Posse Comitatus Act kicked to the roadside by feds, say critics

{TWG Note: This is a nightmare that has become a very real and dangerous  threat.  You can learn more about the “Posse Comitatus Act” HERE ]

 

Jim Kouri

Law Enforcement Examiner

The new defense authorization act all but erases decades of U.S. government compliance with the letter and the spirit of the Posse Comitatus Act 1878,  a law that prohibits the use of the U.S. military to perform law enforcement functions within the United States, according to police officials and others opposed to the militarizing of American law enforcement. 

Provisions in the new authorization act allow military reservists – Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines – to be called to duty and deployed in the event of a natural disaster or other emergency within the homeland, as well as mobilization of reserve units to support counterterrorism and security missions overseas, according to the American Forces Press Service’s Donna Miles.

“Except for a crisis involving a weapon of mass destruction, the reserves historically have been prohibited from providing a homeland disaster response,” Army Lt. General Jack C. Stultz, the Army Reserve chief, told reporters on Friday. …(Con’t)

 

CONTINUE READING: http://www.examiner.com/article/posse-comitatus-act-kicked-to-the-roadside-by-feds-say-critics

obama’s democrats Revive Legislation To Strip Sheriffs Of Powers

Delaware State Bill 325 moved through the State House quietly and with no publicity from any of the so called main stream media.  What was so important about this Bill and why it should have had people in every state in the union shouting from the roof tops, was that it was a Bill aimed at removing…YES, REMOVING…the powers of arrest from the County Sheriff.  If this Bill had passed you have got to believe that a similar Bill would have been enacted in all other states. 

To put this into perspective, the County Sheriff is the constitutionally elected chief law officer in a county, with say over all that happens in their county, including as to if federal troops and agencies can operate there or not. The Obama Regime has been fighting this very issue since the attacks on the president by Maricopa County Sheriff, Joe Arpaio and others who are doing the jobs that they are paid to do, whether it be on fighting at the county level illegal immigration to fighting other crime and corruption like operation fast and furious, or doing what their citizens ask for in investigating the eligibility of Mr Obama to be President due to his birth status.  All the above and other crime fighting jobs done by the Sheriffs have caused this administration problems and embarrasment and the attacks have been ongoing.  This Bill, however, is a full frontal attack on a constitutionally elected official and their duties…(Con’t)

CONTINUE READING: http://www.saveamericafoundation.com/2012/05/08/urgent-news-attacks-on-county-sheriffs-is-beginning-in-delaware-by-fred-brownbill/

 

MORE INFORMATION AT OATHKEEPERS.ORG: http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2012/05/13/democrats-revive-bill-to-strip-sheriffs-of-power/

 

READ “SHERIFFS FIRST” INFORMATION HERE:  http://www.countysheriffproject.org

 

FEDS CONTINUE PUSH TO USURP OUR SHERIFFS AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: http://twg2a.wordpress.com/2012/04/10/feds-continue-stealth-push-to-usurp-our-sheriffs-and-constitutional-laws/

 

NEVADA SHERIFF INTERVENES AGAINST FEDERAL INTRUSIONS http://twg2a.wordpress.com/2011/12/17/nevada-sheriff-tony-demeos-swat-team-stops-federal-government-feds-engaging-in-illegal-confiscation-of-cattle-and-water-rights-of-county-property-owner/

 

NEW MEXICO RESIDENTS STANDING AGAINST FEDERAL INTRUSIONS: http://twg2a.wordpress.com/2011/12/05/armed-and-ready-new-mexico-residents-defy-federal-government/

 

Read more information about the Sheriff’s First Movement and Sheriff Mack’s organization, County Sheriff Project

 

US SHERIFFS RISE UP AGAINST FEDERAL INTRUSIONS: http://twg2a.wordpress.com/2011/12/02/u-s-sheriffs-rise-up-against-federal-government-threatens-feds-with-swat-teams/

Montana GOP Primary June 5, 2012

TWG Note: Wondering about the upcoming Montana GOP Primary?  Me too.  This, from one of the TOP Gun Rights and Freedom Advocates in this Nation, Mr. Gary Marbut.  Mr. Marbut is the President of the Montana Shooting Sports Association.  We can Thank Mr. Marbut for a plethora of very successful bills, including the Firearms Freedom Act.  Mr. Marbut has been a vigilant and diligent proponent for our Second and Tenth Amendments, not just here in Montana, but across this Nation.   You can learn more about Mr. Marbut’s efforts and about the Montana Shooting Sports Association by visiting the following sites:

Gary Marbut, Montana Shooting Sports Association

Montana Shooting Sports Association

MTSSA LEGISLATIVE SUCCESSES

GARY MARBUT – AUTHOR, GUN LAWS OF MONTANA

GARY MARBUT

 

Here is Mr. Marbut’s assessment of the upcoming Montana. You can find the original text at: http://progunleaders.org/MTGOPPrimary.html

 

Montana Republican Governor’s Primary Election Race
The View from MSSA

Usually, after pouring over candidate voting records from previous public service, and examining returned candidate questionnaires, MSSA would like to make an endorsement in a race as important as the one for Governor of Montana.

There are seven Republican candidates facing off in the upcoming Primary Election on June 5th.  Historically, to endorse any one candidate, MSSA wants to see one letter grade gap between the endorsed candidate and others, an “A” versus a “C”, or a “B” versus a “D.” (We don’t endorse candidates for the Primary who don’t earn at least a “B” grade.)

In the Republican Primary race for Governor, we simply cannot identify any candidate that is head-and-shoulders better than the rest – with a letter grade gap above the others.  So, MSSA will make no endorsement in the Republican Primary for Governor.

If I ended this message right here, I can imagine that most GOP Governor candidates would be satisfied, although maybe some disappointed.

However, I can also imagine many MSSA members saying or thinking, “Come on Gary.  You know these candidates.  You’ve worked with them, tracked their votes in the Legislature, talked with them, watched their performance, and surveyed them.  We need whatever information you can pass along in order to make an intelligent choice in the Primary.”  Right.

So, I feel MSSA owes its members at least some information about the various candidates.  In lieu of an MSSA endorsement, let me tell you what I know and what I think (I’ll mix the two) about the various candidates.

I tend to want to place political figures on a spectrum from liberal to conservative.  Because those are fuzzy terms as commonly used, let me tell you how I define them.  I think of a modern (not classic) liberal as a person who tolerates or favors shifting power, choice and money from people to government.  I think of a conservative as a person who would prefer to shift power, choice and money from government to people.  Those are generally the definitions I will apply here.  I will also discuss what is known about each candidate’s position on the right to keep and bear arms, MSSA’s prime focus.

As far as I know, there are no out-and-out liberals in this Republican Primary race, but some appear to be more or less conservative than others.  Here’s what I know or believe, working from the most conservative to the least conservative. (BTW, these candidates will ALL probably end up disliking all or parts of my assessment – comes with the turf if I’m to give MSSA members an honest review.  I know most of these candidates personally, and count them as friends.  I hope they’re still friends after they read my comments.)

