http://www.teapartysilver.com/silverforsale.html

 

Paul Stramer  KC7MEZ
SLC Distributing
PO Box 116
Eureka MT 59917
800 889 2839pstramer@eurekadsl.net

 

 

Info I’m getting to pay attention to:

Info coming out that the US has defaulted on payments to China and that China has demanded the US pay up in full. O is stalling and blocking global currency revaluation(RV) that would completely pay this debt off as he wants a 40% tax on the RV. China has said pay or we are coming to basically repossess and has launched its Navy. O has said "bring it". China is said to possess EMP weaponry that will if used, throw the US back to the dark ages.

Now, none of what I am saying is exaggerated. If O does not go with the demands of China and Mr. WU, who now basically owns the Fed Res, then we will most likely be looking at WW III with China in the coming weeks. There have been countless high level meetings in the last several weeks on all of this and is what I have been posting about including the stock market crash on Fri after Thanksgiving. Mr. Wu accepted O's word that the RV would get done and didn't crash the stock market. Now at this time, O is flirting with a nuclear bomb since he hasn't lived up to his promise and Wu and the Dragons are just about done talking and negotiating. I know there is a high level meeting scheduled for tomorrow afternoon which may be the final tipping point based on what I hear is to be discussed.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/photo/2012-11/28/content_15968636.htm

China is not Japan of WW II....War with China will bring in Russia as an ally, India, Iran, many of the Asian countries and more. Now the US Corp is bankrupt and if there is a war, there will be no money to pay for it as the US's lender, China, will be on the opposite side. … China, already owns significant land in the US, their troops already stationed in Mexico, the sub off of Calif that fired a missile 6-9 months ago, the other subs patrolling in the Gulf of Mexico …. To think we are the big boy on the block any more, well you are sadly mistaken. Now The other side of this is the financial war China has already waged on the US which the US is losing to the ability for China to completely and totally crash the stock market to a value of DOW < 3000 from its current level. I have many, many more examples that will support the fact that China is and has control of this and if it comes to a war, it will be a war the US will most certainly lose.

Some of this hinted at in today’s post on Dinar Recaps:  http://www.dinarrecaps.com/1/post/2012/12/terryk-get-team-member-chat6.html

I have been following all of this for a few years now… China told us back in 2008 that if we failed on our debt payment to them, they would consider it an act of war.

Then, they formed the BRICS treaty/alliance with Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRICS  which basically said they would no longer conduct trade with the US Dollar as the world reserve currency…and have since been trading amongst themselves in a gold-backed currency.  Since then, other countries have joined them; this effectively wiped out the US Dollar as the world reserve currency, and has brought down the fiat central banking system. The entire story goes back centuries… http://newtomorrow.us/main.html

We are about to see this come to fruition… in January 2013 Basel III standards will be implemented world-wide, which will require the central banks to have assets of gold, silver, oil, gas, precious gems etc. to back the value of their currency.  They will no longer be able to just print money at will.   Gold and silver prices have been manipulated to keep up the appearance that fiat currency has retained value; we will be seeing that manipulation soon come to an end, and physical metal prices will separate from the manufactured derivative pricing. 

We have seen shifts in trade and jobs and real estate etc. over the last few years – everything going to China… now you know why… pacification because the US has been in default on our debt to China… there’s also a huge story about US theft of gold from China that dates back to WWII and Chiang Kai-Shek era… much of that has been stashed away in caves in the Philippines… but also used illegally (stolen) by the Central Bankers (Rothchilds, Rockerfeller-Bush Cabal).

If you’ve been following the implementation of the Wanta-Reagan-Mitterand protocols… http://www.myspace.com/tom_heneghan_intel/blog/546523783 this is also in the works… along with the global currency re-set, the change of the world-reserve currency from US Dollar to Chinese yuan/ remnimbi…

http://theglobalnewsandviews.com/lee-wanta-bio/  , http://theglobalnewsandviews.com/2012/09/19/publication-to-be-released-here-on-global-news-and-views/

All of this ties in with what’s been happening with gold and silver, and the dinar RV….which is how I came to be researching all of this stuff to begin with…

Mary Beth Maidment

Silver & Gold Shop

Montana Courtroom Incident Proves Wild Fire Can Burn Twice

This story should make national headlines since Joel Boniek was the legislator that sponsored the Montana Firearms Freedom Act that has gone viral around many states.  Pour on the truth Joel, and let us know how to help spread this story.

This remarkable story begins with a wild fire in Paradise Valley, Montana, south of the small City of Livingston. The valley is aptly named, as it runs from Yellowstone National Park northward all the way to Livingston, Montana. The valley uses steep mountains to showcase the Yellowstone River in scenic beauty renewed and refreshed with every bend as the river winds its way through the silent majesty of Rocky Mountain ranges between Gardiner and Livingston.

Months after a wild fire was quenched, its flames have resurrected to envelop a courtroom in Livingston, Montana with a fiery exchange which has sparked fear and defensive psycho-babble in the hearts of a vociferous huddle of collectivists who are trying to forge a new culture in Montana. At their service is a newspaper cadre which serves up the Progressive perception for readers far and wide.

The culture clash between recently arrived statists and old-fashioned Montanans ignited in a spontaneous combustion in a small courtroom in mid-November, 2012, when a man wearing a three-cornered hat, like that of our forefathers of the American Revolution, stood up and bellowed to the judge in a loud, rich, baritone voice, “Bull Sh*t!”.

What happened next has been wildly misinterpreted in headlines around Montana as the state-worshipping collectivists and socialists of the press were quick in their attempt to douse such a flame, the flame of freedom, the fiery individualist rejection which dared challenge governmental authority. In their misrepresentation and mockery, the press has maligned a former State Representative’s character.

To help readers understand, here are a few of the headlines going about the Internet and some Montana newspapers. We will rebut these headlines and expose the shameful intent of the press further down in this article.

See the whole story and the evidence here:

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2012/12/03/montana-courtroom-incident-proves-wild-fire-can-burn-twice/

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.

http://ericpetersautos.com/2012/11/27/permission-slips-instead-of-rights/ 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: http://www.paulstramer.net/2009/09/when-is-it-time-to-fight.html 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. http://www.juryrights.info 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 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 ©

CHRISTIANS HAVE LOST THEIR SAVOR

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.....
http://www.newswithviews.com/Daubenmire/dave301.htm
by Coach Dave Daubenmire

The Best States For Homeschooling

We home schooled eight children. None of them have any problem competing with the products of the public schools.

http://www.activistpost.com/2012/11/10-freest-states-for-homeschooling.html

Get the book from Amazon called "Public Schools, Public Menace"

http://www.amazon.com/Public-Schools-Menace-Parents-Children/dp/0964569329/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1354112211&sr=8-1&keywords=public+schools+public+menace

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.

https://rt.com/usa/news/supreme-court-illinois-police-653/

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. GET OUT OF THE BANKS NOW INCLUDING IRA AND 401K ACCOUNTS. www.teapartysilver.com 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 WND.com.

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

http://www.moresureword.com/guns.htm

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.

Honor

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. 

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15546c.htm

John Locke on the right of revolution:

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch3s2.html

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 omnipotent. Legally 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. Thomas, Summa 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. Thomas, Summa Theol., I-II.21.4 ad 3). To say nothing of his eternal interests in his relations with his Maker, man 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 interests. Social and political life is not the whole of human life. Man 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 Suárez (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 individuals. Individuals 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:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09212a.htm