Stark Instructions to State and Federal Officials Coming Forth 

Delegates Plan Potent Acts of Civic Resistance

Independence Hall, Philadelphia, PA           2009 Continental Congress in St. Charles, IL – Pheasent Run Resort          After a week of intense committee deliberations, sometimes extending well into the early morning hours, the first formal resolutions of Continental Congress 2009 have begun to emerge.  On Tuesday, the Congress adopted resolutions aimed to ending the federal income tax fraud and terminating all state and federal firearms regulations as de facto violations of the plain language of the Second Amendment. As each of these first resolutions was adopted by the Assembly, they were loudly and spontaneously celebrated by the assembled Delegates, with jubilant energy and great emotion at the emergence of these first acts of nationally organized resistance to emerge from the Congress.   If these initial resolutions are any indication, the Congress clearly has set its collective intent to adopting a volume of provocative and far-reaching “Remedial Instructions” and “Civic Actions” to restore the Constitution, and which effects will soon reverberate from sea-to-shining-sea. Watch the live webcast, see the video archives & donate to help fund the CC2009 event: To obtain the .999 pure silver CC2009 Commemorative Medallion, click on this  special WTP e-store link The Income Tax Instruction to the United States Congress adopted by the Continental Congress cites several essential facts in U.S. law, including irrefutable documentation establishing that the 16th Amendment is void, ab initio, due to its failure to be properly ratified, and that any direct, un-apportioned tax on the labor of any American is wholly unconstitutional.  The resolution cites the U.S. Supreme Court holding that labor (and the fruits thereof) are, “…the most sacred and inviolable” property of the citizens of the nation.  (Citing Butcher’s Union Co. v. Crescent City Co., 111 U.S. 746, 757)    The tax resolution also calls for Congress to execute the immediate cessation of the (unlawful) imposition of the practice of withholding of earnings from the paychecks of American citizens and for the Congress to immediately release and restore all citizens wrongfully imprisoned as a result of the “unconstitutional application of the income tax” (laws).  The Civic Actions recommended by the Congress for the People to end the Income Tax fraud include for the People to contact their local sheriff and demand cooperation with the citizenry to provide protection from (unlawful) federal and state tax enforcement actions (including fraudulent, non-judicial “administrative” IRS liens and levys), that citizens prepare to replace or otherwise recall or impeach any sheriff who refuses to protect their local citizens from “…rogue federal agents acting under color of law,” and for citizens to prepare themselves to withhold their monies as a means to secure Redress.  As to the Second Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms, the resolution of the Continental Congress declares that all regulations, state and federal, which are repugnant to the express language of the Second Amendment are “…null and void – including but not limited to, illegal and unconstitutional restrictions on open and/or concealed carry.”  The arms resolution calls for the citizenry to coordinate with their local county Sheriff in establishing a Constitutional Militia, inherently separate from the state National Guard.  Such militia would be a constitutional defense force, “comprising all citizenry capable of bearing arms and under proper authority, in defense of themselves and the states.”  Official copies of these resolutions and others will be released shortly for public inspection and distribution.  Committee and sub-committee work on “Remedial Instructions” for state and federal officials will by decree, end at midnight Wednesday (Nov. 18).  Starting tomorrow (Thursday) , the Congress begins two and a half days of intense deliberations, turning their sole attention to debating and adopting a comprehensive set of potent “Civic Actions” every American can implement, en masse, to effect a peaceful restoration of Constitutional Order. These lawful, (non-violent) civic actions, (fully lawful and protected by the Right to enforce the First Amendment Right to Petition), will be designed to significantly affect the functioning of both state and federal institutions which have been complicit in enabling or otherwise aiding or allowing the destruction of the Constitution and/or the Fundamental Rights of the People. On Saturday afternoon, the agenda plans for the Delegates set to move to adopt the full package consisting of First Amendment Petitions for Redress of Grievances, “Remedial Instructions” to be served upon state and federal officials, and the slate of “Civic Actions” designed for everyday Americans to implement to resist the tyrants and engage in the battle to restore Liberty.  The final package generated by the Congress will be formally known as the “Articles of Association” and signed (Saturday afternoon) by the Delegates of Continental Congress 2009.  Means are currently being developed for citizens everywhere across America to likewise sign the Articles of Association and join the battle to hold our government accountable to the Law. The current intent for the Articles of Association is that when “x” million (tbd) Americans publicly commit to personally embrace and execute at least some portion of the (peaceful) plan of Civic resistance, the plan of “Civic Actions” will be fully activated and its full effects soon manifest against our errant institutions of government. More details will be announced following the conclusion of the CC2009 assembly on November 21. Donations Still Needed — Please! The WTP Foundation has significant costs it must still cover in connection with hosting and producing the Continental Congress 2009 event, including the cost of the professionally produced webcast enabling thousands to witness the full proceedings of this historic event at no cost. Please consider a fully tax-deductible donation to the 501(c)3 WTP Foundation or to receive the beautiful .999 pure silver CC2009 commemorative medallion. Again, we offer many, many thanks for your support that has made this event possible thus far. We urge everyone to please consider making a  of any amount and support this critical initiative to restore our Founding Principles and protect the Light of Liberty. (If you have not visited our website before, please first join our email list.)   Use this  special WTP e-store link  to donate $100 and receive a FREE 1 oz, .999 pure silver CC2009 commemorative medallion! Use any major credit card, PayPal or you can mail in your donation: Mail-in Donate form (if mailed, please note CC2009 offer)       PLEASE NOTE: online donations made to WTP through our “general” donation streams are NOT eligible for the CC2009 medallion offer.  “State-specific” donations through our state PayPal buttons are likewise, NOT eligible for the CC2009 medallion offer. Click here to donate and receive the CC2009 silver medallion.