Bob Fanning & Joel Boniek

The most conservative of the candidates is Bob Fanning.  Fanning has a good grasp of constitutional principles.  He’s a firm advocate for states’ rights.  He has far more time and energy invested in wolf control than any other candidate, maybe than all candidates combined.  Fanning has been a CEO and a member of the Chicago Board of Trade.  He understands economics.  Fanning returned a great MSSA candidate questionnaire.  Bob likes to describe himself as a “Montanan by choice; not by accident.”  He moved here over a decade ago to deliberately become a Montanan.  Fanning has not previously held any public office in Montana.  Bob buys big game tags every year and is an elk hunter.  He is not as acquainted with the details and processes of state government as some other candidates.  Fanning hasn’t raised a lot of money, and he got off to a late start with is campaign.  His running mate is former Rep. Joel Boniek, a philosophically-pure guy who carried the Montana Firearms Freedom Act for MSSA when it passed in 2009.  I’d say Fanning’s chances of getting into the Governor’s office are a long shot.  He’d have a steep learning curve if he got there, but would be something of a breath of fresh air for Montana in the Governor’s chair.
http://www.bobfanning.com/

Ken Miller & Bill Gallagher

Former State Senator Ken Miller is very nearly as conservative as Fanning.  Miller also has a strong bent towards states’ rights and individual liberty.  Miller has FAR more effort invested in the Governor race than any other candidate.  He’s been actively campaigning for over a year and has crisscrossed Montana multiple times meeting locally with any groups of people who wanted to meet him.  Ken was Chairman of the state GOP for a cycle, and managed to shake up and out that good-old-boy GOP structure some to make the GOP a more effective organization.  As GOP Chairman, he was willing to make more hard decisions than some others who have held the post.  When in the Montana Senate, Miller always supported MSSA’s pro-gun bills.  Miller returned a very good MSSA candidate questionnaire, although with reservation about MSSA’s proposal to stimulate smokeless powder and primer manufacture in Montana.  Ken and his wife Peggy are both big game hunters.  Ken grew up in Montana, and has been a successful small business owner in Montana.  In statewide polling, Miller continues to run a close second place in terms of support among likely Republican voters.  Miller’s running mate is Bill Gallagher, a Helena attorney currently elected to the Montana Public Service Commission.  Because both Miller and Gallagher have served in elected public office at the state level, they have a good grasp of how state government works and perhaps, because of that, an enhanced ability to translate Miller’s philosophy into deeds.
http://www.miller4governor.com/

I see a bit of a gap on the liberal-to-conservative spectrum between these candidates and the next two.

Neil Livingstone & Ryan Zinke

Neil Livingstone is an interesting guy, albeit a bit mysterious.  Although born in Montana, Neil has spent much of his life immersed in the murky world of international business, intelligence and clandestine operations, both in Washington, D.C., and overseas.  Livingstone speaks forcefully about his commitment to constitutional principles, and he definitely wishes to roll back what he sees as extreme environmentalists’ suppression of the natural resource industry in Montana.  Livingstone returned a fine candidate questionnaire, although he had some un-detailed concerns about MSSA’s “Sheriffs First” proposal.  Livingstone has not held elected office in Montana.  While expressing strong support for the right to keep and bear arms, Livingstone did select a running mate, State Senator Ryan Zinke, who formerly expressed a very definite opinion that “civilians” should not be allowed to own .50-caliber rifles.  Livingstone quickly explains that he and former SEAL commander Zinke have come to terms about .50-caliber rifles, and Zinke now whole-heartedly supports civilian ownership of such firearms, as does Livingstone.  Livingstone has a forceful personality.  There are concerns expressed by some, however, that he has not spent enough time in Montana in recent years to have a good sense of Montana issues and Montana culture.  Livingstone has not hunted in Montana, but says he has hunted in Eurasia and Africa.  Livingstone is supported by a number of former high-ranking military and government officials of excellent national repute, many of whom are not Montana residents.  Were Livingstone elected Montana Governor, one gets the impression he would kick ass, and that the timid and naysayers would do well to keep out of his way.  With his long employment, connections and experience with the federal government, one would hope that his total allegiance would be to Montana, rather than to the federal government or influences from D.C. or elsewhere.
http://neil2012.com/

Corey Stapleton & Bob Keenan

Both Stapleton and Keenan are former state senators, both with good conservative credentials, and both of them are known as proven supporters of the right to keep and bear arms – excellent guys.  Stapleton is a graduate of Annapolis, a strong recommendation by anyone’s standard.  Stapleton did not return MSSA’s candidate questionnaire, but, based on his past votes in the Montana Senate, I believe he would support most of the issues MSSA plans to have before the 2013 Legislature.  Because both Stapleton and Keenan have long experience in the Legislature, they also know how state government works and how to translate their philosophy into deeds at the state level.  They would also be realistic, even pragmatic, about what a Governor can accomplish.   Stapleton’s campaign has not been highly visible. There is a concern that because Stapleton has been (and presumably still is) an officer in the U.S. military, the federal government might be able to “pull rank” and command his loyalty in any disagreement between Montana and the federal government.
http://www.coreystapleton.com/

Continuing to work from the conservative end of the political spectrum gets us to:

Rick Hill & Jon Sonju

Rick Hill was formerly elected to represent Montana in the U.S. House of Representatives, and his running mate, Jon Sonju, has been in the Montana Senate.  Both are experienced hands in the process of politics.  Hill is currently thought my many to be the front-runner in this seven-way Republican Primary.  He is reported to lead in fundraising, and is known to be supported by many “old guard” Republican figures.  Although Hill did not return MSSA’s candidate questionnaire, he did speak to the MSSA Annual Meeting in Helena in March (as did Fanning, Miller and Livingstone), where he expressed strong support for the right to keep and bear arms.  It is unknown how this strong expression will translate to the details of MSSA’s legislative agenda in 2013.  I expect he would support most of those issues, but with no returned candidate questionnaire and no voting record from the Montana Legislature, that’s just my educated guess.  Hill is reputed to occasionally hunt upland game birds.  Sonju has been a solid supporter of gun issues in the Legislature, and his family manufactures firearms in the Kalispell area.  It is argued by some that the nature of Hill’s work and experience in D.C. and Montana may make him more vulnerable to attacks by the Democrats in the General Election, making it difficult for him to win the General Election, although Democrats will certainly attack whomever becomes the Republican candidate for the General Election.  Hill recently released a statement asserting need to better manage wolves to prevent negative impact on game herds.  While quite welcome, this recent interest by Hill is seen by some as being a bit late and lacking the strong intent needed to resurrect Montana’s predator-decimated game herds.
http://www.rickhillforgovernor.com/

Jim Lynch & Al Olszewski

Current Governor Brian Schweitzer (a Democrat) appointed Jim Lynch to be Director of the Montana Department of Transportation.  In that office, Lynch says that he has made maintenance of the Montana highway system much more effective and efficient.  He wishes to bring the same management techniques to the Governor’s Office.  Lynch has been an insider in state government long enough to know how things work, although he hasn’t been involved in the political machinations used to turn eggs into an omelet.  Lynch did return a very good MSSA candidate questionnaire, a plus for him, although MSSA puts more credence in a voting record history than in a candidate questionnaire.  I know nothing about Lynch’s running mate, Al Olszewski.  It is said that Lynch has made numerous political donations on record to Democrat candidates, although that may just be an unspoken job requirement to work for Governor Schweitzer.  It is my fuzzy opinion that Lynch is probably a pretty good manager, but I have not heard others who know him speak of his conservative philosophy or credentials.
http://lynchforgov.com/

Jim O’Hara & Scott Swingley

Jim O’Hara is elected as a County Commissioner of Choteau County.  He did not return MSSA’s candidate questionnaire.  I haven’t met O’Hara and really don’t know anything about Jim or his running mate, Scott Swingley.
http://www.oharagov.com/

Conclusion?

I’ve tried seven times to write a conclusion, but I’m just not getting there.  I guess you’ll have to draw your own conclusion.  I hope this has been helpful.

SOURCE: http://progunleaders.org/MTGOPPrimary.html

 

Bob Fanning Running For Montana Governor

(Hat-Tip Elias Alias. Thanks for the forward, Elias!)

Bob Fanning is running for Governor of Montana as a populist Constitutional Republican who will fight for Montana sovereignty.

The U.S. Federal government has failed to protect Montanans from United Nations’ encroachment and has failed to protect Montanans from the criminality of Wall Street and the Federal Reserve System. The U.S. Federal government has failed to protect Montanans from Federal corruption. 

