Archive

Archive for the ‘Tenth Amendment’ Category

Ninth Circuit Rules in Firearms Freedom Act Case

August 28, 2013 1 comment

NEWS RELEASE
(August 23, 2013 – for immediate release)

Ninth Circuit Rules in Firearms Freedom Act Case

MISSOULA, MONT. – The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals released its opinion today in MSSA v. Holder, the lawsuit brought in federal court to validate the principles of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act (MFFA).  The MFFA was enacted by the Montana Legislature and signed into law by then Governor Brian Schweitzer in 2009.  The MFFA declares that any firearms made and retained in Montana are not subject to any federal regulation under the power given to Congress in the U.S. Constitution to “regulate commerce … among the states.”  The MFFA uses firearms as a vehicle to challenge federal commerce clause power.

Plaintiffs in MSSA v. Holder are the Montana Shooting Sports Association (MSSA), the Second Amendment Foundation, and Gary Marbut, President of MSSA.  To set up the legal challenge, Marbut determined to manufacture a youth-model, .22 caliber, bolt-action rifle called the “Montana Buckaroo.”  The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms informed Marbut that any such unlicensed manufacture would be illegal under federal law.

Despite Marbut’s BATF-prohibited plans to make the Montana Buckaroo, the federal District Court ruled that the plaintiffs lacked “standing” to bring the lawsuit, and dismissed the lawsuit.  MSSA appealed this dismissal to the Ninth Circuit.

In its long-awaited ruling today, the Ninth Circuit reversed the federal District Court on the standing issue, saying that Marbut has standing to bring the challenge, but held that existing Supreme Court precedent was against plaintiffs on the merits of the lawsuit.

Marbut commented, “This was about as good of a ruling as we could have expected from the Ninth Circuit.  We must get to the U.S. Supreme Court to accomplish our goal of overturning 70 years of flawed Supreme Court rulings on the interstate commerce clause.  We knew that the Ninth Circuit couldn’t help us with that.  Only the Supreme Court can overturn Supreme Court precedent.  However, now that the standing question is resolved in our favor, we have the green light to appeal to the Supreme Court.”

Marbut says the attorneys involved are already beginning to work on the appeal process.

Marbut continued, “The time is ripe in America for states to challenge federal power, from Obamacare to indefinite detention, to illegal spying on U.S. Citizens and media, to IRS abuses of power, and more.  It was the states which created this federal government that has grown to become such a monster.  It’s time for the states to get their creature back on a leash.  With MSSA v. Holder, we will offer the Supreme Court a chance to do just that.”

Since the MFFA was initially enacted in Montana in 2009, nine other states have enacted clones of the MFFA, and 20-some additional states have introduced MFFA-clone bills.  The lawsuit to validate the MFFA principles, MSSA v. Holder, has attracted many intervenors and amicus curiae parties.  These include the State of Montana, the attorneys general of eight other states, Montana legislators, legislators from other states, the Goldwater Institute, Gun Owners Foundation, the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, the CATO Institute, the Weapons Collectors Society of Montana, the Pacific Legal Foundation, and others.

More information about the Firearms Freedom Act movement and lawsuit is available at:
http://www.FirearmsFreedomAct.com

Information:  Gary Marbut, 406-549-1252

Gary Marbut, President
Montana Shooting Sports Association
http://www.mtssa.org
Author, Gun Laws of Montana
http://www.MTPublish.com

Gary Marbut: What the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause really means

February 24, 2013 Leave a comment

By: Gary Marbut

President, The Montana Shooting Sports Association

In an op-ed published in The Daily Caller on February 23, Gregg Re repeats the all-too-common understanding that the overrated Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution makes the federal government supreme in virtually anything it wishes to do. That Gregg would hold such an opinion is no big surprise. It’s what he and most everyone else were taught in high school. Fortunately, I have learned since high school that this view of the Supremacy Clause is not only wrong; it is dangerous to people and to individual liberty.

Montana Closer To Declaring Sheriffs Supreme

February 16, 2013 2 comments

TWG: You can learn more about “Sheriff’s First” efforts here: http://www.countysheriffproject.org/

 

Montana moved a step closer Friday to declaring that local sheriffs are the supreme law of the land and trying to nullify any federal crackdown on assault rifles.

The measures were among a slate of gun rights bills that cleared the Legislature’s House Judiciary Committee and now head to the House floor.

