Florida Senate President Calls for Hangings

krisannehall.com

Monday December 3, 2012, I met the Republican leader of the Florida Senate Don Gaetz after speaking to the Senate Committee on Healthcare Exchanges.  I explained to him that I wanted to teach on nullification and why the Healthcare Act is unconstitutional.  He mocked the Founders of this nation to my face, implying they are irrelevant to the interpretation of the Constituion.  He laughed at my support of Constitutional principles.  He then shouted out to me as he left the room that he would read anything that I sent him.  This morning I sent him an email explaining the Founders' position on State Sovereignty and nullificaion.  

After sending Senator Don Gaetz my letter explaining the positions of James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton on State Sovereignty, Mr. Gaetz says that citizens who agree with the writer of the Declaration of Independence should be summarily shot and hanged.  Does that means Don Gaetz is in favor of shooting the many Catholic Bishops and other religious leaders who have said that they will not comply with this mandate?  Notice the double-speak in his email below.  He affirms his support for the Constitution and then demonstrates his utter ignorance of its meaning and purpose.

Here is a copy of his email:

Thank you for your email and for your passionate views.   
Like you, I believe Obamacare is unconstitutional and wrong-headed policy. I have consistently voted in the Florida Legislature for legislation that affirms our state's options, obligations and sovereignty under the United States Constitution. I am working every day to ensure the election of national candidates who will repeal and replace this extraordinarily bad policy. 

As to nullification, I tend to favor the approach used by Florida's first Governor, Andrew Jackson: 

It is said that one evening, while he was president, General Jackson was interrupted in his reading in his bedroom by an alarmed military aide who breathlessly reported, "Mr. President, the "nullifiers" are in front of the Executive Mansion with torches and guns. They are screaming that each state has the right to decide for itself which federal laws to follow. They threaten to burn us down if you will not agree with them." 

Without lifting his head from his reading, Andrew Jackson said, "Shoot the first nullifier who touches the Flag. And hang the rest." 

Chaplain, I have sworn an oath on my father's Bible before Almighty God to preserve, protect and defend the constitution and government of the United States. And that's exactly what I intend to do. Count me with Andrew Jackson. 

Senator Don Gaetz 

I can only assume since this overbearing blowhard is used to getting his way, he thinks such intimidation will make us shut up and go away. Well, Mr. Gaetz is sadly mistaken.  

While Mr. Gaetz may only give lip-service to the Constitution so that he can continue his political reign, there are those of us who actually believe in the Constitution and plan to support and defend it, no matter what!  If it means being threatened or shot at by tyrannical oligarchs, so be it.  Just know that this path was not our choice Mr. Gaetz. You fired the first shot!

Mr. Gaetz, stand all you like with Andrew Jackson, we will be the ones across the way standing with Patrick Henry!

United Nations threatens Colorado, Washington state over marijuana decriminalization laws

Thursday, November 29, 2012 by: J. D. Heyes

(NaturalNews) Likely empowered by a U.S. administration that favors the kind of nanny state politics a ruling global entity would no doubt embrace, the head of the United Nations' International Narcotics Control Board feels comfortable telling federal officials they should move to challenge measures in Colorado and Washington that decriminalize possession of small amounts of marijuana for adults 21 and over.

Raymond Yans lectured the voter-approved measures - part of the United States' democratic process, something most UN member countries are not familiar with - send "a wrong message to the rest of the nation and it sends a wrong message abroad."

In an interview with The Associated Press, Yans said he would like to see Attorney General Eric Holder "take all necessary measures" to ensure that marijuana possession remains illegal throughout the United States.

Does the UN remember that Obama inhaled? 

Currently, both states are awaiting the implementation of plans to regulate and tax the drug because officials there are waiting to see if Washington will assert its federal authority in the matter. At present, pot is a Schedule I controlled substance, in the same category as LSD and heroin. The federal Drug Enforcement Administration has said that marijuana has a high potential for abuse and "no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States," the New York Times has reported.

Yans' outrage makes us wonder here at Natural News if he read reports back in 2006 when then-U.S. Sen. Barack Obama told the American Society of Magazine Editors that he did, in fact, smoke marijuana.

 "When I was a kid, I inhaled," he said. "That was the point."

Also, is Yans oblivious to the fact that the Netherlands has essentially legalized pot by decriminalizing both its possession and sale? Or that Portugal, in 2001, became the first European country, according to Time magazine, "to officially abolish all criminal penalties for personal possession of drugs, including marijuana, cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine?"

At the time, critics of the policy change warned that drug use would skyrocket in a nation where hard drug use was already the highest on the continent. But a subsequent study by the libertarian-leaning CATO Institute in 2009 found no appreciable increase in usage. In fact, in the years after personal possession of drugs was decriminalized, illegal use among teens in Portugal dropped while rates of new HIV infections caused by the sharing of dirty needles also fell. The number of people seeking treatment for drug addition; however, more than doubled - but that figure was an acceptable alternative to incarceration because the Portuguese government had previously determined that treating offenders would be cheaper than jailing them.

"Judging by every metric, decriminalization in Portugal has been a resounding success," Glenn Greenwald, an attorney, author and fluent Portuguese speaker, who conducted the research, told Time. "It has enabled the Portuguese government to manage and control the drug problem far better than virtually every other Western country does."

"I think we can learn that we should stop being reflexively opposed when someone else does [decriminalize] and should take seriously the possibility that anti-user enforcement isn't having much influence on our drug consumption," Mark Kleiman, author of the forthcoming When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment, and director of the drug policy analysis program at UCLA, told the magazine.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/038140_United_Nations_Colorado_marijuana_prohibition.html#ixzz2Dhv6IqS6