Early In the 2012 Gubernatorial race there have been thus far three Gubernatorial debates.  At Montana State University at Bozeman, Montana, Bob Fanning read his “Montana Declaration of Independence”. At the Republican debate on campus at Billings, Montana, Bob Fanning exposed the evil of the 106^th Congress as it placed into law the four satchel charges which blew up the American financial system on September 15, 2008. At the Gubernatorial debate at Great Falls, Montana, Bob Fanning read his blistering speech on the relationship between the UN’s Agenda 21 and the Foreclosure Fraud spectacle which is now engulfing the nation and many Montana families.

No other Montana Gubernatorial candidate is speaking up on these topics, for fear of – well, for fear of what? Are they afraid to speak truth to power?  Perhaps they simply do not know how real the threat is.

Bob Fanning is not afraid to speak the truth. He knows the truth; he “gets it”. Truth is that we’re now looking at a criminal cabal centered in the Federal Reserve, the Federal government and Wall Street, which has international ties with and is marching to the drums of the United Nations with full-blown intent of destroying America, and taking Montana down along with the other States in the process. 

Just why the other Republican Gubernatorial candidates do not know this, or, in knowing, are afraid to speak of it, escapes us. The RNC itself has proposed a resolution to expose the UN’s Agenda 21, yet of eight Republican Gubernatorial candidates only Bob Fanning is speaking out with a plan to shut down the United Nations gambit in Montana.  Here is a section from the Republican National Committee’s proposed resolution against Agenda 21 –

WHEREAS, the United Nations Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control that was initiated at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992; and,

WHEREAS, the United Nations Agenda 21 is being covertly pushed into local communities throughout the United States of America through the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) through local “sustainable development” policies such as Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, and other “Green” or “Alternative” projects; and,

WHEREAS, this United Nations Agenda 21 plan of radical so-called “sustainable development” views the American way of life of private property ownership, single family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices, and privately owned farms; all as destructive to the environment; and,

WHEREAS, according to the United Nations Agenda 21 policy, social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment which would be accomplished by socialist/communist redistribution of wealth; and,

WHEREAS, according to the United Nations Agenda 21 policy National sovereignty is deemed a social injustice….

Okay. Now. The above was composed by a committee within the Republican National Committee. Can it be made more apparent than that? Montana is under siege by the United Nations’ Agenda 21 program which itself is fortified with NGOs such as Yukon To Yellowstone, ICLEI, etc. The State of Montana is not protecting Montanans from this scourge, and Bob Fanning continues to ask where is Steve Bullock, our alleged Attorney General?

This is the Great Falls Tribune coverage of the February 27, 2012, Gubernatorial debate in Great Falls, Montana, with the closing paragraph explaining about Bob’s statement on Agenda 21.

http://www.greatfallstribune.com/article/20120228/NEWS01/202280304/Montana-gubernatorial-candidates-mix-up-Great-Falls?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|Frontpage

“Fanning repeatedly warned the more than 100 people gathered at the Exhibition Hall about “Agenda 21,” which he said is a United Nations conspiracy to strip Americans of their private property rights. Fanning called on Bullock, as attorney general, to “step up to the plate and start protecting Montana homeowners” from “zombie banks” that are using foreclosures to act on the “communist call to redistribute wealth.”

More: As Bob Fanning pointed out in his speech at the Gubernatorial debate in Great Falls, this international madness is connected with the fraudulent foreclosure phenomenon.  To understand the validity in Bob’s stand against fraudulent foreclosure practices in the wake of the housing market implosion, please read about the Attorney General of New York State, who has initiated lawsuits on behalf of the people of New York.

http://www.ag.ny.gov/media_center/2012/feb/feb03a_12.html

Here is the headliner for that article on the New York Attorney General’s website –

A.G. SCHNEIDERMAN ANNOUNCES MAJOR LAWSUIT AGAINST NATION’S LARGEST BANKS FOR DECEPTIVE & FRAUDULENT USE OF ELECTRONIC MORTGAGE REGISTRY

Complaint Charges Use Of MERS By Bank Of America, J.P. Morgan Chase, And Wells Fargo Resulted In Fraudulent Foreclosure Filings  

Servicers And MERS Filed Improper Foreclosure Actions Where Authority To Sue Was Questionable

Schneiderman: MERS And Servicers Engaged In Deceptive and Fraudulent Practices That Harmed Homeowners And Undermined Judicial Foreclosure Process

Learn more at the above link. And then join Bob Fanning in asking, “where is Attorney General Steve Bullock when the people of Montana need him?”

For your convenience here is the text of Bob’s speech –

Right now thousands of Montana families are losing their homes to foreclosure and many more will face this crisis in the coming year!

 

This was and is a well executed plan by the world elite banksters (here) (here) (here) and the politicians in bed with them to usher in the United Nations’ plan called Agenda 21; which proposes a profound re-orientation of ALL humans unlike anything the world has ever experienced. I quote from their 1976 United Nations Habitat I Conference:

 

                 “Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market… Private land ownership is also a principle instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore contributes to social injustice.”

 

Folks, they are telling you that it is a social injustice to own your own home!  This is the communist call to re-distribute wealth and part of that plan is FORECLOSURE. The Zombie Banks are the intermediary arm of the United Nations and the City of London financial district. Foreclosure is being accomplished at the local level through mortgage fraud, which is the ultimate goal of those who seek global governance! 

 

• The powerful and their puppets believe that they should tell you where to live, how to live, and their ultimate goal is to move you to an URBAN SETTLEMENT of their design.
• See the RNC’s denouncement of Agenda 21, in which the Republican National Committee’s winter committee resolves that Agenda 21 not only wants your property, but also wants to deprive Americans of private automobile ownership.
• This is systemic financial barbarism done with the flick of a pen; sending documents in the mail to the homeowner, invoking fear to drive you from your homes; and it uses courts to support the theft.
• This is how to have a war without a shot being fired. 
• In the last 12 years, many Homeowner’s across Montana thought they were getting a loan from the too big to fail Zombie Banks of Wall Street.
•  A large percentage of the Mortgage Note’s from these banks were securitized: in plain English, securitization

1)         Is a tax evasion scheme

2)         It is wrongful and improper foreclosure process based on forgery and fraud

3)         It undermines the integrity of the judicial process

4)         Causes mass confusion over property title and ownership

5)         And those Zombie Banks have no standing as many courts are recently affirming!

• These big banks used this elaborate design to take the homeowner’s equity and the investor’s money, knowing full well that very few could unravel this highly engineered plan of FRAUD!

 

We have given the too big to Fail Wall Street Banks respect that they do not DESERVE!  They and many compromised politicians are taking your taxes and pumping that money into methods of assault against your families, friends, and neighbors.

 

Again, this is a part of Agenda 21 to steal Montana’s wealth, folks…the LAND is the WEALTH!

 

All Montana land is under assault! It affects us all, whether you have a mortgage or not, because the EPA, BLM, and USFS are also a part of this wealth stealing plan…

 

This is a call to the leaders throughout Montana and to my opponents on both sides to address this crisis, to set up a hot line that will help homeowners to stand in this fight. The people need to know that certain papers are necessary for a bank to foreclose on their property, and in most cases those papers cannot be produced.

 

Do not leave your land, it is your WEALTH, YOUR HERITAGE, and YOUR CHILDREN’S INHERITANCE!

 

Possession is 9/10s of the law.  Together we Montanans will deal with the other 1/10^th…to make new laws that confront this assault head on. Montana’s antiquated codes and property laws were not designed for this battle and are currently inefficient. 

 

Attorney General Steve Bullock, of Washington DC’s Step Toe Johnson Law Firm, defender of these Zombie Banks, what are you doing to protect Montana property owners? Why are you allowing the Attorney General of the State of New York stand alone in exposing this? You have an oath-sworn duty to the people of Montana, and the facts are now known. Where are you?

 

As governor, foreclosure fraud will be one of my first priorities.

You are invited to read that speech at Bob Fanning’s campaign website where you can donate by credit card to Bob Fanning’s campaign.