Other measures that advanced would let college students bring guns on campus, allow high school students to leave guns locked in their cars, and clear the way for nearly anyone to carry concealed weapons without a permit.

Several of the bills met with staunch opposition from Democrats.

The so-called “sheriffs first” bill says federal agents must get a sheriff’s permission before making arrests or serving warrants — or risk local kidnapping or trespassing charges.

If the bill clears the Republican-controlled House and Senate, it would go directly to voters in 2014. The direct referendum would avoid the potential veto pen of Gov. Steve Bullock, a Democrat.

Supporters said it is a necessary check on the power of federal law enforcement agencies,

The measure was opposed earlier in the week at a hearing by local law enforcement agencies, and critics have said such a measure most certainly would face a legal challenge.

Opponents, led by Democrats, warned it would threaten the effectiveness of cooperative task forces tracking violent crime and drugs.

“To call the sheriffs in our state the supreme law of the land, I find that absurd,” said Rep. Ellie Hill, D-Missoula. “What is the message we are sending to Montana and the rest of the nation?”

Another bill that cleared committee would bar police from enforcing any federal bans on assault rifles or high-capacity clips. Supporters said it’s necessary to protect gun rights in Montana.

Opponents, who called it an extreme piece of legislation, argued the bill also violates the U.S. Constitution granting the federal government supremacy in such matters.

The panel also advanced a measure allowing the use of silencers while hunting big game, and removing the potential penalty of disturbing the peace for the discharge of a firearm.

Below is a letter from Gary Marbut, Founder and President of the Montana Shooting Sports Association, dated January 8, 2013, which lists bills introduced and an explanation of each bill. 
Dear MSSA Friends,

The Montana 2013 legislative Session if fast approaching, and once again
MSSA has an aggressive agenda of pro-gun and pro-hunting bills to
introduce and get passed.

GETTING THESE BILLS PASSED WILL REQUIRE YOUR HELP.

The items on MSSA’s Legislative Agenda are pasted below. Please study
them so you are familiar with them. Please redistribute this email to
all your pro-gun friends.

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

=================

MONTANA SHOOTING SPORTS ASSOCIATION
2013 LEGISLATIVE ISSUES

1. Harmonizing concealed weapon permit (CWP) requirements. Since 1991, a
CWP has not been required for a law-abiding person to carry a concealed
weapon in 99.4% of Montana – outside the limits of cities or towns. With
over a decade of experience that not requiring CWPs for nearly all of
Montana has not created any problems, we propose a bill to harmonize the
law so a permit will no longer be required for a law abiding person to
carry a concealed weapon in the remaining small part of Montana, inside
cities and towns. We intend to leave the permitting process in place, so
citizens who desire them may still obtain CWPs for travel to other
states that recognize Montana CWPs, and for firearm purchases at gun
stores under the federal Brady Law. This change would exclude criminals
from applicability – it would still be illegal for criminals to carry
concealed weapons. It would also close a dump truck-sized loophole in
existing law that allows people to carry firearms openly in the
“prohibited places” of bars, banks and public buildings, but would
exempt law enforcement personnel and actual CWP-holders from “prohibited
places” restrictions.

2. Smokeless powder and primer production. There is a serious threat to
our right to bear arms because of narrow, monolithic and
federally-controlled manufacture of essential ammunition components,
smokeless powder (propellant), primers and cartridge brass. For example,
there are only two manufacturers of smokeless powder in the U.S., one
plant owned by defense contractor General Dynamics and another owned by
defense contractor Alliant Systems (ATK). All other smokeless powder
used in the U.S. is imported, and subject to immediate and arbitrary
import restrictions. And, General Dynamics and Alliant Systems are
subject to a standard condition of military contracts that 100% of their
production may be commandeered for military use at any time. Without
ammunition, our firearms and our right to bear ammunition are worth
nothing. We propose certain incentives to encourage small-scale
production of ammunition components in Montana. That model includes
offering liability protection to future producers, providing that such
producers qualify for existing state assistance with financing, and will
include a 20-year tax amnesty from start of business, which would give
up zero current tax income to the state but would provide jobs for Montana.