Texas has backup plan for keeping feds (NDAA) at bay

WND EXCLUSIVE

Considering proposal to make cooperation with specific program a crime

by Bob Unruh

Presumably, a proposal being developed in Texas right now won’t be necessary should its petition on the White House website to secede from the union be successful.
But if not, the Lone Star state apparently wants to be prepared to challenge whatever it views as a federal encroachment on the rights of the state, or its citizens.
So it will be reviewing a legislative plan that not only would make it illegal to cooperate with the federal National Defense Authorization Act in Texas, but could make an offender subject to a year in jail and a $10,000 fine.
The NDAA was signed into law by Barack Obama at the end of 2011, and it includes sections 1021 and 1022, “Which, in essence, create a new power for the federal government to ‘indefinitely detain’ – without due process – any person. Indefinitely. That’s little different than kidnapping,” said a report from the Tenth Amendment Center, which focuses its work on the rights reserved to the states and the people under the federal Constitution.
Michael Boldin, the center’s founder, told WND, “With four more years of the man who not only signed ‘indefinite detention’ into law, but has vigorously defended it in court, there is absolutely zero chance for repeal in Washington, D.C. Our last hope is to stand up and nullify.”
He cited House Bill 149 by Rep. Lyle Larson in Texas.
The “Texas Liberty Preservation Act” specifically finds the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution lets Washington “exercise only those powers specifically delegated to it under Article I, Section 8.”
The bill itself explains that the president “has asserted that the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, enacted in 2001, authorizes the president to indefinitely detain, without charge, any person, including a citizen of the United States or a lawful resident alien, regardless of whether the person is apprehended inside or outside the borders of the United States.”
The NDAA sections specifically allow “indefinite detention of persons apprehended within the United States without charge or trial.”
That, however, violates “The Texas Constitution, the limits of federal power authorized by Article I, Section 8″ and “the legal doctrine of Posse Comitatus.
Oh, and it also violates habeas corpus, the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, the Sixth Amendment, the Eighth Amendment, the Fourteenth Amendment, the legislation explains.
That would be the right to petition government, being free from unreasonable searches, the prohibition of the deprivation of liberty without due process, a speedy trial, the ban on cruel and unusual punishment, and others.
Since those sections, 1021 and 1022, “Violate portions of federal law, the United States Constitution, and the Texas Constitution,” they are “invalid and illegal” in Texas, the legislation says.
But it goes further. A lot.
It specifies that “A person who is an official, agent, or employee of the United States or an employee of a corporation providing services to the United States commits an offense if the person enforces or attempts to enforce a statute, a rule or regulation, an order, or any law of the United States in violation of this subchapter.”
Such violations would be punishable by a jail term of a year, a fine of not more than $10,000.
Or both.
“Rep. Larson will likely be derided by the establishment, so if you live in Texas, he deserves your praise and relentless support on this issue,” Boldin told WND. “If you live anywhere else in the country, the time to act is now. Get on the phone with your state legislators and press them to show the same kind of courage that Lyle Larson has done. When enough states stand up and say NO to unconstitutional federal acts, there’s not much that Obama and his gang can do about it. The Constitution and your liberty will win.”
The organization has reported that sources suggest that at least 10 other states will be considering similar legislation in the coming year.
“And potentially dozens of counties and cities can be expected to move along these lines as well,” the report said.
Already, cooperating with the NDAA provisions are illegal in Virginia. Michigan is considering a similar move, and more than 15 local communities have take the same action.
The pushback against the NDAA started with a few local communities in Colorado before Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell signed House Bill 1160, making that state the first to pass a law not only rejecting the federal act, but fully banning any state agency from cooperating with the feds on it.

WND previously has reported on a court case over the sections, where the Obama administration has battled vigorously for its right to detention.
The fight is on appeal right now, after U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest issued a permanent injunction against the sections.
In her order, Forrest had written, “The government put forth the qualified position that plaintiffs’ particular activities, as described at the hearing, if described accurately, if they were independent, and without more, would not subject plaintiffs to military detention under Section 1021.”

 

 Full story HERE

New Law: Virginia will not cooperate with NDAA detention

Contact: Mike Maharrey
Communications director
O: 213.935.0553
media@tenthamendmentcenter.com
www.tenthamendmentcenter.com

For Immediate Release:April 18, 2012

RICHMOND, Va. – On Wednesday, the Virginia legislature overwhelmingly passed a law that forbids state agencies from cooperating with any federal attempt to exercise the indefinite detention without due process provisions written into sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act.

HB1160 “Prevents any agency, political subdivision, employee, or member of the military of Virginia from assisting an agency of the armed forces of the United States in the conduct of the investigation, prosecution, or detention of a United States citizen in violation of the United States Constitution, Constitution of Virginia, or any Virginia law or regulation.”

The legislature previously passed HB1160 and forwarded it to Gov. Bob McDonnell for his signature. Last week, the governor agreed to sign the bill with a minor amendment. On Wednesday, the House of Delegates passed the amended version of the legislation 89-7. Just hours later, the Senate concurred by a 36-1 vote.

Bill sponsor Delegate Bob Marshall (R-Manassas) says that since the legislature passed HB1150 as recommended by the governor, it does not require a signature and will become law effective July 1, 2012.
Several states recently passed resolutions condemning NDAA indefinite detention, but Virginia becomes the first state to pass a law refusing compliance with sections 1021 and 1022.



“In the 1850s, northern states felt that habeas corpus was so important that they passed laws rejecting the federal fugitive slave act. The bill passed in Massachusetts was so effective, not one single runaway slave was returned south from that state. Today, Virginia joins in this great American tradition,” Tenth Amendment Center executive director Michael Boldin said. “When the federal government passes unconstitutional so-called laws so destructive to liberty – it’s the people and the states that will stand up and say, ‘NO!’ May the other states now follow the lead taken today by Virginia.”

For more information on the new Virginia law, click HERE.

 

OREGON SHERIFF GIL GILBERTSON CONTINUES STAND AGAINST U.S. FOREST SERVICE

By Sarah Foster
November 23, 2011
NewsWithViews.com

Josephine County, Ore. -- Two months ago Gil Gilbertson, the sheriff of this rural county in southern Oregon, drafted a 10-page report exploring the origins and extent of federal power within a state and emailed his findings to various parties, asking for comment.

Since the report was in rough-draft form he was somewhat surprised that it went viral, but it shows there are a lot of people hungry for information about how much power (particularly law-enforcement power) the federal government actually wields within a state, where that power comes from, and the limits to that power.

Gilbertson continued his research and recently completed a 13-page revised and updated version, retitled: Unraveling Federal Jurisdiction within a State. It is highly footnoted with references to statutes and court decisions.

This a “must read” for anyone concerned about infringements against the 10th Amendment and federal encroachments in general – like road closures, Wild Lands and Monument designations, mining and other resource uses. In other words, this is for anyone and everybody with an interest – no matter how casual -- in accessing the public lands, either as a “resource user” (a rancher or miner) or simply a casual vacationer who enjoys weekend camping.