Please remember, the operations of the WTP Foundation
are funded entirely by your generous support.

Now I sit me down in school
Where praying is against the rule
For this great nation under God
Finds mention of Him very odd.

If Scripture now the class recites, It violates the Bill of Rights.
And anytime my head I bow
Becomes a Federal matter now.  

Our hair can be purple, orange or green,
That’s no offense; it’s a freedom scene.
The law is specific, the law is precise.
Prayers spoken aloud are a serious vice.  

For praying in a public hall
Might offend someone with no faith at all
In silence alone we must meditate,
God’s name is prohibited by the state.  

We’re allowed to cuss and dress like freaks,
And pierce our noses, tongues and cheeks..
They’ve outlawed guns, but FIRST the Bible.
To quote the Good Book makes me liable.

We can elect a pregnant Senior Queen,
And the ‘unwed daddy,’ our Senior King.
It’s ‘inappropriate’ to teach right from wrong,
We’re taught that such ‘judgments’ do not belong.

We can get our condoms and birth controls,
Study witchcraft, vampires and totem poles.
But the Ten Commandments are not allowed,
No word of God must reach this crowd.  

It’s scary here I must confess,
When chaos reigns the school’s a mess.
So, Lord, this silent plea I make:
Should I be shot; My soul please take!

Amen

Two Questions from The Liberty Tree Lantern:

1. Is the above prayer true in its representations?
2. How did we get so far from our roots, American heritage, and our unique “American” culture that this “silent” prayer addresses?

May God Help Us.   Look at how “The MATRIX”,  secular humanism, and evil forces resulting in mis-interpetations of Constitutional intent has beguiled our society and our students.  We MUST get back to our “American” roots which are founded upon our Creator as clearly written in The Declaration of Independence itself, not to mention numerous documents written by the hand of our Founding Fathers.

May America, as a whole and Americans as individuals seek and acknowledge our God before he tramples out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored!  With the collapse of The MATRIX (our perceived economy based on almost worthless pieces of green and black paper printed out of thin air) being 1 1/2 -  2 1/2 years away from today, WE DO not have much time to choose.  God’s truth is marching on!  Whether some of us want to acknowledge him in  1  1/2  -  2 1/2 years or not.  We have a rendezvous with destiny. 

 
Dear C4L (Campaign for Liberty)  Member,

A few weeks ago, we sent out an alert that Representative Mel Watt was attempting to water down H.R. 1207 in the House Financial Services Committee.

The latest reports we have received have informed us that a vote on the Watt amendment could come TODAY!

There’s still time for us to stop this attack on Audit the Fed!  Click here to get a full list of Financial Services Committee members, along with their contact information.

Financial Services leadership seems determined to include Audit the Fed as part of a regulatory reform package instead of passing it as a standalone bill.

While C4L will still do everything in its power to fight for a standalone vote on Audit the Fed on the House floor, it is critical we challenge Watt’s amendment in Committee.

It will become much easier for our representatives to claim they still support Audit the Fed on the House floor if the Watt version passes, when, in reality, Representative Watt’s amendment puts restrictions on Government Accountability Office audits of the Fed.

For example, Watt’s amendment prevents the GAO from auditing or reviewing decisions to authorize, modify, extend, or terminate loans or liquidity facilities.