3. Shooting range funding. Montana began using some hunter license money
to make matching grants to develop shooting ranges in 1989. The program
to build safe and suitable places for Montana people to shoot was put
into state law in 1999, as the Shooting Range Development Program
(SRDP). The funds for this program are approved each legislative session
in the appropriations process for the Department of Fish, Wildlife and
Parks budget. There are no general tax revenues used for this program,
only the money hunters pay for licenses. The 2007 Legislature
appropriated $1,000,000 for the SRDP. $600,000 was appropriated in 2009,
and about $650,000 in 2011. We ask that $1,000,000 be appropriated to
the SRDP in the 2013 legislative session, regardless of any FWP
opposition to that level of funding.

4. Overreaction to firearms locked in student vehicles in school parking
lots. An underreported tragedy in Montana is the number of students who
have been disciplined, many expelled, for forgetting that their hunting
rifle was locked in their vehicle, usually from a weekend hunt. When
such a condition occurs in a school parking lot, ill-informed
administrators universally tell reviewing school boards that they have
no choice but to expel offending students because of compelling federal
law. However, unknown to these poorly-informed (or perhaps over-paid)
administrators, federal law on the subject specifically excludes from
consideration any firearm locked in a vehicle in a school parking lot.
About 450 Montana high school students have been expelled, and had their
academic aspirations ruined for life, over this issue. We propose a bill
to clarify for uninformed administrators and misinformed school boards
that firearms locked in a student vehicle does not mandate expulsion.
This bill would NOT deprive school boards of tools to deal with genuine
safety problems, but would clarify that firearms locked in vehicles do
NOT MANDATE student expulsion.

5. Allow safe travel to work and employee property right inside private
vehicles. Employees have a property right to what they choose to carry
in their vehicles, whether Bibles, newspapers, or firearms. Employees
also have a constitutional right to be equipped to provide for their own
personal protection when traveling to and from work. However, many
private employers have made it a termination offense for an employee to
have a firearm locked in the employee’s vehicle if that vehicle is
parked in a company parking lot. Such employers assume no responsibility
for employee safety during travel to and from work. We propose that
employers be prohibited from firing employees only because that employee
has a firearm locked in a privately owned vehicle in a company parking
lot. This bill would require that any such firearms also be out of sight
from outside the vehicle.

6. Self defense legal costs. A few prosecutors use the tactic of
“throwing the book” at persons accused in order to make legal defense
costs so unaffordable that the accused has no choice but to plead guilty
to some prosecutor-approved charges. We propose that, in cases where
self defense is alleged, prosecutors must pay the legal defense costs
associated with any charges that are dropped, dismissed, or for which
the accused is found not guilty.

7. Disorderly conduct – fixing bad law. The existing disorderly conduct
statute in Montana is badly written because it makes it a potential
crime for a person to discharge a firearm, except at an established
shooting range. While inappropriate prosecutions under this existing law
have not been a problem in Montana, it is susceptible to abuse and
should be repaired. Besides, a person could lose their constitutional
right to keep and bear arms for life if convicted of this perceived “gun
crime.” This bill would simply strike the offense of firing firearms
from the disorderly conduct statute.

8. Sheriffs First – Law Enforcement Cooperation. Many Montanans, both
citizens and people in public office, are concerned about the lack of
accountability of federal officers conducting law enforcement operations
in Montana. In Montana, we know the county sheriff and he is elected and
accountable locally. We believe the sheriff is the chief law enforcement
officer in the county, and ought to have the tools to implement that
status. MSSA will offer a bill to require federal officers to obtain the
written permission of the local sheriff before conducting an arrest,
search, or seizure in the sheriff’s county. There are exceptions for
federal reservations, Border Patrol, Immigration and Naturalization
Service, close pursuit, when a federal officer witnesses a crime that
requires an immediate response, if the sheriff or his personnel are
under investigation, and other necessary exceptions. This bill was
passed by the Legislature in 1995, but was vetoed by the Governor.

[TWG: Here’s a document written by Mr. Marbut which addresses the “Accusations” with very succinct “Answers” regarding the  Sheriff’s First Legislation:  http://sheriffsfirst.org/AccusationsAndAnswers.html
You can learn more about “Sheriff’s First” efforts here: http://www.countysheriffproject.org/

9. When police may take firearms and how long they may keep them. There
are no clear directions to law enforcement in current Montana law about
under what circumstances law enforcement officers may disarm citizens,
and how long they may keep guns taken. This leaves it up to the
discretion of individual officers to make this call. A few officers
abuse this discretion by insisting on disarming every armed citizen they
encounter – treating citizens like criminals. The right to bear arms the
people have reserved to themselves at Article II, Section 12 of the
Montana Constitution does NOT say “except when in the presence of a law
enforcement officer.” Rather, the Constitution says the right to bear
arms “shall not be called into question …” We propose legislation to
establish some clear but workable rules for under what circumstances and
for how long law enforcement officers may disarm citizens.