“If you’d told me two years ago that I would be writing such a document, I would have probably walked away from you shaking my head,” the sheriff notes in the introduction.

“This paper is a result of a clash with the federal [U.S. Forest Service] law enforcement in this county, from citizens complaining of what can only be described as harassment and violations of their rights,” he explains. “The first time I approached the USFS the door closed regarding any discussion. The USFS advised me to file a Freedom of Information (FOI) request. “

Eventually Gilbertson was able to discuss the issue with the Forest Service. “Most of my questions were answered except for one: Where does the USFS’s authority come from? (bold-face in original). The answer(s) were surprising.”

Finding the answer is one of five tasks he set himself, which he lists as follows:

1. Identify true jurisdictional authority of the Federal Government
2. Examine and expose how the reserved powers of the States are usurped by federal agencies writing and enforcing their self-imposed codes and regulations
3. Examine how the health, safety, and welfare of the Citizens within the State are undermined
4. Provide a positive and equitable solution
5. Coordinate with like-minded Sheriffs to take a formal stance on these issues.

Mission Creep

To sum up his conclusions regarding federal authority in a very small nutshell: the original idea was for the federal government to hold public lands within a state in trust, with the intention being for eventual disposal. Gilbertson writes:

“The public lands (out West) were considered by many as the ‘problem lands.’ However, the approved procedure, since the passage of the Resolutions of October 1780, was that the central government held the lands in trust. Upon a state being admitted to the Union, the federal government had the trust authority and obligation to dispose of the lands for expansion, exploration, occupancy, and production by setters.

“Slowly, over the years many of these ‘public lands’ held in trust seemingly became more desirable to retain, rather than for disposal. Newly formed federal regulatory agencies worked their way into existence, each taking an increasingly expanding role (enter ‘mission creep’). By 1976 complete and total disregard for the trust obligation to dispose of public land was made clear in the Federal Lands Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), which states: ‘…that it is the policy of the United States that the public lands be retained in Federal ownership.’”

Sheriff Gilbertson talked with NWV about his report, expanding on his views about the division of power between federal and state governments.

[Book predicts the safest place in America to ride out the coming apocalypse is Josephine County, Oregon]

He strongly questions the legality and constitutionality of executive orders and various regulations, as well as laws like FLPMA, observing that Congress has the sole authority to make law, not the president, not the agencies. Not surprisingly he takes sharp issue with President Obama who has declared he’ll “circumvent the Constitution” through the use of executive orders.

“The Constitution is clear on who has police and legislative powers. Those executive orders are not law,” said Gilbertson.

And while FLPMA is a congressionally passed statute, it delegates undue powers to the agencies. “Congress cannot give an agency the ability to write rules and regulations and enforce them as if they were law,” he said. “Congress has to do that. These agencies write their own rules and regulations as they go along and enforce these as law.”

“The big issue, as I see it,” he continued, “is that all these things combine. You have DEQ, EPA, all these federal entities. And as all these federal agencies evolved over the years, there’s been mission creep. They decided, well, we need to fix this; this gives us more powers, and so forth, so we’ll just write down more rules and regulations. They were allowed to get away with it for whatever reason, and now they enforce those as laws. But it’s clearly stated that that can’t be done -- I spelled that out in my document,” he said.

Moreover, “Forest reserves were not federal enclaves subject to the doctrine of exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the United States. Local peace officers were to exercise civil and criminal process over these lands. Forest Service rangers were not law enforcement officers unless designated as such by state authority.”

The federal government sees it otherwise, so in addition to expanding claims for general regulatory power agencies like the Forest Service are attempting to extend the reach of law enforcement authority – a matter that adds to Gilbertson’s concerns.

“The U.S. Forest Service and BLM are really stepping outside their authority in that the Constitution does not give them that,” he observed. “The Tenth Amendment clearly reserves police rights to the states.”

Law Enforcement Power Grab

Sheriffs in other counties have taken note of this development. In his report Gilbertson refers to a one-page position paper by the Western States Sheriffs’ Association that concurs with his observations, and in fact grew from his earlier one. He writes, quoting from the WSSA statement:

“The USFS recently sent out a communication dated July 15, 2011, titled Federal Register publication of Final Proposed Rules [Title 36] 262, 261, and 212 purportedly to clarify and expand their authority.

On Sept. 21, the Western States Sheriffs Association responded with a position paper to this USFS publication by writing: “The membership of the Western States Sheriffs Association has reviewed the proposed rule changes and believes they exhibit the following: (1) an absolute disregard for the sovereignty of the individual States, (2) a disregard for the authority of the Office of Sheriff, and (3) A continued inability of the Forest Service to understand the mission and function of its Law Enforcement component."

Additionally, “This effort is viewed as an unnecessary and unauthorized expansion of federal police powers. The ultimate legal and constitutional authority for the protection of the public and the land within an individual county is vested in the Office of Sheriff. The Roles and responsibilities for the Office of Sheriff are well enumerated within the laws of each State, and the Sheriff possesses the authority to extend enforcement powers as appropriate.

“It is the position of this committee that the membership of the Western States Sheriffs’ Association utilizes all appropriate methods and resources to oppose this effort.”

Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations deals with the U.S. Forest Service. Section 212 is about Travel Management within the national forests.

NWV contacted Dave Brown, Sheriff of Skamania County, Wash., for additional information. Sheriff Brown is the chair of the Public Lands Committee of the WSSA that drafted the Position Paper. He said he hoped to have it adopted by the association at its annual meeting.

“It has not been adopted, but my hope is that it will be at our spring conference next March when it’s presented to the entire membership,” Brown said.

Brown said his committee relied for background on the first report Gilbertson sent out in mid-September. His further observations to NWV were particularly chilling.

“Essentially they are nationalizing their ability to do law enforcement. Right now the ability for them to enforce is based on … rules that are made at the district ranger’s office or the forest supervisor’s office,” he said. “They want to take that authority away from local rangers and forest supervisors and basically put it into their back pocket to do consistent enforcement nationally.”

A National Police Force in the Making

And this is about more than simply the road closures which are going on in all the national forests. As Brown sees it, these new provisions spell the way to a national police force. The new rules will give the federal law enforcement the authority to enforce state laws on county roads across national forest land and on roads outside the national forests.