Congressman Paul will offer an amendment in Committee restoring an audit of the Fed’s entire $2 trillion balance sheet, but we have received word that some of the Democrat members may be waffling on their support for his amendment.

Help us turn up the pressure on these members!  Below is the list of Democrats on the committee who have cosponsored H.R. 1207.  Please call them and urge them to vote “Yes” on Ron Paul’s amendment.  Click on their names to get their web contact information.

1. Rep. John Adler, NJ (202) 225-4765

2. Rep. Travis Childers, MS (202) 225-4306

3. Rep. Steve Driehaus, OH (202) 225-2216

4. Rep. Alan Grayson, FL (202) 225-2176

5. Rep. Rubén Hinojosa, TX (202) 225-2531

6. Rep. Suzanne Kosmas, FL Toll Free: 1-877-956-7627

7. Rep. Dan Maffei, NY (202) 225-3701

8. Rep. Brad Miller, NC (202) 225-3032

9. Rep. Walt Minnick, ID (202) 225-6611

10. Rep. Ed Perlmutter, CO (202)-225-2645

11. Rep. David Scott, GA (202) 225-2939

12. Rep. Brad Sherman, CA (202) 225-5911

13. Rep. Jackie Speier, CA (202) 225-3531

When contacting these members, remember that up to this point, they have been allies on this issue.  A civil yet firm tone should be kept during these calls.  They should be thanked for their cosponsorship, told that Mel Watt’s changes to the bill are unacceptable, and urged to hold the line and honor their promise to support transparency at the Fed by voting “Yes” on Ron Paul’s amendment.

And don’t forget to click here to get a full list of Financial Services Committee members.

For more information on the Watt amendment, check out this article by The Huffington Post’s Ryan Grim.

We are continuing our work to achieve a standalone vote on H.R. 1207 on the House floor, but we must first stop the Watt amendment in the Financial Services Committee.

Make sure the Financial Services Committee members hear from you as soon as their offices open Thursday morning!

A vote could come any time tomorrow.  Call, email, and fax the Financial Services Committee members to vote “Yes” on Congressman Ron Paul’s amendment.
In Liberty,

John Tate

President
P.S. Click here to get a full list of Financial Services Committee members. Urge them to reject the Watt language and to vote for Congressman Paul’s amendment!

As the debate over an audit of the Federal Reserve intensifies in the House, one camp is trotting out eight academics that it calls a “political cross section of prominent economists.”

A review of their backgrounds shows they are anything but.

In a letter to the House Financial Services Committee earlier this month, all eight wrote that they support the type of amendment now being introduced by Rep. Mel Watt (D-N.C.). Watt’s approach purports to increase Fed transparency while it actually would tighten restrictions on any audits that could go forward.

The letter was sent around Wednesday by Watt’s staff to members of the committee in advance of a vote scheduled for Thursday.

Watt’s measure is in competition with an amendment cosponsored by Reps. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and Alan Grayson (D-Fla.), which would repeal the restrictions that Watt leaves in place.

But far from a broad cross-section, the “prominent economists” lobbying on behalf of the Watt bill are in fact deeply involved with the Federal Reserve. Seven of the eight are either currently on the Fed’s payroll or have been in the past.

The Fed connections are not outlined in the letter sent around to committee members on Wednesday, but are publicly discernible through a review of their resumes, which are all posted online.

In September, Huffington Post reported that the Federal Reserve has accomplished a soft form of effective control over the field of monetary economics simply by employing — and being the means for career advance — for an overwhelming proportion of the discipline.

Now that the Fed is locked in a legislative battle on the Hill, it can call on those economists to give their “unvarnished” opinions to lawmakers.

The connections that the seven economists lobbying Congress have to the Fed are not incidental and four of them maintain current positions.

Let’s run the traps:

Frederic Mishkin is a former board member, having served from 2006-2008. His career at the Fed stretches back to 1977 and he currently holds two positions: one as a member of the Center for Latin American Economics at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, where he’s been since 1996; and another as an academic consultant to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, where he’s been since 1997.

Anil K. Kashyap is currently a consultant with the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, a position he’s held since 1991. He’s also on the economic advisory panel of the New York branch and was a consultant there in 2003. He was a visiting scholar at the division of monetary affairs at the Board of Governors of in1994, 2001 and 2005 and at the division of international finance in 1997.

Pete Klenow was a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis from 1994-1999, 2003-2004, 2006 and again this year. From 2000-2003 he was also a senior economist at that branch. He’s currently a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, a position he’s held since 2005. He was a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City from 2004-2006.