Bob Fanning is the only man running for Governor of Montana who has the courage and knowledge to combat the international and Federal-level threats to our well being, freedom, and prosperity.  The other candidates wilt under the magnitude of the threat facing all Montanans today, but Bob Fanning rises to the challenge with Constitutional remedies and courageous implementation.

Judge Andrew Napolitano wrote to Bob Fanning on Monday, February 27, 2012, after having read Bob Fanning’s platform, and said that he is in agreement with Bob’s “substantive” planks.

Join with Judge Napolitano in recognizing that Bob Fanning’s Montana Declaration of Independence is valid, truthful, and necessary if we are to save freedom for Montanans and indeed for all Americans. Bob Fanning could use our help.

.

Contribute your support online at http://fanning-baldwin.com/?p=1647

Checks and money-orders may be mailed to:

Bob Fanning * FanningForGovernor2012 * Post Office Box 7 * Pray, Montana , 59065

- Friends of Fanning For Governor 2012 -
–

 Heirs to self knowledge shed gently their fears.

 

Gary Marbut and The Montana Shooting Sports Association Letter To Fish and Wildlife “Protection” Agency….. BE HONEST AND DO YOUR JOB, OR NO MORE FUNDS!

[TWG Note:  Below is a letter, written by Gary Marbut, President of the Montana Shooting Sports Association to the Fish and Wildlife "Protection" agency.  I think you'll find it most interesting, particularly if you live in Montana, Washington, Idaho and Oregon.  Please see my personal note below the letter, and please help me in sending Mr. Marbut a heartfelt THANKS for his efforts on behalf of our gun rights, wildlife, hunters and for all Americans who feel that Federal agencies have overstepped their boundaries.]

************************************************************

Shane Colton
FWP Commission

Shane,

See the story in the Bozeman Chronicle at:
http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/ap_news/montana/article_dcde1660-dd51-59b1-8515-a8e0b9957576.html

This is the first overt symptom of the agency “death spiral” for FWP.

For two decades, FWP has come to focus on wildlife and biology, when it should have been focused on fish and game.  A significant part of this picture has been FWP’s shocking tolerance and support for large predators.  FWP’s total, willing, even eager cooperation with large predator enhancement has long been predicted to result in an economic crash for the agency, when the word unavoidably spreads that there is no game left to hunt so there is no reason to buy a license.

FWP leaders have for too long leaned on the scales of policy by making excuses for the devastation wrought to game herds by large predators, fudging game counts and census numbers, and blaming any population declines that could not be covered up on climate change, sunspots, or aliens – anything but the truth.  This coverup culture has been fostered by senior staff, always near retirement, who knew they’d be gone and not in the hot seat when the crisis actually arrived.

If the overall FWP attitude had not been so Hell-bent on “ecosystem management,” “biological diversity,” “natural balance” and other similar catchy but terminal “green” ideas destined to end hunting, FWP managers could have projected the current crisis years ago.  I guess nobody at FWP noticed or cared several years ago when the editor of the NRA’s American Hunter magazine wrote a feature article about his fruitless elk hunting trip to southwest Montana, a trip where the only tracks he saw were wolf tracks.  Nobody at FWP noticed or cared about the other thousands of warnings from Montana citizens.  Worse, those warnings were ignored in a mad pursuit of a “green” agenda for FWP.

The stock mantra from FWP managers has been:  We’re the professionals.  We know best.  The outcome concerned citizens project will never come to pass.  The “evidence” of crashing game herds citizens cite is just “campfire stories” and is without merit because it doesn’t come from professional FWP biologists.

Yet when retired FWP employees, freed from the institutional FWP muzzle, asserted that FWP-tolerated wolves were turning the Montana landscape into a “biological desert,” FWP dismissed such comments summarily.

For the last two decades, FWP has been busy digging a hole for itself.  As it sees daylight disappearing around the edges of the hole, it still won’t quit digging.

Of course, the obvious solution for the bureaucratic-bound and reality-disconnected FWP will be to announce, “We’ve been managing wildlife for the general public (including the non-Montana public) for years.  Now we need the general public to pay the bills.”  FWP has so fouled its nest by inadvisably removing hunters from the economic equation that it will eventually have to go to the Legislature asking for relief, including increased fees that hunters simply won’t pay to access a vanishing resource, and, ultimately, general taxpayer money.

You can bet that when FWP approaches the Legislature demanding an allowance increase as a reward for having flunked Econ 101, MSSA and thousands of Montana hunters will be there to say “Absolutely no way.”  FWP has not only ignored the many warnings from Montana hunters, it has mocked and disrespected them.

What FWP needs is not more or alternate sources of money, but a total change in attitude and culture.  Until that happens, let FWP starve!  It is not serving Montanans.

Sincerely yours,

 

Gary Marbut, president
Montana Shooting Sports Association
http://www.mtssa.org
author, Gun Laws of Montana
http://www.mtpublish.com

 

*************************************************************

[TWG Note: Gary Marbut, President of the Montana Shooting Sports Association, has been diligently and tirelessly advocating for hunters, wildlife and for our Second and Tenth Amendment Rights not only here in Montana, but all over the country.  We can Thank Him for the Firearms Freedom Act, among many, many successful legislative efforts and accomplishments on our behalf.   Mr. Marbut is an amazing individual, and I hope you’ll join me in thanking him for his efforts and success.  

 

I’ve personally witnessed Mr Marbut’s relentless work here at the Montana Legislature and in numerous opinion articles he’s written in his efforts to expose the truth about gun rights, wildlife and Tenth Amendment issues.  He’s a SUPERSTAR in my book, and if you can help support his efforts, I’m certain a donation in any amount would be very much appreciated by him.  If you’d like to become a member of The Montana Shooting Sports Association, you can show your support by purchasing a membership for a mere $25  You do not need to be a resident of Montana to join the Montana Shooting Sports Association.  Donations and membership fees are used to help Gary’s efforts in advocating for our rights not just here in Montana, but all across America.

 

Donate to MSSA political efforts

MT Fish, Wildlife and Parks “Adaptive” Wolf Management Is Just Another Lie

[The wolf huggers in DC, CO, FL and CA seem to LOVE these predatory beasts.  I say we round 'em up and ship them to DC, CO, FL and CA.  Let those idiots live with these wolves and see how they like it.  Remember when those bears and wolves escaped in Ohio last year?  They residents were TERRIFIED!   We need to be able to LEGALLY hunt those wolves year round. Otherwise, people are going to have to break the law to protect themselves, their families, their pets and their livestock.  Montanans call it "The Three S's"  I wonder if they taste anything like chicken...]

 

w

 

 

The state senators and representatives who make up the EQC have been catching a lot of flack from their constituents about getting the wolf problem under control.  But, as long as MT FWP remains the same, trying to reduce wolf numbers through a wolf season with an established quota, that is never going to happen.  Still, MT FWP Director Joe Maurier says he doubts if we will ever have the opportunity to take wolves whenever there is an opportunity – 365 days a year.  However, study after study from around the world has found that is the ONLY way to possibly ever reduce wolf numbers to the point where game populations can rebound – OTHER THAN AERIAL GUNNING…. (Con’t)

 

READ MORE: http://lobowatch.wordpress.com/2012/01/13/mt-fish-wildlife-and-parks-adaptive-wolf-management-is-just-another-lie/

 

FRAUD ALERT! “MONTANA HUNTERS AND ANGLERS ACTION”, NOT WHAT THEY CLAIM. WOLVES IN SHEEPLE’S MASK?

 

 

…….OF WOLVES AND SHEEPLE…

Could Montana Hunters and Anglers Action be simply a front for what is really just another radical environmental group? A group with a political agenda?

Let’s take a look at those who lead this “sportsmen’s organization”……

CLICK HERE TO READ THE ARTICLE

Montana AG Steve Bullock….. Picking and Choosing Which Laws We, The People Must Obey…. AGAIN.