Asked if they’d be enforcing all laws and ordinances on land outside the national forests, Brown said, “no – They would essentially be enforcing those state traffic laws that we would currently enforce and some drug enforcement laws, abandoned property issues, things like that.” “Most people don’t follow this or pay attention to it, but if we don’t [the federal government] will have everything they want to basically create a national police force,” he said.

Which is why the proposal has created a “firestorm” among western sheriffs. “We recognize it as them kicking us in the face and saying, ‘We don’t really care about you being the sheriff: we are going to give ourselves this authority,’” Brown said.

Corralling Runaway Government

The question for concerned Americans is how to stop the train, something easier said than done, though not necessarily impossible. “The real solution is to encourage Congress to comply with, and enforce the Constitution with the intent and guidance as written,” Gilbertson writes. “The PEOPLE vested the authority in Congress to accomplish this task. Put law enforcement aback where it belongs, within the several states. “It is my hope this letter [report] will serve as an awakening to the public and for elected officials to exercise the proper conduct to stop this runaway government. It is also my hope that Sheriffs throughout the United States will join to bring our Republic form of government back to the people.”

NOTE: Josephine County is on the California-Oregon state line across from Siskiyou County, a county that ranchers, farmers, miners and their allies are calling “ground zero” in the intensifying battle over land use and access to public lands. Siskiyou County is where the federal government, in lockstep with local environmentalists, seeks to remove three clean hydro-power dams on the Klamath River – an action that will wipe out what’s left of the once vibrant ranching and farming communities. A fourth dam, in Klamath County, Ore., is also slated for demolition.

On Oct. 22, eight brave sheriffs – seven from northern California and one from central Oregon -- put their careers in law enforcement on the line by addressing an audience of nearly 1,000 people at a rally in Yreka, the county seat of Siskiyou County. The event was sponsored by Support Rural America and other groups; the panel was introduced and chaired by Jon Lopey, Sheriff of Siskiyou County.

“By their testimony these fine sheriffs’ verbally documented the assault on sovereignty and the abridgement of individual rights … that they have personally witnessed,” says retired Sheriff Jim R. Schwiesow in a recent NewsWithViews column.

Sheriff Gilbertson was not among the eight panelists. He and his wife had made vacation plans and reservations over a year ago and it was not possible to change these. But although not able to attend in person, his report on federal jurisdiction speaks eloquently for him.

The event was videotaped and posted at ConstitutionalSheriffs.com.

Contact Sheriff Gil Gilbertson

Earlier Story

1 - Sarah Foster: Oregon Sheriff Stands Up Against the U.S. Forest Service: July 2, 2011

Archive of articles by Sheriff Gilbertson

1 - Unraveling Federal Jurisdiction within a State, Nov. 8, 2011
2 - Federal Jurisdiction Within a State: Posted by US-Observer, Oct. 8, 2011 (10 pages)
3 - Sheriff Wants Holders of Concealed Weapon Permits to Remain Private: 11-28-08
4 - Sheriff Seeking Stable Funding for His Office: 7-22-08
5 - Introducing Sheriff Gil Gilbertson 10-30-07

For More Information

1 - Public Lands Committee, WSSA: Position Paper: Re. Proposed Rules Changes by the U.S. Forest Service Law Enforcement: Sept. 21, 2011

U.S. Sheriffs Rise Up Against Federal Government: Sheriff Threatens Feds With SWAT Team ~ Grass Roots Take Charge!

Political Vel Craft

November 14, 2011

Sheriff Threatens Feds With SWAT Team

As more people became dissatisfied with federal government controls and land grabs, it was inevitable that local law enforcement would eventually see the bigger picture. At the northern California fairgrounds of Yreka last month, seven California sheriffs and another from Oregon gathered with a large group of citizens to say that they are finally going to do something about it.

“A giant has been awakened,” said Plumas County, Calif. Sheriff Greg Hagwood, “and they didn’t count on that,” speaking of the federal bureaucracy.

With exposure of the Emergency Management Center in San Luis Obispo a few decades ago, California began to offer the rest of the nation some evidence of the psychological conditioning aimed from the federal level at state, county and city law enforcement.

• Nevada Sheriff Tony DeMeo Stops Federal Government: Feds Engaging In Illegal Confiscation Of Cattle And Water Rights Of County Property Owner.
• Oregon Sheriff Gil Gilbertson Gives Federal Agents The Boot: Feds Have No Jurisdiction!

Dean Wilson, sheriff of Del Norte County (Sacramento), is a great example of this great awakening. He received the loudest and longest applause for his candor in confessing past faults after apologizing for not understanding the central government assault and land grab being committed against the people and what he should have been doing about it. Only in the past year has he done a turnaround and begun to behave as a county sheriff instead of an extension of federal law enforcement.

• Obama’s Federal Stooges Beginning To Understand The Power Of Sheriffs: Sheriff Warns Federal Agents They Will Be Arrested If They Interfere!
• Arizona Sheriff: ‘If Decapitating Police Officers Is Not Terrorism, What is?’: More Troops At Korean Border Than Deadly U.S. Mexican Border.

“I had spent a good part of my life enforcing the penal code, but not understanding my oath of office,” he told the audience. “I was ignorant and naïve, but now I know of the assault against our people by the federal government.”

• Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office To Launch Drone: Texas Sheriff Gains Bird’s-Eye View To Keep Check On Crimes By Federal, Domestic, Or Criminal Aliens!

Host sheriff John Lopey of Siskiyou County, speaking about the federal environmental intervention, said: “I have told federal and state officials over and over that, yes, we want to preserve the environment, but you care more about the fish, frogs, trees and birds than you do about the human race. When will you start to balance your decisions to the needs of the people?” Later he told the audience, “We are right now in a fight for our survival.”

Glenn Palmer, sheriff of Grant County, Oregon, said, “If an elected official has not taken an oath of office, he does not belong in office.”

AFP readers are familiar with the work of former Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack, who has spent the latter half of his life teaching sheriffs that they are the top law enforcement officers in their counties despite continuing federal intervention attempts. The ears that were deaf for so long may finally be starting to hear.

• States Of The Republic: Correcting Their Wayward Child ~ New Laws Constraining The Federal Government.
• Stop Homeland Security Agents Cold In Tennessee: McNairy County Sheriffs!