Ricardo J. Caballero was a visiting scholar at Federal Reserve Bank of Boston from 2004-2005 and a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Board on multiple occasions.

Robert Hall was a research assistant at the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System from 1982-1984 and an economist there from 1988-1991.

Thomas Sargent was an adviser to the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis from 1981 to 1987 and continues to write frequently for Fed-sponsored journals.

Micheal Woodford is currently on the Monetary Policy Advisory Committee of Federal Reserve Bank of New York, a position he’s held since 2004. He’s also listed as a consultant to the research department there dating back to 2005. In the past, he’s been a visiting scholar at the Board of Governors and various regional branches in 1987, 1993-1998 and 2000-present, often at multiple banks in the same year.

Economists with Fed connections strongly reject the notion that being paid by the bank influences their thinking. But Robert Auerbach, who spent years investigating the institution and is the author of “Deception and Abuse at the Fed”, says that those economists are simply in denial. “If you’re on the Fed payroll there’s a conflict of interest,” says Auerbach.

The tie between the economists backing Watt’s amendment and the Fed doesn’t by itself mean that it’s bad policy, but it does make clear which amendment is favored by the Federal Reserve. If there’s still any doubt, the e-mail from Watt staff notes that former Fed chairs Alan Greenspan and Paul Volcker also support a version of it.

Meanwhile, a broad coalition of liberal organizations is lining up behind the Paul-Grayson amendment, which also has the backing of most Republicans on the committee.

The AFL-CIO and other labor groups, as well as Americans for Financial Reform signed on to a letter posted Wednesday calling for committee members to back the Paul-Grayson approach.

“In creating the Federal Reserve nearly 100 years ago, the Congress envisioned a central bank free from political pressure. But the structure that may have once ensured independence now appears to put the Fed much closer to the financial industry than the American people, who deserve to know who the beneficiaries are,” reads the letter.

The Fed, in other words, is not presently independent of political pressure, but that pressure comes from Wall Street banks rather than from the American people through their elected representatives.

It’s a distinction that the note from Watt’s staff on Wednesday subtly acknowledges, by focusing on legislative and executive branch pressure, rather than financial industry influence. The Paul-Grayson amendment, it warns, “would place the United States well outside of the mainstream of industrialized nations that shield their central banks from political interference by the Legislative and Executive branches of government, with potentially disastrous results to the U.S. economy.”

Commentary from The Liberty Tree Lantern:

Capt. Karl is scratching his head on one part of this article.  The President of the AFL-CIO is a member of the private and exclusive club of megalomaniacs, founded by The Federal Reserve “System” called The Trilateral Commission.  According to their own website their primary directive is to create a One World Government / New World Order.  Such a One World Government would be at the end of the puppet strings of The Federal Reserve cartel of twelve privately owned banks, who created The Trilateral Commission in the first place.  So why is the AFL-CIO bucking the Watt Amendment?  Any comments or info on this readers?   This doesn’t fit any form of logic.  Additionally, as many people know from the 1984 Grace Commission Report, the US Government doesn’t get any income taxes from the American People.  After transfer payments to various Socialist programs, like Social Security and Medicare for example, all income taxes go DIRECTLY to The Federal Reserve “System” for payment on the “Public Debt”.  So EVERY SINGLE PENNY that the US Government spends comes from and is borrowed from The Federal Reserve.  So every single Government program, except a couple of transfer programs, comes from the bottomless money pit at the Federal Reserve, who are the programmers of “The MATRIX” which is our economy based on little pieces of green paper printed out of thin air called FEDERAL RESERVE “NOTES” that our minds have programmed in public schools, the main stream media, The Federal Reserve, and The US Government, to believe are worth 100 cents apiece when in the ‘real’ world, outside of “The MATRIX” which only exists in our minds, they are really only worth 2 – 3 cents now after TARP, Bank and Corporate Bailouts, Stimulus and Socialist spending programs and various Government sanctioned “Ponzi” schemes.  Before this recent accelerated monetary policy programs the Dollar has been worth only 4 cents apiece for decades, even though in our minds we believed that they were worth 100 cents as we have been programmed to believe.  Of course much of the world today is starting to revalue the Dollar to its ‘real’ value of 2 – 3 cents, which will result in “hyperinflation” and, thereby, the total collapse of ‘The MATRIX’ (our economy) that has only existed in our minds for many decades, since fractionalized banking started chipping away from the gold standard and until it completely was eliminated by the US Government, anyway.   The AFL-CIO greatly believes in Socialism and Democracy which is defined as 50% plus one steals the individual rights, liberty, earnings and property, by popular vote and “mob rule”  from the remaining population so that by definition “Democracy” is the purest form of Socialism and/or Communism.  The Constitution, in contrast, “guarantees” a Republican form of government in Article 4 Section 4, so as to protect everybody’s individual unalienable rights, earnings and property from the immoral that would rob and steal and from the mob rule of “The Masses”, as Stalin would advocate.