[TWG NOTE:  Montana Commie AG Steve Bullock..... picking and choosing which laws We, The People will obey.   The stoners like the tenth amendment, but ONLY if it protects their right to get stoned on drugs and shoot guns. To Hell with everything else, as long as they get their pot.  Can't wait for a Conservative to take the helm and pick & choose which laws THEY will obey.  Isn't it comforting to know the glassy eyed stoners will be legally allowed to own, carry and use firearms???   Shut up and pass the joint.  I'm hunting hogs today.]

***********************************************************

 

A new directive from the federal government’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives concerning the rights of medical marijuana patients to own or possess firearms runs contrary to state and federal law and should not be enforced, Montana Attorney General Steve Bullock told the U.S. Justice Department Monday.

As hunting season draws near, Montanans are buying guns and ammunition and “preparing to enjoy an activity that is deeply rooted in our heritage and culture,” Bullock told Attorney General Eric Holder in a Monday letter.

The ATF’s edict that marijuana users may not own or possess firearms or ammunition “implicates serious legal issues under the Second Amendment, and the equal protection and due process clauses of the Fifth Amendment,” Bullock said. It also flies in the face of the state constitution, which protects the right to hunt….(Con’t)

 

CONTINUE READING HERE: http://www.belgrade-news.com/news/state_regional/article_01c3e6b6-eea4-11e0-830a-001cc4c03286.html

Medical Marijuana, Firearms, 10th Amendment and Montana…

Feds: States Have No Rights
By Chuck Baldwin
October 13, 2011

Archived column:
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=4050

In a recent column appearing on InfoWars.com, Kurt Nimmo succinctly
and correctly pointed out that the federal government’s usurpation
of State sovereignty, jurisdiction, and authority is worsening. The
current case in point is the recent open letter to all firearms
dealers by the ATF. Nimmo begins, “In its continuing effort to pare
down the number of Americans who can exercise their rights under the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco
and Firearms has sent a letter to firearms dealers informing them that
medical patients ‘addicted’ to legally dispensed medical marijuana
have no right to own and possess firearms.

“According to Arthur Herbert, Assistant Director of Enforcement
Programs and Services at the ATF, ‘any person who uses or is
addicted to marijuana, regardless of whether his or her State has
passed legislation authorizing marijuana use of medicinal purposes, is
an unlawful user or addicted to a controlled substance, and is
prohibited by Federal law from possessing firearms or ammunition’
and will be compelled to admit the prescribed use of medical marijuana
on ATF forms at the point of purchase.”

Nimmo goes on to point out, “More significantly, the ATF’s move
to deny cancer and other patients medical marijuana is part of a
larger attempt to roll back the Second Amendment by color of law and
also attack states’ rights as guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment.”

And it’s not just medical marijuana and cancer patients that the
ATF–and its water boys in Congress–wants to deny Second Amendment
rights to. As has been previously reported, many of our nation’s
veterans are also on the “hit list” as not eligible to keep and
bear arms.

See the report at:

http://gunowners.org/a091207.htm

Beyond that, any person who has been diagnosed with a “mental
disorder” is also in the cross hairs for having their Second
Amendment rights expunged. And, of course, “mental disorder” could
include anyone from a returning combat veteran who suffers from
“post-traumatic stress disorder,” or “combat fatigue,” to
someone who was prescribed medication for Attention Deficit Disorder
(ADD) as a child, to someone who was diagnosed as suffering from
bipolar disorder. In other words, the federal government wants the
power to classify just about anyone it wants to as having a “mental
disorder” and, therefore, be denied their right to keep and bear
arms.

But there is even more. Nimmo writes, “In 2009, Democrat and
notorious gun-grabber Rep. Carolyn McCarthy introduced The No Fly, No
Buy Act (H.R. 2401), a bill that would have merged the TSA’s no-fly
list with the National Instant Criminal Background Check System
(NICS), a point-of-sale system for determining eligibility to purchase
a firearm.

“The current mayor of Chicago–the largest anti-Second Amendment
city in the country after New York City–and former Obama Chief of
Staff Rahm Emmanuel proposed that anybody on the fed’s no-fly list
(numbering in the tens of thousands) should have their Second
Amendment stripped.”

Of course, if having one’s name on the no-fly list makes one a
terrorist, why wasn’t former senator Ted Kennedy so identified? It
is a matter of public record that he was detained several times by TSA
agents, because his name kept showing up on the no-fly list.

Nimmo concludes his column by saying, “The feds are determined to
whittle away at the Second Amendment and this under-handed effort to
make gun dealers responsible for determining if their customers are
marijuana ‘addicts’–under penalty of losing their licenses–is
part of the long term plan to disarm the American people.”

See Nimmo’s column at:

http://tinyurl.com/6ggsabg

This draconian decision by the ATF hits people in my home State of
Montana especially hard. Under the laws of the State of Montana, a
person is lawfully allowed to receive prescribed amounts of medical
marijuana for legitimate health reasons (I know many of these people
personally). And contrary to what anyone inside the Beltway says,
marijuana in medicinal amounts has been proven to greatly assist
people who suffer from a variety of maladies. Furthermore, the misuse
of alcohol–which is also known to help treat a variety of illnesses
in medicinal amounts, which even the Holy Scripture collaborates in I
Timothy 5:23–inflicts far greater havoc upon both the individual user
and society in general than marijuana has or could ever inflict.

It is also true that the so-called “war on drugs” by the federal
government is not only an abject failure, it has become a tool by
which power-hungry despot-wannabes strip hundreds of thousands of
harmless, peaceful Americans of their freedoms and liberties. There
are tens of thousands of people languishing behind prison walls that
have never harmed a single person, have never stolen, have never
committed an act of violence, or have never even shown the slightest
aggression toward a fellow human being. They languish for decades and
even for a lifetime in harsh prison conditions because of this
never-ending, always escalating “war on drugs.”

Talk about a financial cost to taxpayers: the cost of incarcerating
tens and hundreds of thousands of harmless, nonviolent drug users–not
to mention the cost of investigating, arresting, arraigning, and
trying them–literally dwarfs whatever the cost would be to let them
live peacefully in society, or even to allow churches and
special-needs ministries and hospitals to treat them.

But a few things the “war on drugs” does accomplish is it serves
as a major reason to increase federal funding for all kinds of
Gestapo-like tactics at every level of government; it provides
justification for governmental restrictions of civil liberties; and it
is a major excuse for the exponential growth of the emerging police
state. And dare I even mention the fact that it is now absolutely
certain that persons (at the highest levels) and agencies within the
federal government have been (and are) reaping gargantuan profits via
illegal drug trafficking. As one retired federal agent (that’s
right, federal agent) who was personally involved in the feds’
“war on drugs” for decades personally told me, “Chuck, the
federal government hates competition.” (I’m not making it up;
that’s what he said.) Oh yes! It also allows the ATF to deny Second
Amendment rights to more and more people!

America desperately needs State governors to draw a line in the sand
against this federal leviathan for the protection of the liberties and
freedoms of the citizens within his or her State! Let me say it
bluntly: we desperately need a State governors to tell the feds to go
to Hades! If State leaders would stop cooperating with and submitting
to these would-be tyrants, I am convinced the people of the states
would rally behind them in record numbers and speed! I am absolutely
convinced that this would be the case in the Mountain States anyway.
And when the feds attempt to withhold federal tax dollars from these
courageous, albeit recalcitrant states, it needs to be remembered that
the states can do likewise. They can withhold tax revenues from the
feds: two can play that game! All it would take would be a plucky
governor with enough backbone to do it!

In the meantime, combat veterans, people who have taken certain
prescription drugs, people who have shown up on no-fly lists, and now
people who have been lawfully issued a particular medical card can be
denied their right to keep and bear arms by the US government. When
will the American people ever have enough?