“It’s becoming a national movement now,” Mack told AFP, citing Immigration and Naturalization Service failure at the Mexican borders, the phony drug war, plus IRS and other unconstitutional intervention within these states.

His plans to take this movement national will be launched at a January meeting, where he anticipates 200 sheriffs will be in attendance.

“The county sheriff is the last line of defense guarding our people’s liberty,” he said.

Retired USAF Col. Richard Niemela of Reston, Va. has been exposing the federal monster for years.

He told AFP: “It’s the surreptitious domination by international globalists insidiously using unauthorized and illegal tactics to render null and void those historic and unique powers of the sheriff.”

American Free Press

• Police Lock Down Bank Of America: Florida Homeowner Forecloses On Bank Of America ~ Police, Movers, & Lawyer Orders Furnishing To Be Removed From Bank For Auction!
• U.S. District Federal Judge Aleta Trauger Orders Police To Stand Down: Orders Tennessee Police To Stop Arresting Occupy Protesters!
• High Noon Sheriffs In America: Battle Against Rothschild’s Richest 1% ~ The International Wall Street Banking Cartel.
• Arizona Sheriff Babeu: ATF, DOJ Accomplice to Murder – Holder Had Knowledge Of Project Gunrunner In 2009.
• The States Nullify Unconstitutional Federal Laws, Even When Endorsed By Supreme Court: Public Opinion & Support Make It Easy To Resist Federal Tyranny.
• Nullification 10th. Amendment
• Rothschild’s Obama ~ Establishes Domestic Terrorism Group By Signing His 86th. Executive Order #13575 : U.S. Farmers & Landowners Stripped Of Their Liberty & Given To Communist RURAL “Stake Holders”. Agricultural Dams Being Removed In The USA U.N. Agenda 21
• Obama’s Natural Born Status To Enter Senate Ethics Committee!
• BREAKING => “April 2, 2009″ DOJ Document Condemns Eric Holder: Brags At Mexican Conference In 2009 ABOUT Obama’s Stimulus Funding Of 2009 Gunrunner Project.

Sheriff Swat Team

Related articles

• Wyoming Sheriffs Told Federal BATF & IRS Agents To Abide By The Constitution Or Face Immediate Arrest. (politicalvelcraft.org)
• Gun Lake Tribe Donates K-9 to County Sheriff’s Department (indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com)
• Convicted former O.C. sheriff’s official due $362,000 in back pay (latimesblogs.latimes.com)
• Obama’s High Noon: Sheriff’s Eligibility ‘Posse’ Sparks Media Whirlwind. (politicalvelcraft.org)
• Arizona Judge Stood Firm With Sheriff Mack (unmasker4maine.wordpress.com)

Sheriffs Stand TALL for the Constitution

(a class "A" video that shows there may be still hope for our country . . .)

by ReddingPatriots on Oct 29, 2011



Here are eight county sheriffs from Northern CA and Southern OR speaking on at panel at the Defend Rural America event October 22, 2011 in Yreka. Despite the low media coverage there were about 700 people in attendance from all over California, Oregon and as far away as Wyoming. The sheriffs made it perfectly clear that they are the last line of defense for their citizens and given authority by the 10th Amendment. YOU will be a source of information beyond the lame stream media by forwarding this link! For further information:
http://www.SiskiyouCountyWaterUsers.com/
http://www.DefendRuralAmerica.com/
http://www.PieNPolitics.com/
For information on the Constitutional Sheriff
visit http://www.sheriffmack.com/index.php/sheriffs

A Tree Party Rebellion

G. Edward Griffin: Sheriff of Otero County, New Mexico, warns federal agents he will arrest them if they try to stop the cutting & thinning of trees in a forest that is a wildfire danger. This is yet another case where states are exerting their constitutional power to reject federal laws.

finance.townhall.com

Marita Noon

Communities all over the country feel that their hands are tied with one-size-fits-all DC Brand Red Tape. The rules and regulations prevent them from doing what is best for their specific circumstances. The situation has escalated to the point where elected officials are now taking charge to do what is local and logical.

What took place this weekend in the rural New Mexico town of Cloudcroft could become the model for all who want to cut the red tape. Hundreds of people were at what is being called the “Otero County Tree Party” in support of realigning the federal government and putting them back where they belong.

Ten years ago, the New Mexico State Legislature passed SB1, which was signed into law by then-governor Gary Johnson. The legislature overwhelmingly voted for it, believing that it was a necessity borne out of “Uncontrollable, but preventable wildfires, and unresponsive federal agencies.” The Forest Service’s (USFS) inaction to reduce or remove the fuel buildup put “the lives and property of the citizens of New Mexico” at risk.

SB1 exerted local sovereignty over public lands. But it had never been tested.

Then, in 2011, the Wallow and the Las Conchas Fires left severe economic and social impacts—much like the 2000 Los Alamos Fire that prompted SB1.

For the past decade, the folks in Otero County have been trying to work with the USFS to solve the problem of the Lincoln National Forest. It was unhealthy, like a tinderbox. Each time the county leadership thought the members were making progress with the Forest Service officials, the officials were transferred. The stall tactics worked until the summer of 2011, when the county declared a state of emergency.

Ronny Rardin, chairman of the Board of Otero County Commissioners, told me they didn’t want to be the next disaster. People’s lives were in grave danger. The commissioners drafted the Emergency Forest Management Plan. On September 9, a public hearing was held. One-hundred twenty people supported the plan. Two opposed it. The commission voted to move forward.

For the past 20 years, since the Mexican Spotted Owl was listed as an endangered species, New Mexico’s forests have become overgrown. Thousands of jobs were lost, sawmills closed up. Fires became wild.

A study done earlier this year by the USFS’s Pacific Research Station, and validated by work done by Sandia National Laboratories, shows that the healthiest forests in the arid climate of the Southwest have approximately 50 trees per acre. Many of the forests in the Southwest have as many as 2,500 trees per acre. Forest management practices that aim to restore owl habitat, rather than that of an overall healthy forest, have contributed to increased fuel loads and fire severity.

The forest density is a serious fire danger, as the trees are thin and unhealthy. Many small trees lead to high-intensity fires where, by contrast, forests with fewer and larger trees have low-intensity fires. Additionally, there is not enough water to support all the trees—which also makes them more susceptible to disease, and dead trees burn more easily than healthy ones.