The AFL-CIO believes in “free stuff” Socialist type programs from the US Government, who gets every single nickel from The FED that they spend.  So the question becomes; Why is the AFL-CIO biting the hand that “ultimately” feeds them from a bottomless pit of printed out of thin air money and whose President is a major member of the Trilateral Commission?  Are they coming to the side of Jeffersonian Constitutionalists now?  And, what about this “broad coalition of liberal organizations that are lining up behind the Paul-Grayson amendment?  Don’t they understand that ALL GOVERNMENT MONEY comes from THE FEDERAL RESERVE and NOT from income taxes?  Haven’t they read the Grace Commission Report?  Without THE FED Socialism and Government “free stuff” couldn’t exist.  I don’t get it? 

Anybody please comment.  If you don’t see a comment box below, just click on the title of this post and one will be produced below for you.

NOTE: Comment on this story online here

This is a story very near and dear to me. I have a special interest in this candidate and he means a lot to me.

February 27th was a cold day in Chicago. It was snowing, the wind was blowing and hot coffee wasn’t quite doing the trick. Our organizers for the Chicago Tea Party had spent just six days preparing for the first first event to follow Rick Santelli’s rant. We had no idea who or how many would attend.

I remember thinking, at the time, that if 100 showed up we could deem it a success. Until 2009, gatherings of this nature just didn’t really materialize in Chicago. Everyone I know in politics told me to prepare for the worst… believing that few would actually show up.

I parked the car and got my signs, clip boards and handouts, and headed to Daley Plaza, the location for the first Chicago Tea Party of 2009. When I arrived on scene, there was a family standing to the side of the property with some signs. It was obvious that at least someone had come to be a part of the event.

Their names were Richard and Laura Behney. They had traveled from Indiana up to Chicago for the tea party, and they were eager to be a part. After a brief introduction and chat, I asked them to take the clipboards and ask attendees to put there information on them so we could stay in contact. They humbly accepted and were happy to help out.

Hundreds and hundreds would soon start flooding into Daley Plaza and I lost sight of Laura and Richard for the duration of the event. But after the tea party, they brought me the clipboards and wanted to know what was next. They were extremely excited about what was unfolding, and they would eventually go back to Indiana to become a very influential and hard working part of the tea party movement in their home state.

This morning I received a message from Laura that reads as follows:

On that freezing cold February 27th day, you met my husband, Richard and I at Daley Plaza for Chicago’s first Tea Party. We were the first ones there and you asked us to take your clipboards and ask people to sign in. And so began our involvement in the historic Tea Party movement.

From there, Richard and I founded the Indianapolis Tea Party, where on Tax Day we had over 13,000 Hoosier Patriots on the lawn of our statehouse holding signs reflecting the sentiment that they had had ENOUGH!

And from there, hundreds of Hoosier Tea Partiers and 912 Groups urged Richard to take on Indiana’s political dynasty, Evan Bayh. A master of fence-riding so much so that he must have splinters!

The road from regular citizen (we own our own small plumbing business) to Tea Party goer to Tea Party organizer to candidate for United States Senate has been one we never expected to be on and frankly, slightly ticks us off that we have to be on it. BUT, someone has to do something, so it might as well be us.

Now I don’t know about you, but I think Richard needs as much help as we can possibly give him. Richard and his wife were the first two tea party activists I met since this movement began, and they deserve the full support of tea party activists across the country.

If you want CHANGE FROM the last TEN DECADES of Tyranny resulting in the utter Despotism and Economic Collapse we have today, YOU need to SUPPORT the Jeffersonian Constitutionalist Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate seat for Indiana. 

I recommend we all blog about him, tweet about him, send him financial support, volunteer for the campaign, call friends and family in Indiana to ask for help… do everything possible to give this campaign a boost.

Not only do we need to rid the Senate of thugs like this, we need to replace them with patriots like this.