10. University system gun bans. The people of Montana have reserved from
government interference the right to keep or bear arms in the Montana
Constitution. The Montana university system is a government entity. The
Montana Constitution gives the Board of Regents broad authority to
manage the affairs of the U. system, but it gives the Board NO authority
whatsoever to suspend, amend or abolish the Constitution and the rights
the people have reserved to themselves from government interference. We
propose a bill that withdraws all authority from the Board of Regents to
restrict firearms on U. system campuses, and then gives back to the U.
system narrowly-tailored authority to adopt certain restrictions that
are sensible and also defensible under recent federal (Heller and
McDonald) and state (Colorado, Oregon and Utah) court cases.

11. Suppressors illegal for poaching. Firearm suppressors do not
“silence” firearms, but suppress somewhat the noise of the muzzle blast.
They do nothing to attenuate the loud crack of the sonic boom as a
bullet breaks the sound barrier all along its flight path. Currently,
firearm suppressors are illegal for hunting. FWP argues this is
necessary for them to be able to catch criminals who poach. We propose a
bill to make use of suppressors illegal for poaching only, but not for
general hunting. Some argue that use of suppressors for hunting is not
“fair chase,” because the hunted animal would not hear the muzzle blast
from a hunter’s rifle. This argument ignores physics – that a rifle
bullet arrives before the sound of the muzzle blast because the bullet
flies faster than the speed of sound. It ignores that a missed shot will
startle the game animal with the nearby sonic boom before any sound of
muzzle blast arrives. Finally, it ignores the common acceptance of “fair
chase” hunting with absolutely silent arrows during archery season.

12. Controlling wolves. Federally-fostered wolves have become a serious
problem in Montana. They are decimating Montana’s valuable herds of
huntable game, killing or impacting an unacceptable amount of livestock
in Montana’s already stressed agricultural community, and are carrying
diseases that may cause serious human and livestock health problems. We
propose again a bill for Montana to take a much more aggressive posture
in managing and controlling wolves.

13. Revise fish and game enforcement laws. Montana game laws are very
different in their application and enforcement than similar criminal
laws in Montana. We propose to adjust Montana fish and game laws so they
conform generally to the standards applied in all other criminal matters
in Montana.

14. Concealed weapon permit list private. Montana people have reserved
the right to privacy to themselves in the Montana Constitution.
Notwithstanding this restriction, the Montana Department of Justice has
been releasing the names of about 30,000 Montanans who hold or have held
concealed weapon permits. This release includes to the Billings Gazette,
and others. In other states, newspapers have published such lists,
making CWP-holders’ residences focused targets for burglars seeking guns
for crime. We propose a bill to prevent release of CWP-holder names
except for law enforcement purposes.

15. No shooting range property tax. The Deer Creek Shooting Center
recently had its property tax bill increase from $246 to over $7,000 in
one year, which is being assessed retroactively for two more years. MSSA
will see introduced a bill to flat exempt all active shooting ranges
from property taxes.

16. Prohibiting enforcement of new federal gun control. Since the school
shooting in Connecticut, Senator Diane Feinstein has promised to
introduce federal legislation to reassert the 1994 federal “assault
weapons” ban, to cause semi-auto firearms to be classified as machine
guns under the National Firearms Act, to require registration and
licensing of most gun owners, and much more. MSSA’s bill in response to
this will prohibit all state and local authorities from enforcing or
aiding in enforcing any such new federal gun control.


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

Agenda 21 & ICLEI A Horrendous Crime Against Humanity

October 15, 2012 17 comments

[TWG: I couldn’t believe my eyes when I saw this story on yahoo news today.  The mainstream media has done everything they can to hide this scandal.  Agenda 21 IS TREASON and it is evil to it’s very core.  Far too many people have no idea what this is and what it means for property rights, American Sovereignty and humanity as a whole.  If you’re not involved in fighting this treasonous effort, PLEASE get involved at your local level and find out where your city and county council members are focusing their efforts.  Following this article, I’ve included a white paper written by Karen Sweetland, who has worked diligently on fighting this massive conspiracy.  PLEASE learn what this is about and do your part to fight it locally within your own city/county council and State Government.]