The water issue is dangerous for more than just the trees’ health and fire prevention. With the current forest density, the trees are sucking up the limited water supply and threatening the local communities who depend on the near-surface aquifer.

The nearby forests of the Mescalero Tribe provide a case study on forest management. Rather than following USFS policy, they manage for the health of the forest and practice uneven age management—meaning they log selectively. When there are forest fires—a reality in the arid mountains of the Southwest—in the Lincoln National Forest, the fires quickly become wild, threatening people, livestock, structures, and livelihoods. When the same fire rushes on to Mescalero lands, due to the healthier trees and less density, it lays down and becomes a more manageable surface fire. An added bonus: their forests have several spotted owl protected activity centers.

Keeping the forest healthy through thinning costs about $600 per acre, but fighting a forest fire can cost nearly four times more. Additionally, rather than going up in smoke, thinned material can be used for wood products and biofuels. The thinning helps the watershed store more water and limits erosion, which fills up reservoirs and streams with silt from the flash floods on mountains with no vegetation to hold the water back. It also helps maintain the mountain ecosystem and allows the snow to melt and filter into the ground water rather than evaporating from the branches, reduces structure damage and insurance issues, and maintains the recreation economy.

So, why has the USFS fought the citizens of Otero County, who want what is best for their community? Why were Congressman Steve Pearce and county commissioners threated with incarceration if they cut the tress as planned? Like “Why is the EPA fighting farmers?” answers to these questions remain left to our imagination.

What we do know is that on Saturday, September 17, the Otero Country Tree Party put the Forest Service on notice. They did not ask permission; they realigned the government and took back their right to manage the lands owned by the state and county. The 1976 Federal Land Policy and Management Act requires that the lands be managed in coordination with the state and local governments and New Mexico state law gives local sovereignty over public lands.

New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez supports the county’s efforts but could not attend because of the state’s special legislative session going on at the same time. A letter from Lt. Governor John Sanchez was read at the rally before the tree cutting ceremony.

The Sheriff’s Department had an obvious presence with a SWAT vehicle and riot gear. But the only trouble was a lone environmentalist holding up a sign in opposition of the tree cutting efforts.

While the “Tree Party” on Saturday was largely symbolic, it let the Forest Service know the County is serious. If the Forest Service doesn’t follow through with the Emergency Forest Management Plan the County has drawn up, the County will have no choice but to move forward on its own. The actions taken by the Otero County Commissioners are being watched closely by the National Association of Counties.

The Otero Country Tree Party has worked to stay within the law and asked people to leave their pitchforks and chainsaws at home. The trees were cut by professionals, who safely dropped them, as a cheering public looked on. Congressman Steve Pearce cut the first tree under the direct supervision of the professionals. The Tree Party supporters then helped clean up—doing what the USFS should be doing.

The Otero County Commissioners believe that in addition to saving lives and property through reducing the fire danger, their Emergency Forest Management Plan can provide as many as 1,000 jobs for the local communities. Chairman Rardin said: “We are just trying to fix our problem. This is what America wants.”

The Otero County Tree Party is a movement that could change the nation as other counties realign the government by putting them back where they belong.

Feds order California pot dispensaries to shut down - despite being legal under state laws

(a perfect issue for the Federal government to attack the states with, where if you support the states, you are labeled as a kook . . .)

[A power struggle is coming to a head in 16 states that have legalized medical pot. The feds claim that federal law supersedes state law. The states say that the Tenth Amendment authorized them to nullify any federal law that is unconstitutional. The outcome of this contest will shape the future of America. - G. Edward Griffin]

By Associated Press

6th October 2011

Federal prosecutors have launched a crackdown on pot dispensaries in California, warning the stores that they must shut down in 45 days or face criminal charges.

They also threatened to confiscate their property even if they are operating legally under the state's 15-year-old medical marijuana law.

In an escalation of the ongoing conflict between the U.S. government and the nation's burgeoning medical marijuana industry, California's four U.S. attorneys sent letters on Wednesday and Thursday notifying at least 16 pot shops or their landlords that they are violating federal drug laws, even though medical marijuana is legal in California.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2046224/Feds-order-California-pot-dispensaries-shut--despite-legal-state-laws.html#ixzz1aC0gb5up

Rage Against The TSA: Protesters Storm Texas Capitol

Demonstrators led by Alex Jones chant “treason” in response to federal government threat to close down Texas airports

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, May 26, 2011

Alex Jones’ spontaneous decision calling on Texans to protest the government’s egregious threat of a federal blockade if the Texas Senate passed an anti-TSA groping bill resulted in hundreds of protesters storming the Capitol in Austin yesterday afternoon.

As we reported yesterday, the TSA and the Department of Justice resorted to financial terrorism by threatening a federal blockade that would have closed down Texas airports if the Texas Senate had followed the House in unanimously passing a bill that would have made TSA groping in the state a felony.

“There’s never a dull moment at the Texas Legislature. The House and Senate were going about their regular end-of-session business on Wednesday when loud screams could be heard coming from the rotunda. Outside the chambers, a group of mostly men and a few women were screaming, “Cri-mi-nal! Cri-mi-nal!” and “Treason! Treason!” reports the Texas Tribune.

The quickly arranged demonstration was announced during Jones’ radio show just hours beforehand. Next time around, there would be 50,000 protesters in attendance, he promised.

Media reaction to the event was mixed, with some accurately reporting the protest and others resorting to the usual brand of sneering arrogance we’ve come to expect from the corporate press.

Despite the fact that the intimidation tactics of the federal government, which will surely backfire as a massive shot in the arm for the states’ rights movement, scuttled the anti-grope bill in Texas, there are numerous other states that are already debating or preparing to introduce similar bills.

The feds cannot keep relying on mafia-like behavior to preserve the ability of their criminal army of minimum wage perverts to molest children, at some point down the line lawmakers will have the guts to stand up and say no, and at that point a wave of TSA resistance will sweep legislatures across the country.

Watch more videos of the protest below.

Financial Terrorism: TSA Holds Texas Flights Hostage

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
May 25, 2011

Image: Steuben (Flickr Commons)

DOJ resorts to economic terrorism, lawmaker compares fight to revolutionary war against Mexico

Related: Texans Take to Capitol, Demand Representatives Resist TSA Tyranny

An astounding Department of Justice threat to cancel airline flights to and from Texas, in addition to underhanded lobbying by TSA representatives, has killed efforts in the state to pass HB 1937, a bill that would have made invasive pat downs by TSA agents a felony.