For Liberty,
-Eric Odom

In it, police officers, soldiers, veterans, tax defiers, Patriots, tea party members, right-wing militias, “birthers” and sovereign citizen proponents are all said to exhibit elements of a resurging anti-government movement that reached its zenith in the mid-1990’s and spiraled out of control with violence and domestic terrorism.

A number of national and local citizens groups are called out in the report — the National Rifle Association, Minutemen, Oath Keepers — as well as mainstream conservative politicians and media personalities — U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), U.S. Rep. Spencer Bachus (R – Ala.), Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Fox News host Glenn Beck, CNN’s Lou Dobbs, MSNBC commentator and former Republican presidential candidate Pat Buchanan — as evidence of this growing domestic threat.

Add to the list former Graham County, Arizona sheriff Richard Mack, dubbed a “long-time militia hero” by SPLC. The son of an FBI Agent, Mack has long been a crusader for freedom and individual rights.

As a twenty-year law enforcement official, Mack served on the thin, blue line that protects a civilized society from lawlessness. But the controversial SPLC report casts a shadow over Mack’s views and questions his role in the resurgence of the militia movement and violent “right-wing extremism.”

“Something you’ll never hear from me, that is to advocate violence in any matter,” Mack said during an exclusive interview with Big 3 News. “I never have, and as I said, my record in law enforcement is very clear. I’ve never, ever, in twenty years of law enforcement, slugged or beat up another person.”

Mack has challenged the founder of SPLC, Morris Dees, to an open debate to discuss the characterizations made in the report.

“I don’t believe he would ever do it,” Mack said. ” I don’t believe he could afford to be exposed as the liar that he is.”

Mack went to college with the intent of becoming an FBI agent like his father, but life had other opportunities for him. He worked his way though college and hired on in March 1979 as a full-time police officer in Utah. In 1988, he returned to his home state of Arizona and ran for sheriff.

“I was miraculously elected, I ran a very strong campaign on constitutional principles,” Mack said. “The people of the county elected me, and in 1992 I was re-elected.”

His biggest victory may not have been political but rather in the courts.

In 1994, Mack joined six other sheriffs in bringing a successful lawsuit before the United States Supreme Court challenging aspects of the Clinton Administration Brady Bill.

“The Brady Bill forced, it compelled, the county sheriff to work for the federal government for free,” Mack explained. “But the worst thing of it was it forced us to participate in a federal gun control scheme that I knew was unconstitutional. And I wasn’t going to violate my oath of office for Bill Clinton, Sarah Brady or anybody else.”

On June 27, 1997, the Supreme Court ruled that the Brady Bill, in part, was unconstitutional and that Congress had exceeded their authority.

Mack believes this judicial victory and his views on the 2nd Amendment  are the motivation behind the attacks on him by SPLC.

“If you look up the word militia in the dictionary, it means citizen volunteers,” Mack said. “The militia was the same militia as mentioned in the 2nd Amendment, that Paul Revere called out to get their guns, to defend us against the tyrant King George III. The 2nd Amendment was written to prevent a reoccurrence of that kind of tyranny. If it ever happened again, the people, or the militia, would be armed to defend our nation against tyrants.”

Watch and listen to our exclusive 5-part interview with Sheriff Richard Mack below:

by Alan Stang
March 20, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

[Announcement: Did you know Alan Stang has a new radio show? Click here for details.]

For many years, the people’s attention in the Battle for America has been directed toward the federal government and its offices. Candidates stand for the House and the Senate. Patriotic groups publish voting records of incumbents. Considerable time, effort and money are expended in support of candidates for President. After decades of such commendable activity, the record shows it is an utter failure. The danger to the nation is worse than it ever was.

For many of those years, Republicrud bosses whined that if the people would only give them control of the federal government, they would undo Democrud damage and restore Free Enterprise. Finally, the people gave it to them. Remember? The Republicruds controlled the House, the Senate and the Oval Office long enough to turn the country around. What happened? The Republicruds made our problems much worse. Their spending made the profligate drunken sailor look like Scrooge. They deserved it when the people kicked them out. They lost all credibility.

Yes, there is Dr. Ron Paul. But Dr. No is a political aberration. Time and again, he stands alone. He has neither men’s room problems nor woman problems. He doesn’t take congressional retirement. He actually returns “money” (computer entries) to the federal treasury. He proposes abolishing the Fed and the income tax and replacing them with nothing. In foreign affairs he suggests that we mind our own business. Imagine! But, again, he is an aberration.

Why? Certainly one reason has to be that we ship the successful congressional candidate off to the District of Corruption. However good the new congressman may have been when he or she boarded the plane to the District; he is subjected to intoxicating blandishments when he arrives in the enemy camp.