 

Tea Party versus Agenda 21: Saving the U.S. or just irking it?

By Nick Carey | Reuters

CEDAR FALLS, Iowa (Reuters) – Tea Party activist Judd Saul admits that he can sound a little unhinged when he gets talking about an issue close to his heart that most Americans have never heard of.

“Agenda 21 is an elusive enemy that floats in and chokes you gradually,” said Saul, of the Cedar Valley Tea Party in Cedar Falls, Iowa. “They want to destroy the middle-class way of life.”

“Agenda 21 aims to undermine your property rights and force you” to live in cities, Jake Robinson told Tea Party members at a meeting in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, in April.

For Joe Dugan, leader of the Myrtle Beach Tea Party in South Carolina, “Agenda 21 is nothing short of treason.”

If you don’t know what Agenda 21 is, you’re not alone – only about 15 percent of Americans do. It is a nonbinding U.N. resolution signed by more than 170 world leaders (including Republican U.S. President George H.W. Bush) at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro as a way to promote sustainable development in the face of a rapidly growing global population.

A small percentage of Americans say it is an attack on their very existence – part of a grand conspiracy to take away their gun rights, destroy suburbia and turn America into a modern-day Soviet state.

At a local level across the country, conservative activists linked to the Tea Party movement have rallied around the cause of blocking development they say is part of the conspiracy.

Kim Simac, a member of the Northwoods Patriots in northern Wisconsin, believes a local sustainable development plan will shut down her horse-riding school because her business takes up more land than the plan allows for. Heather Gass says she has been fighting sustainable development plans in the San Francisco area that she says will include hefty road tolls and deliberately drive up gas prices “because they want to force us out of our cars.”

“It sounds crazy, but it’s true,” she added.

Activists dislike the use of multi-unit apartment buildings in city plans – which they call “stack ’em and pack ’em” units – as well as bike lanes and other zoning restrictions they say impinge upon the value of their property and rights.

“Property ownership is the essence of the American dream and a cornerstone of the American economy,” said John Anthony, a conservative small business owner in New Jersey who has devoted a lot of time to studying Agenda 21. “When you diminish property values, you shrink the net worth of the entire middle class.”

Republicans at the state level have passed or tried to pass laws aimed at Agenda 21 and the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), an international association of local governments. ICLEI was formed in 1990, and its promotion of sustainable development at the local government level has made it synonymous with Agenda 21 to Tea Party opponents. Activists have gone after the ICLEI in their attacks and the group has lost 29 U.S. members as a result.

This summer, Alabama passed a property rights bill targeting Agenda 21, which was signed by Governor Robert Bentley – his office did not respond to a request for comment. Anti-Agenda 21 resolutions were also passed in Kansas and New Hampshire.

Campaigners managed to persuade the Republican National Committee to pass a resolution on the “destructive and insidious” plan being “covertly pushed into local communities,” and the party’s 2012 platform approved in August stated: “We strongly reject the U.N. Agenda 21 as erosive of American sovereignty.”

AND YET…

After all that, things have gone a bit quiet. The issue barely registers in the presidential election campaign, and the Republican National Committee did not respond to a request for a comment.

At a local level, there are signs of a backlash.

A June poll of 1,300 U.S. voters commissioned by the American Planning Association found that when asked whether they supported or opposed U.N. Agenda 21, 85 percent of respondents said they did not know enough to form an opinion. Nine percent supported Agenda 21, 6 percent opposed it.

“I think the Tea Party people who turn up to shout at planning meetings are heading for a McCarthy moment,” said Ron Littlefield, the mayor of Chattanooga, Tennessee, referring to the Communist witch hunts of Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s.

“They have been heard, and many people are sick of their scare tactics,” added the mayor, whom local Tea Party activists have been trying to recall for raising property taxes.

Don Knapp, U.S. spokesman for the ICLEI, rejected the notion of an anti-American plot. “Sustainable development is not a top-down conspiracy from the U.N., but a bottom-up push from local governments,” he said.

An anti-sustainable development bill in Arizona died this spring when the Arizona Chamber of Commerce successfully lobbied against it, arguing it was vague and could drive away corporations that have embraced sustainable development.