HB 1937, a bill that would have made it “A criminal act for security personnel to touch a person’s private areas without probable cause as a condition of travel or as a condition of entry into a public place,” was headed for an imminent Senate vote in Texas having already passed the House unanimously 138-0, before the federal government stepped in to nix the legislation.

In a letter sent to Texas lawmakers, including to Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, Speaker Joe Straus, the House Clerk, and the Senate Secretary, U.S. Attorney John E. Murphy threatened to cripple the airline industry in the state if legislators did not back down.

“If HR [sic] 1937 were enacted, the federal government would likely seek an emergency stay of the statute,” Murphy wrote. “Unless or until such a stay were granted, TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew.”

“We urge that you consider the ramifications of this bill before casting your vote,” Murphy added.

The fact that Murphy can’t even get the name of the bill correct is almost as disconcerting as the rampant mafia-like attitude of the DOJ in using de facto economic terrorism to shoot down the legislation.

Following a fiery debate in the Texas House last night, Senate sponsor Dan Patrick (R-Houston) pulled the bill, remarking that TSA representatives had been “lobbying” the Texas Senate in an effort to mothball the legislation.

“I will pull HB 1937 down, but I will stand for Liberty in the state of Texas,” Patrick said.

Patrick added that TSA officials had warned him passing the bill “could close down all the airports in Texas,” which he regarded as a ‘heavy handed threat’ by the federal government.

The staff of Rep. David Simpson said the DOJ had “thrown down the gauntlet” in using such stark language to oppose the bill.

“Either Texas backs off and continues to let government employees fondle innocent women, children and men as a condition of travel,” the staff wrote, “or the TSA [Transportation Safety Administration] has the authority to cancel flights or series of flights.”

“… 97 percent of people who go though the nation’s airports do not go through these offensive searches. And yet, a United States Attorney warns that flights to Texas could be shut down because TSA would not be able to ensure the safety of passengers and crew if agents could not touch genitals. Someone must make a stand against the atrocities of our government agents …”

In a point by point refutation of the DOJ letter, Simpson compared the battle against the TSA to the Texas revolutionary war against Mexico, writing, “Gentlemen, we find ourselves at such a watershed moment today. The federal government is attempting to deprive the citizens of Texas of their constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 9, of the Texas Constitution. If we do not stand up for our citizens in the face of this depravation of their personal rights and dignity, who will?”

The fact that the Department of Justice and the TSA have resorted to threats of economic terrorism in addition to underhanded lobbying techniques again illustrates the fact that the federal government is increasingly behaving like a criminal enterprise with total disregard for the Constitution.

The TSA’s initial response to HB 1937 was to claim that it could not become law because it violated the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article. VI. Clause 2), a law that the TSA claimed “prevents states from regulating the federal government.”

In reality, this was a complete fabrication.

“The statement is false. Ignorance from the TSA is unlikely, so I’ll call a spade a spade. They’re lying. The supremacy clause says nothing of the sort,” reported Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center.

Here’s the full text:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

“So, in simple terms, what does the supremacy clause mean? Just what it says. The constitution is supreme. And any federal laws made in line with the constitution is supreme. Nothing more, nothing less,” writes Boldin.

As we have documented, TSA grope downs and body scans are now being rolled out on highways, street corners, public buildings, at sports events, and even at local prom nights.

Despite the fact that the federal government has resorted to thuggish intimidation tactics to kill the anti-grope down bill in Texas, this only marks the latest chapter in an epic states’ rights battle that has centered on the agenda of the TSA to become a literal occupying force in America, manning internal checkpoints that will litter the entire country.

H.J. Res. 62: Amending The Constitution To End States Rights?

Wiki Commons

Marti Oakley, Contributing Writer

Activist Post

H.J. Res. 62, Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to give states the right to repeal Federal laws and regulations when ratified by the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States.

Sounds like a great deal . . . right? Wrong! The states already have the right to repeal Federal laws and regulations. It is called nullification under the 10^th Amendment.

Or, states can refuse to contract with the Federal government or any of its privately owned corporate agencies, thereby refusing the contract and any of its provisions (regulations or laws).

Secondary to this action, is the refusal to accept any Federal funding offered to implement what is usually a series of laws or regulations, (these being written by unelected bureaucrats, lobbyists and other interested stakeholders), meant to deprive you of your rights, intrude on your privacy, interfere with your right to engage in business and otherwise reduce and abrogate your constitutionally protected freedoms.

Read more »

North Dakota Governor Jack Dalrymple Signs Obamacare Nullification Bill

from Rob Port at the SayAnything blog:

Apparently deciding that the risk of angering his constituents over a failure to act against Obamacare was worse than angering his Attorney General, Wayne Stenehjem, who holds that the state cannot pass laws contradicting federal law, Governor Jack Dalrymple signed SB2309. (click here to read about the health care nullification act in N.D.)

The bill affirms that North Dakotans have the right to buy, or not buy, whatever health insurance they want. This law is statute. A previous bill that would have amended the constitution with similar language was defeated with a gang of 29 House Republicans voting with Democrats at the behest of Stenehjem to kill it.

This bill was discussed on Fox News recently by state nullification proponent Tom Woods and Judge Andrew Napolitano. “The new state law, if signed by Dalrymple, says the federal health insurance law can’t interfere with North Dakotans’ decision to buy health insurance or not buy health insurance,” wrote the editorial board of the Minot Daily News though the paper went on to say that the law “won’t make a difference” because state law “can’t override a federal law.”

This, of course, isn’t true. The states are under no obligation to abide by federal laws that are unconstitutional. And since that is the State of North Dakota’s official position on Obamacare in a multi-state lawsuit challenging the law, this law passed by the legislature and signed by the governor is appropriate.

Kudos to Dalrymple for having the courage many other political leaders in this state do not.