Soon, he succumbs to the blandishments, maybe even making himself blackmailable, and begins to vote as the party boss says, without even reading the bills. Instead of representing the people of his congressional district in the District of Criminals, he represents the D.C. to the C.D. He or she now is one of the boys or the girls. It has happened hundreds of times.

So, if the long, heroic effort to elect federal legislators has failed, does there remain any governmental Horatius who can stand in the gap; who can lead the Battle for America and restore the Constitution? There is. Lock and load, mount up and prepare for the return of the sheriff.

My guess is that in the minds of many Americans the sheriff is an antiquated figure who lives in the movies. In the older movies he is the hero; he is Gary Cooper in “High Noon,” awaiting the train that will bring killer Frank Miller back to town. In the new ones, he is the southern sheriff, even bigger than Rosie O’Donnell, sneering, sadistic, racist, violent, etc. He has no modern relevance.

But now here comes Sheriff Richard Mack, elected and re-elected in Graham County, Arizona, where he served for eight years. During his tenure, three federal agents came to a meeting of Arizona sheriffs and told them in certain terms how they would be dragooned as unpaid federal bureaucrats and administer the new, federal Brady gun registration law.

The law was named of course for Ronald Reagan’s press secretary, who was severely wounded in the immensely suspicious attempt to assassinate the President. Since then, Mrs. Brady has become a leader of the campaign for Nazi gun confiscation. I don’t know whether she was as crazy before the shootings as she is now. Just one more increment of lunacy and they would have to lock her up.

Richard Mack and the other Arizona sheriffs at the meeting rebelled. Sheriff Richard says the language he heard – in which he did not participate – could not be repeated in the presence of genteel Christian ladies, so we can’t tell you here what the sheriffs said. But Sheriff Mack did take the government to court. He sued the United States, and Sheriff Jay Printz of Montana joined him as plaintiff.

Sheriff Richard Mack

On June 27th, 1997, the sheriffs won; in Printz v. U.S. (521 U.S. 898) the U.S. Supreme Court struck Brady down. Associate Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the ruling for the Court, in which he explained our system of government at length. The justly revered system of checks and balances is the key:

“. . . The great innovation of this design was that ‘our citizens would have two political capacities, one state and one federal, each protected from incursion by the other’” – “a legal system unprecedented in form and design, establishing two orders of government, each with its own direct relationship, its own privity, its own set of mutual rights and obligations to the people who sustain it and are governed by it.” (P. 920)

Scalia quotes President James Madison, “father” of the Constitution: “[T]he local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.” The Federalist, No. 39 at 245.

Again and again, Justice Scalia pounds the point home (page 921): “This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty: ‘Just as the separation and independence of the coordinate branches of the Federal Government serve to prevent the accumulation of excessive power in any one branch, a healthy balance of power between the States and the Federal Government will reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front.’. . .” Gregory, 501 U.S. at 458.

He quotes President Madison again: “In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments. Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.” (P. 922)

No one could make this any clearer. The primary purpose of the Fathers was to prevent someone from grabbing all the power. When that happens, they knew, the result is arbitrary, confiscatory, government, the kind Tom Jefferson described in the Declaration of Independence. We would call it totalitarian.

Madison explains: “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” Federalist No. 48, February 1, 1788.

To prevent that from happening, they divided the power. First, they divided the federal power into three parts: the executive, the legislative and the judicial. They would bicker among themselves, so that no one of them could seize all the power the Constitution grants to the federal government.

The Founders divided the power even more. They set the limited power the Constitution grants the “general authority,” Madison’s term for the federal government, against the vast residual powers of the states. Each sphere of government, state and federal, would be supreme in its own sphere. Neither could control the other. Each protects itself from intervention by the other. Each has its own laws and rules.

Madison says this: “Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.” Loc. Cit.

What does all this mean today in the Battle for America? Sheriff Mack says it proves that the sheriff is the highest governmental authority in his county. Within that jurisdiction – inside his county – the sheriff has more power than the governor of his state. Indeed, the sheriff has more power in his county than the President of the United States. In his county, he can overrule the President and kick his people out. Remember, the President has few and limited powers.

What? The sheriff can do that? He’s not just a character in a movie? That’s right. Not only can the sheriff do that; sheriffs have already done that, more than once. Most Americans are not aware of that because lying, conspiracy scumbags like Rush Humbug, Shallow Sean Hannitwerp and Hugh Blewitt (a lawyer) etc., haven’t told them.