P.S. I think it fitting at this juncture to remind readers that one
of the reasons so many pastors and Christians offer so little
resistance to the unconstitutional conduct of our civil magistrates in
Washington, D.C., is because of the erroneous and fallacious
interpretation of Romans chapter 13. Let me remind everyone that I
have a four-part message series on “The True Meaning of Romans 13”
available on one DVD. I strongly encourage readers to obtain this DVD
and to distribute it as widely as possible. I am convinced that the
correct interpretation of Romans 13 could literally change the course
and direction of our country! To obtain a copy of this Romans 13 DVD,
go to:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=3146

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be
made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=19

� Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and
pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America
was founded. He was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitution
Party. He and his wife, Connie, have 3 children and 8 grandchildren. See
Chuck’s complete bio at:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=6

This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.

To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=450

To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=457

Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied
intact and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web site address is
included.

Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact sec@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address
is P.O. Box 10, Kila, MT 59920. When responding, please include your name,
city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all respondents will be
added to the Chuck Wagon address list.

Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://chuckbaldwinlive.com

Are Montana Sheriffs Knowingly Associating With Communists, Globalists and Gun Grabbers?

As I was reviewing some history on the Montana Sheriff’s First (SB 114) legislation, passed in both house and senate and vetoed by Governor Schweitzer, I stumbled across this very interesting and informative article written by my Friend and Oathkeeper Elias Alias in January 2011.  

 

It appears we have a LOT of courtesy flushing to do here in the Great State of Montana.  I think you’ll find this article very interesting and very well written.  I suggest you investigate these issues in your State so that We, The People know exactly who we’ve got leading our States (our Liberty, our Freedom and our gun rights) straight down the crapper.

 

Why are Montana Sheriffs Associating with Communists and Gun Grabbers?

Posted on January 28, 2011

by Elias Alias, Montana Oath Keepers, USMC Vietnam veteran

Scenario SB 114

 

If the mayor is under attack

For gaming behind your back,

Look-out Jack, better step back -

Duck the flak, but stay on track.

 

Scenario: Deception distorts perception in the debate on SB-114, the Sheriffs First bill:

The people of Montana are grateful to Senator Shockley for reminding the people that Montana’s legislators are primarily Montanans and only secondarily serve as occasional legislators. They do not have to specialize in American history or in Constitutional studies.

We are now told that because the North won the Civil War, the conclusion we all should draw from that is that Federal law trumps State law, “like it or not.” Somehow Lincoln managed to rewrite the Tenth Amendment by winning a war – or did he? Let us make a scenario.

In our scenario, an amateur  student of history who has given countless hours over many years to study the Constitution and the contexts of the era in which it was written, shows up at a committee hearing for a particular bill to speak for a bill, and finds to his dismay that the citizen legislators, some of whom have not bothered to learn the important lessons of history, are enmeshed in a tightly-orchestrated schedule and cannot grant one enough time to pack even the most condensed quintessence of ten years’ worth of study into a two-minute presentation before the committee.

Perhaps that is simply a blow delivered by bureaucracy’s inherent constructs, the infrastructure of organized governance.  All can see that it is impersonal, that it is just how busy sessions work.

But our scenario grows darker when we recall the recent hearing by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Friday, January 21, 2011.  The bill before the Senate Judiciary Committee was Senate Bill-114, commonly referred to as the “Sheriffs First” bill. The public was invited to appear before the Committee and speak for or against the Sheriffs First bill. A number of Montanans drove to Helena to stand before the microphone and plead for passage of this important bill.

However, the citizens who spoke for the bill were opposed by a battery of public employees who showed up to speak against the bill. Interesting, that.  As reported, all who spoke against the bill were public servants, while the people from the private sector were in favor of the bill. There was that clear delineation – public servant vs the public. In this scenario, the public servants are convinced that they know what is best for the public, and shall wield the public power of office to ensure that the public gets only the laws which public servants deem appropriate. That begs the question, “Who is serving who?”

The citizens who support the bill, including attorneys, represent the sector of Montana society which encourages study into Constitutional issues, constitutional philosophy, study into contexts, study into history, and Supreme Court precedent. These citizens represent the aware and conscientious patriots within Montana who do as the founders insist all citizens should do – which is to be ever vigilant in watching over the manner in which government administers itself upon the governed.

Opposing the citizens were “associations” or lobbies for ‘special interests’. Of the several opponents of the bill present at the hearing, one in particular is handy for this extended scenario. We shall try to be elegant as we review some things, but we must now name a lobby which opposed the Sheriffs Bill. Of all things, it was the Montana Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (MSPOA).  The spokesperson for MSPOA was Helena Mayor Jim Smith, a man with considerable connections at the core of governance.

He is the mayor of the State Capitol, after all. So let’s take a look at him from the city’s website:

http://www.ci.helena.mt.us/departments/commission/mayor-and-commissioners/mayor-smith.html

There we read:  – quoting from city’s page on Mayor Jim Smith -

“ In 1978 he began working on public policy issues, with the Montana Seniors Citizens Association and the Rocky Mountain Development Council.  In 1983 Jim began working as a Lobbyist at the Montana Legislature.  He has lobbied every Session since, working for a variety of human service, health care, law enforcement and local government associations and organizations. In 1994 Jim became a co-owner of Smith and McGowan, Inc., a lobbying, management and government relations firm located in downtown Helena.  The firm’s clients include: the Montana Council of Community Mental Health Centers, the Montana Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, the Montana County Attorneys Association, the American Cancer Society, and others.”

- end quote -

So that is part of our scenario  – the gentleman is a well-connected lobbyist. A professional lobbyist. He advocates professionally for organizations, both public and private. He’s got position, and personality.

Speaking of personality traits, there is this tidbit, published on December 17, 2009 by the Missoula Independent.

http://missoulanews.bigskypress.com/missoula/targeting-gun-violence/Content?oid=1198586

-  quoting -

[Bob] McKelvey and [“Mike” Meyer] Chessin founded Montanans United to Stop Gun Violence (MU-SGV) years ago to combat what they saw as a serious problem in the state. Late this summer, they finally reached out and approached state Reps. Dick Barrett and Ron Erickson, both of Missoula, about helping the group. In November, Helena Mayor Jim Smith joined MU-SGV’s steering committee.

“I think it’s a voice that needs to be heard in the debate here in Montana over gun rights,” says Smith, who has lobbied against concealed weapons carry for 15 years. “I don’t think there’s another grassroots organization or a group of ordinary citizens who are committed to the end of gun violence and the maintenance of a civil society.”

The group faces a number of tasks for 2010, most immediate of which is agreeing what issue to use as a rallying point. McKelvey says he has growing concerns over the rising number of open carriers in the Bitterroot—an issue highlighted by recent Celebrating Conservatism meetings that feature numerous attendees with firearms. But Barrett says putting open carry practices in the group’s crosshairs could galvanize Second Amendment proponents.

-  end quoted passages from the Missoula Independent –

Our scenario continues to develop. We have a ‘lobbying personality’ which is running a city in Montana and providing its talents to the Montana Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association and the Montana County Attorneys Association, and lo and behold, this lobbying personality, presently dwelling like a clouded dream in the head of the Mayor of Helena, has taken a seat on the steering committee for a gun control group run in part by a fellow traveler named “Mike” Meyer Chessin.

Montanans who enjoy traditional gun culture in Montana are seen by Mr. Chessin to be “a serious problem”. He apparently has concerns about the Celebrating Conservatism movement in the Bitterroot, who lawfully carry their guns openly, but I’m sure he doesn’t think the Maiden of Montana Liberty, Ms Mona Docteur, would pop a cap on him. Surely he is not paranoid about his vision of a gun-free Montana, a somewhat delusional vision which he entitles “…the maintenance of a civil society”.

But what can we ask about Mr. Chessin, Mayor Smith’s partner at the Montanans United To Stop Gun Violence organization?

May we ask if he once was a professor at the University of California at Berkeley?

May we ask if, owing to alleged communist affiliations, Mr. Chessin fled UCB during the McCarthy era at a time when communists were being expunged from public offices?