Full article HERE

GETTING OFF THE GLOBALIST CHESSBOARD: AN INTRODUCTION

Neithercorp Press

By Stewart Rhodes of Oath Keepers
and Brandon Smith of the Alternative Market Project

To put it simply, America is nearing a checkmate scenario. Like the final torrid maneuvers of a rigged chess match, we have been pressed, manipulated, and attacked into the last remaining corner of the “grand global chessboard” left to us; centralized control of all social and economic power into the hands of an unworthy elite. If we continue playing the game by their rules, we will lose. There is no doubt. There have been many solutions presented to us in the past to combat this development, but nearly all of them function within the constraints of Federal politics. Working within the system has earned us no quarter, and frankly, no results. Our only recourse (and, frankly, the best recourse all along) is to STOP relying on the rules of their game, and to walk away from the chess board completely.

Globalization is essentially just another word for centralization, and the key to centralizing any system is to remove all options until the masses are completely and utterly dependent upon a single dominant paradigm. Globalists have deceived many Americans into believing that centralization is a “natural” process – that their game is indeed the only one in town. The widespread acceptance of the fiat monetary system is a perfect example of the average person’s unfortunate lack of economic flexibility. Only recently, in the face of dollar devaluation and complete financial collapse have many finally begun to question the legitimacy of a single brittle and corrupt economic structure. American politics are no different.

The elites have conned us into thinking that the only possible “solution” to where we are is federal elections, which only vote in new puppets for the puppet masters to manipulate in an illusory shell game. We have been tricked into thinking we are free because we come together from time to time to select our rulers.

But of course, this country was not founded as a democracy, but as a Constitutional Republic, and in such a Republic as ours, liberty is not just about “kicking the bums out” every few years only to vote a new set of bums into Congress, as the globalists would have us think. Federal elections are just one small part of it. The Founders intended us to be active, sovereign citizens, in strong communities and strong, sovereign states, and that is about far, far more than merely voting.

But because the globalists – with the aid of complicit domestic counterparts – have been able to capture our education system, our media, our political system, and our legal system, they have succeeded in dumbing us down and duping us into thinking that all other mechanisms for constraining power have been removed from the table. In fact, we have been convinced that all of the other fundamental institutions of our republic– aside from voting – are illegitimate, or even criminal.

The Founders gave us a dual sovereignty republic. That means states are as much sovereign within their sphere as the national government is within its sphere, with a national government of limited, enumerated, and divided powers. As our Tenth Amendment makes clear, “[t]he powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

In Federalist 45, James Madison (widely considered the ‘father of the Constitution”) promised the American people that:

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.

Clearly the design of the Founders’ has been turned on its head. With the aid of complicit judges – which Thomas Jefferson called a “corps of sappers and miners” – who willfully misinterpret the Commerce Clause to grant Congress the power to regulate literally anything, we now have a ruling class who will admit of no restraints on national power with a national government of nearly unlimited de facto powers, grown like a metastasizing cancer far beyond the bounds of anything foreseen by even the most skeptical of Anti-Federalists from the Founding era. All actual, physical and structural powers of any real meaning – legislative, military, legal, law enforcement, and economic – are consolidated in the hands of the federal government. On top of this, they have grafted a hydra-like overlay of international law and international unelected agencies and untouchable international “officials” that are also being imposed up us by means of treaties, executive partnerships (such as the supposedly now defunct Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, now being revitalized by the Obama Administration) and other constitutionally dubious mechanisms.

While we are distracted with elections, they are planning the destruction of the dollar, the collapse of our economy, the final destruction of our sovereignty, and the total absorption of our entire system into the vapid body of an unaccountable global government.

This is why we must stop playing by their “rules,” must get off of their artificial chess board, and instead play by the rules of our Constitution. This means taking power into our own hands as individuals, communities, counties, and states.

To do this, Neithercorp Press, the Alternative Market Project, and Oath Keepers are working together to focus on concrete solutions that can be applied by the average American in their day-to-day lives, in both the private and public spheres. In the limited time we have left, we urge Americans to focus on the following four key strategies (arranged in order of priority of needs):

1. Food and fuel independence and security – and other essential infrastructure (general preparedness) – as individuals, within local veterans organization chapters, neighborhood mutual aid societies, churches, co-ops, farmers markets, and at the town, county and state levels). In the aftermath of an economic collapse, food is the hardest necessity to improvise, and food scarcity is a serious achiles heel, exploited by oppressive regimes throughout history. To get started on food storage and independence, follow the advice on providentliving.org (you don’t need to be LDS to learn from their experience in food storage and preparedness, or to use their canneries). Likewise, we will need fuel, emergency medical, and resilient communication that can function in a grid-down crisis, devoid of internet communication (or with the internet shut down intentionally by means of a kill-switch).

2. Physical security and Independence – again as individuals, neighborhoods, towns, counties and states, to include forming neighborhood watches, mutual aid associations, a volunteer sheriff’s posse (staffed by volunteers under direct command of the sheriff), and county militias established by county ordinances but staffed by self-supplied and self-funded volunteers (as is done in volunteer fire departments all over this nation), and ultimately, a true state militia capable of “repelling invasions” (using the research and model bills of Dr. Edwin Vieira). Americans have plenty of guns, but not enough organization. See operationsleepinggiant.org for details.

3. Economic security and independence – as individuals and communities, including barter networks, use of silver and gold as real money, the development of valuable trade skills, and sound money bills at the county and state levels (as Utah just passed into law). The localization of community commerce is the only sure way to counter globalization. The more independent and insulated cities and states are from the corrupt and dysfunctional mainstream economy, the more safe and secure they will find themselves when that economy implodes. We must have an alternative to the fiat money system in place to preempt such an event. See alt-market.com for details.

4. State sovereignty and nullification of unconstitutional federal laws and actions. Veterans must support only sheriffs, state legislators and governors who have the guts and integrity to keep their oaths. To vote for an oath breaker, is to become an oath breaker. We must defend the powers reserved to the states and to the people by supporting state sovereignty resolutions and nullification of unconstitutional laws. See tenthamendmentcenter.com. And eventually we must kick the bums out, as GOOOH recommends. See goooh.com.

We will soon be publishing an upcoming series of articles that will provide in-depth details on each of the above four key pillars of action. While we should not turn our backs on the tactics of educating the public, supporting constitutional legislation, voting for honest and principled representatives, or nullifying unconstitutional laws (we should certainly make full use of the soap box, the ballot box, and the jury box) it is now time to dedicate ourselves to much more. The very future of our country, our liberties, and the prosperity of the next generation depends upon this.

For the Republic,

Stewart Rhodes
Brandon Smith