 Remember, the office of sheriff has a pedigree so long, we are not positive about when it was created. We think it was in the Ninth Century in England. We do know that each land district, or “shire,” was governed by a “reeve.” The sheriff of Nottingham became famous. At first, the king appointed them. With few exceptions, our American shire reeves are elected by the people.

In 1997, in Nye County, Nevada, federal agents arrived to seize cattle that belonged to rancher Wayne Hage. The sheriff gave them a choice: skedaddle or be arrested. They skedaddled. The cows stayed where they were. Wyoming sheriffs have told federal agencies they must check with the respective sheriff before they serve any papers, make any arrests or confiscate any property.

In Idaho, a 74-year-old rancher shot an endangered gray wolf which had killed one of his calves. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service sent three armed agents to serve a warrant. Lemhi County Sheriff Brett Barslou said that was “inappropriate, heavy-handed and dangerously close to excessive force.” More than 500 people turned out for a rally in the small towns of Challis and Salmon to support the sheriff and the rancher and to tell the federal government to back off.

While Richard Mack was sheriff of Graham County, Arizona, a bridge washed out. Parents had to drive twenty six miles to get their kids to school half a mile across the river. But the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wouldn’t fix it. First they had to do an “environmental impact study,” to replace a bridge already there. They were in no hurry. The study would take a mere ten years.

The people’s suffering reached the board of supervisors. The board voted to dredge the river and fix the bridge. The feds warned that they would be fined $50,000 per day if they tried. The supervisors hesitated. Sheriff Mack promised them and the workers protection and pledged to call out a posse for the purpose if necessary. They built the bridge and the Corps of Engineers faded. The board never paid a dime.

So the long dormant spirit of America is reviving. The states are beginning to adopt Tenth Amendment resolutions, using powers they have always had. The people are restoring our long unbalanced constitutional system. There is something “blowin’ in the wind,” but it isn’t what Bob Dylan thought it was. Recently, Sheriff Mack addressed 570 people in Fredericksburg, Texas. He reports that the reception was “beyond fantastic.”

What can you do? For once we are not just complaining. There is a plan. I do not argue that you should forget about Congress. Not at all; if you see an opportunity there, take it. Always remember that right now it is run by people like Barney the Bugger of Taxachusetts, who will be elected by moronth in hith dithtrict until he dieth of AIDS.

Most of the time, when you approach your congressman, you come to complain. In the new crusade, you will approach your sheriff and tell him that he is not only handsome, charming and overwhelmingly masculine, but also that he has powers he may not be aware of. You have come to tell him what they are and to back him up. My guess is, when you tell him that, he will not kick you out.

Tell him you expect him to return the courtesy when the Nazis come from the District of Criminals to get the guns. Tell him you are ready in a minute to serve under his direction in a posse. He will not move to Washington and be corrupted. He will stay there with you. Show him the ten orders the Oath Keepers will not obey. The Oath Keepers are retired and active duty military and police. Their web site is oath-keepers.blogspot.com. The first order they promise to disobey is an order to disarm you.

Put him together with Sheriff Mack. You will find him at sheriffmack.com. His telephone numbers are 928 792-4340 and 928 792-3888. Bring the sheriff to your town to speak. He will explain all this. Invite your own sheriff. At the meeting I attended, the local sheriff and chief of police were there and loved what they heard. No one dislikes hearing how important he is.

What if your sheriff is stupid or a federal factotum? That is what you will find in many big cities. I once interviewed Los Angeles County Sheriff Peter Pitchess, who said no one should have a hand gun. I asked him how a five foot lady alone in bed could defend herself from a rapist. Realizing he was perilously close to making himself look even dumber than he did usually, Pitchess conceded she could have a long gun.

I brightened. A street sweeper isn’t really the best weapon for close quarters, but it would give the lady a chance. Unfortunately, Pitchess added the word, “unloaded.” I asked him what that five foot lady with an unloaded shotgun could do against a six foot rapist. A police captain sat beside Pitchess during the interview. His job was to extricate Peter from the jams he persisted on getting himself into. The police captain extruded a barrage of miasma. It was effective. I did not get an answer.

 In such cases, says Sheriff Mack, move to a county where the sheriff is receptive. Many more will be. For instance, in Texas there are 254 counties. Each has a sheriff. If it is feasible to do so, run for sheriff yourself. Even your wife will be impressed when she sees you with a hog leg on your hip and a star on your vest. Imagine the intense joy of meeting IRS Communists or BATFE Nazis at the county line and denying them admission.