May we also ask whether at that same time the University of Montana was having accreditation problems for not having sufficient numbers of ‘accredited’ professors?

And may we further ask whether the University of Montana picked up a handful of trans-locating communist professors, (some of whom were fleeing their offices under light of public scrutiny), at a discount price, including Botany professor Chessin?

Finally, may we ask whether students who attended U of M during that time readily admit that Chessin kept posters of Stalin and Lenin on his office walls at the U of M?

We are just asking questions of course, but we can be sure that Chessin does not approve of Montana’s gun culture, its traditions, and its importance in today’s world.

Question – aren’t communists always against allowing a population to keep and bear arms? And isn’t the keeping and bearing of arms one of our denoted “inalienable rights”, which public officials are sworn to protect on our behalf?

Another question. Why would the University of Montana take down the Internet page which could have revealed the reasons we have so many questions today regarding Chessin?

The information on faculty-member Chessin, now removed from the www, used to be at this link – it’s a dead link now:

http://www.umt.edu/journalism/student_work/veterans_history_project/mikechessin.html

Scenario:

The fearless professional lobbyist who is also the Mayor of Helena, Montana, sits on the steering committee for an anti-gun group with an alleged – but unproven – communist sympathizer at the same time he is providing his services to the Montana Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association and the Montana County Attorneys Association.

On their behalf, in their names, he has stood before the Montana Senate’s Judiciary Committee to oppose a bill which would affirm the (Montana) constitutional Sheriff’s authority as the highest law enforcement officer in his County. This he did while the unanimous voices of the citizens were entered into the record requesting that the Committee move the bill forward.

The citizens’ voices were confronted by Mr. Smith’s retort that: 

“The sheriffs of Montana really do not want to be pawns in anyone else’s political games.”

Is it not the quintessence of gall for a man to seek to install against the wishes of the people

“…the maintenance of a civil society”,

which is a politicization in itself, by accusing freedom-loving Montanans of playing political games?

Shouldn’t Smith admit that the ‘Montanans United to Stop Gun Violence’ organization is indeed “politicizing” an issue of our County Sheriffs’ authority?

Isn’t MU-SGV a self-declared political organization with a self-declared mission to infringe upon Montanans’ rights to keep and bear arms – perhaps with the instigation of avowed communists?

Gary Marbut, of Montana Shooting Sports Association wrote this Sheriffs First bill. Gary is the same author who gave us the successful Montana Firearms Freedom Act of 2009. Gary Marbut represents the voice of the Montana citizenry. Gary Marbut is not a lobbyist for any government office or agency. Gary Marbut defends the Montana Constitution on behalf of a free people.

Yet the professional lobbyist for MSPOA and MCAA is representing an anti-gun-rights agenda at the same time he purports to lobby for our Sheriffs and Peace Officers.

Who is politicizing what here?

Are the Sheriffs Smith purports to represent actually as anti-gun as Smith, or is Smith using the Sheriffs as pawns in the Smith/Chessin anti-gun game?

Some may say that kind of question begs “standing”. Very well. Here is some standing -

We are asking questions about the propriety of lobbying, its place in our lives, where it fits into our world. What does a lobbyist do?

Lobbyists are “statists” who represent “interests” in efforts to shape, mold, and structure state authority in ways which benefit the “interests” who pay for such services.

What is a “statist”?

A statist is one who values and believes in the power of the state (as in, the government, on whatever level). Statists use the force of the state to animate their policy, which is derived from their personal perception of various systems available to them.

Communists, for example, are statists, as also are ‘collectivists’ and ‘Marxist socialists’ or ‘progressives’ harking back to Colonel Edward M. House and Woodrow Wilson.Neo-cons are also statists.

Communism, like Marxism or socialism or any other governmental “ism”, is based on the individual’s willingness to believe in the power of the state, and the use of that power to control or regulate others. That is a psychological element of a perception which elicits a personal response in harmony with one’s view of life on earth – one’s “perception”.

A lobbyist who is a collectivist, or one who is a statist, can be employed to shape public perception in ways which benefit one’s client’s interests. A lobbyist who chooses to represent a government arm, such as, say, the office of County Sheriff, but brings a statist perception to the table, may, if one is not exceedingly careful, awaken the very Sheriffs and Peace Officers upon whose good name said lobbyist rides.

Question – Do the Sheriffs and Peace Officers who are represented by this particular statist lobbyist know that he also works with an anti-gun organization?

Did Mr. Smith call the Sheriffs of Montana’s Counties to see how they felt about SB-114, the Sheriffs First bill?

Was the lobbying of the Mayor fortified by the spread of “official” views for each Sheriff to hold regarding this bill, before Mr. Smith purported to represent their personal views to the Senate Judiciary Committee?

We do know that at least two courageous Sheriffs have taken stands for the bill, much to their respective Counties’ glory. We wonder what the other Sheriffs may think. There is, after all, an Oath to the Constitution, and that Oath is, as President John Adams said long ago, “a sacred obligation”, which is why the Oath was written into the Constitution – to bind a public servant down to honorable service to the people who created the government, to ‘we the people’.

How many Sheriffs in Montana will stand on their Oath?

How many Montana Sheriffs recognize the need for a powerful buffer between Federal intrusion and the inalienable rights of the people?

How many Montana Sheriffs truly want a communist sympathizing anti-gun professional lobbyist representing them before the people’s legislature?

But there is more. Let us add some color to our scenario. This is a pdf.

http://www.montanaviewpoint.com/ads/oct-16pg.pdf

We have to ask. Is Mayor Smith’s fair City of Helena involved in any way with the United Nations’ Agenda-21 and ICLEI? What do those terms mean? Here is an excerpt from that pdf:

The specific plan is called United Nations Agenda 21 Sustainable Development. By now, most Americans have heard of sustainable development but are largely unaware of Agenda 21.

ICLEI was founded in 1990 as the ‘International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives’. The Council was established when more than 200 local governments from 43 countries convened at the ICLEI inaugural conference, the World Congress of Local Governments for a Sustainable Future, at the United Nations in New York. In a nutshell, the plan (Agenda 21) calls for governments to take control of all land use and not leave any of the decision making in the hands of private property owners.

It is assumed that people are not good stewards of their land and the government will do a better job if they are in control. Individual rights in general are to give way to the needs of communities as determined by the governing body.

This is now being implemented in several Montana cities, and Helena is one. We must wonder, who lobbied to get ICLEI operating in Helena?

Do the people of Helena know with cognizance that a United Nations radical and extreme land-control program has been installed in their city?

Could city planning be affected by anti-gun-rights affiliations?

Isn’t that a part of what Smith’s partner sees as “…the maintenance of a civil society”?

To really understand what the United Nations’ Agenda 21 Sustainable Development and ICLEI are all about, read often at the best online source for the full picture – Michael Shaw’s remarkable site, Freedom Advocates:   http://www.freedomadvocates.org/

So let us see. We have a lobbying Mayor representing the Montana Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association and the Montana County Attorney Association in opposition to the Sheriffs First bill, and he works at the same time with an anti-gun organization which is pondering getting rid of our right to openly carry our guns, and all the while he’s not embarrassed to make deals or cooperate with the United Nations, which seeks a higher authority over our U.S. Constitution.

And this guy claims to be representing our communities’ law enforcement? And our County Attorneys?

That’s quite a scenario.

Does Helena’s Mayor have some help from within those organizations?

Yes. He does. Gallatin County Attorney Marty Lambert took time from his busy schedule to speak against the bill at the Committee hearing, and spat a bit of his own vitriolic resentment that, in his misguided view of SB 114, the people’s elected Sheriff should have the power to interfere with his federal associations. Dr. Ed Berry has already quoted him, but just for the record, Mr. Lambert sees the bill as an infringement on his job.

Could that infringement in any way affect his friendly relationship with the federal agencies operating in his County?

Aren’t the in-state activities of Federal agencies/agents part of the object of this bill?

How would the Sheriff’s lawful duty to require all federal agents to obtain the Sheriff’s written permission prior to search, seizure, or arrest of any County citizen somehow threaten the Attorney’s job unless the Attorney has discrete liaison with federal offices?

Where in this Sheriffs First bill is any Sheriff instructed to manage the office of the County Attorney?

But wait – doesn’t that bring us back to the opening of this lengthy screed?

We began by talking about citizen legislators and we noted that Senator Shockley gave us pause with his statement regarding his conclusion about the Civil War. Senator Shockley mused that since the North won the war, that settled the question of Federal vs State sovereignty. States are under the authority of the Federal government, as he would say it. His gracenote was “Like it or not”.

But we may ask next, what about the Montana Firearms Freedom Act of 2009?

It was passed into law, signed into law, and immediately the Federal ATF declared that Federal law trumps Montana law, sending letters to that effect to each FFL in the State.

Did not the Montana Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association oppose that bill also, as they are opposing the Sheriffs First bill this session? (Or was it just their lobbyist?)

But the real question to ask is whether the Federal denial of our lawfully-enacted Firearms Freedom Act of 2009 would be weakened by the passage of the Sheriffs First bill?

What about Montana’s medical marijuana law, which the Federal government also refuses to recognize?

How would the Sheriffs First bill affect the Feds’ insane push to over-ride Montana’s law?

Do the people of Montana have any sovereignty if their voted and legislated will is subject to Federal incursion?

And isn’t it Federal incursion when the Federal government threatens Montana with Federal powers to over-ride the written will and law of the Montana people?

And is not the Sheriffs First bill a threat to that kind of Federal mischief?

Dr. Ed Berry has alluded already to the Mack/Printz Supreme Court decision of 1997. The full story on that is available at Sheriff Mack’s website –

http://www.sheriffmack.com/

Enough can’t be said about that landmark decision. Icing on the cake with that decision is the fact that then-County Sheriff of Ravalli County, Montana, the distinguished patriot Sheriff Jay Printz, was Sheriff Mack’s partner in the suit against Clinton’s Brady bill. Two Sheriffs, one from Arizona and one from Montana, sued the Federal government and won, and part of the majority opinion, written by Justice Scalia, goes like this:

“It is incontestable that the Constitution established a system of ‘dual sovereignty’… Although the States surrendered many of their powers to the new Federal Government, they retained ‘a residuary and inviolable sovereignty,’…

“Residual State sovereignty was also implicit, of course, in the Constitution’s conferral upon Congress of not all governmental powers, but only discrete, enumerated ones, which implication was rendered express by the Tenth Amendment’s assertion that ‘the 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….

“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… The Constitution thus contemplates that a State’s government will represent and remain accountable to its own citizens.” – Justice Scalia

Senator Shockley, it can’t get any more clear than that. The Federal government did not create the States, and it does not give us any “rights” – the Civil War did nothing to damage the Tenth Amendment. The Federal government was created by the States to protect individual rights which are clearly stated to be unalienable rights. That means, no government can place a lien on our God-given/Natural rights.

Senate Judiciary Committee, think on these things please. Listen to your people.

The people of Montana want the Sheriffs First bill passed into law. Support the people and the State of Montana as we resist Federal incursion and Federal intrusion. Acknowledge the citizens’ rightful seat of legitimacy and authority in this Republic of law. The document begins with, is of, by, and for, “we the people”.

Choose the people over the special interests, over the socialists, over the communists, over the professional lobbyists. Choose the law as written, not a lobbyist’s interpretation of law. The perception of the opponents of this bill has been furnished to them by Federal programming and a dependency on Federal funding. It is only natural that they, joined at the waist with Federal programs, would oppose this move by the people to reclaim Montana sovereignty.

Good Senators, please hold dear Montana’s historic culture of freedom, and celebrate Montana’s compliance with the Constitution for the united States of America. Please pass SB-114.

Thank you for reading.

Salute!

Elias Alias, Montana Oath Keepers, USMC Vietnam veteran

Notes, brief bibliography -

Freedom Advocates -  http://www.freedomadvocates.org/ Michael Shaw

ICLEI –  http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id=about

Mack/Printz v United States – http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/95-1478.ZO.html

Montana Shooting Sports Association – http://www.mtssa.org/ Gary Marbut

Oath Keepers – http://www.oathkeepers.org/ Stewart Rhodes

Liberty Fellowship – http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/ Dr. Chuck Baldwin

Matrixx Productions – Creator of these films is James Jaeger:

Fiat Empire – http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5232639329002339531#

Cultural Marxism – http://www.realityzone.com/culturemarx.html

Original Intent – http://www.originalintent.us/single.htm

Corporate Fascism – http://www.corporatefascism.org/

The Purse And The Sword – by Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., holder of four degrees from Harvard. This is the definitive advanced Constitutional course, over eight viewing hours’ worth, on sound money and the lawful Militia of the several States:

< http://www.heritageresearchinstitute.org/PurseSwordPage.htm >

Constitutional “Homeland Security”: Volume 1: The Nation In Arms

by Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr.; copyright 2007 by Edwin Vieira, Jr.; Bookmasters, Inc., 30 Amberwood Parkway, Ashland, Ohio 44805; International Standard Book Number (10): 0-9671759-2-5; International Standard Book Number (13): 978-0-9671759-2-8.

To order Dr. Vieira’s Constitutional Homeland Security, order your copy directly from Dr. Vieira: $19.95 postpaid, by check or money order to:

Edwin Vieira * 52 Stonegate Court * Front Royal, Virginia 22630

How To Dethrone The Imperial Judiciary

by Dr. Edwin Vieira; copyright 2004-2005 Vision Forum Ministries; Content copyright 2004-2005 The Conservative Caucus Research, Analysis, And Education Foundation and Dr. Edwin Vieira; Vision Forum Ministries, 4719 Blanco Rd., San Antonio, Texas 78212, www.visionforum.org; ISBN – 10 0-9755264-1-3; ISBN – 13 078-0-9755264-1-5.

The Conservative Revolution: Why We Must Form a Third Political Party to Win It

by Nelson Hultberg; copyright 2009 by Nelson Hultberg; published by Americans for a Free Republic, P.O. Box 801213, Dallas, Texas 75380-1213; ISBN: 1-891191-45-4.  http://www.afr.org/ Mr. Hultberg also works with The Daily Bell: http://www.thedailybell.com/

Unalienable Rights And The Denial Of The U.S. Constitution

by Michael E. LeMieux; copyright 2007 by Michael E. LeMieux; published by PUBLISHAMERICA,LLLP; www.publishamerica.com; Baltimore; ISBN: 1-60441-785-4;

Michael LeMieux is the Nebraska chapter President for Oath Keepers.

The Constitution In Exile: How the Federal Government has Seized Power by Rewriting the Supreme Law Of The Land.

by Judge Andrew P. Napolitano; copyright 2006 by Andrew P. Napolitano; published by Nelson Current, a division of a wholly owned subsidiary (Nelson Communications, Inc.) of Thomas Nelson, Inc., in Nashville, Tennessee; email: SpecialMarkets@ThomasNelson.com.

Lies The Government Told You: Myth, Power, and Deception in American History

by Judge Andrew P. Napolitano; foreword by Ron Paul; copyright 2010 by Andrew P. Napolitano; published in Nashville, Tennessee by Thomas Nelson, a trademark of Thomas Nelson, Inc.; ISBN: 978-1-59555-266-2.

The County Sheriff: America’s Last Hope

by Sheriff Richard Mack; copyright by Richard Mack 2009; www.sheriffmack.com; published by Sheriff Mack, P.O. Box 971, Pima, Arizona 85543.

Nullification: How To Resist Federal Tyranny In The 21st Century

by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.; copyright 2010 by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.; published by Regenery Publishing, Inc., One Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20001, www.regnery.com; ISBN: 978-1-59698-149-2.