“We thought this was a wrongheaded approach,” said chamber spokesman Garrick Taylor. “It would be bad for business.”

Many conservatives also vehemently disagree with the global warming arguments behind Agenda 21. But planners and developers say sustainable development plans are needed to meet future shifts in the size and age of the U.S. population.

According to U.S. Census Bureau projections, America’s population should grow by more than 40 percent by 2050 to 440 million, requiring millions of new housing units. Demographers and developers also warn that as baby boomers start turning 70 in 2016 and seek to downsize their homes, there will be a spike in demand for multi-apartment buildings in walkable areas.

“What I want to hear from opponents of sustainable development is where are you going to put 50 million new housing units over the next few decades?” said Mitchell Silver, head of planning for Raleigh, North Carolina, who is also president of the American Planning Association (APA). “So far, I haven’t gotten an answer to that question.”

Another problem some Tea Party activists acknowledge is that few local officials have heard of Agenda 21. This was the case in Garland, Texas, during a debate on the city’s strategic plan. Anti-Agenda 21 activists objected to bike lanes, efforts to determine what types of businesses to allow into Garland and any reference to “sustainable development.”

“We found if we mentioned Agenda 21, our officials’ eyes would glaze over,” said Katrina Pierson of the Garland Tea Party. “So we focused on parts of the plan we didn’t like.”

Her group managed to have significant portions of the city plan changed and got Garland to quit its membership in the ICLEI.

Judd Saul was not so successful when he went to battle against Cedar Falls 2020, the city’s development plan. Saul says his studies of Agenda 21 began after he discovered that the requirement to have a lockbox at the back door of his family’s restaurant containing keys for emergency service access to his property was “based on international fire regulations.”

Saul says that rather than taking on the parts of Cedar Falls 2020 he disliked most, he focused instead on Agenda 21 at a public meeting to discuss the plan. As almost no one in attendance knew what he was talking about, Saul says his words met with blank stares.

“I wish I’d focused on why the plan was bad,” he said, “instead of talking about Agenda 21 and looking like a wacko nut job.”

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/tea-party-versus-agenda-21-saving-u-just-050156332.html

 

Here’s information on Agenda 21 and ICLEI.   It’s lengthy, but PLEASE take some time to familiarize yourself with it and to get involved at your local level.

 

AGENDA 21 ICLEI

Written By Karen Sweetland

This is a very concise overview regarding the encroachment of our rights as outlined in Agenda 21.

Unfortunately the majority of Americans are totally unaware of this treasonous  movement. Private property owners should be especially aware of Agenda 21.  For those of you in the know, this is good reference material…..

Agenda 21 is too big, too complicated to condense into a couple of paragraphs.  I have taken copious notes and reduced it all to the following information, and am sending under separate email the explosive PDF file on the APA war against Agenda21 opposition – it is well laid out, sophisticated, comprehensive, well funded and national in scope.  To date I do not believe there is a single organization in the country that has assumed a counterpart position with even remotely similar clarity of purpose and modeling.  The information below is so vital, so urgent, so massive it should be a major part of ANY candidate’s campaign – as a means of educating the public and reflecting a serious dedication to Constitutional principles and laws.

You may share this, but I would ask that I be given credit for authoring this information whenever and wherever it is used.

I have many months of research into this topic.  This can be regarded as one of my “white papers” with others forthcoming.  I am willing to give presentations and/or training on this topic, be it to candidates, current legislators, patriot or political groups.

AGENDA 21

An overview by Karen Sweetland
February 22, 2012

What is Agenda 21? It is a United Nation’s program presented and approved in Rio in 1992. At that time American conservatives laughed it off.
“This is too crazy,” they said. “Impossible. It will never happen. Not here!”
Well, it is happening. It is happening here and it is happening now. Agenda 21
is a totalitarian comprehensive environmental program that, when fully
implemented, will direct where you live, how much water you can use, and how, when and where you can travel.

Agenda 21 is being marketed as a worldwide effort to ensure that all human
beings will have access to adequate housing, health care, water and food. Of
course this will require a massive redistribution of wealth from prosperous
countries to poorer countries. Predictably, capitalistic countries, like the
United States, will of necessity suffer seriously lowered standards of
living.

It’s noteworthy that Presidents George H. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama, through Executive Orders, have signed onto
Agenda 21. Hundreds more governors, mayors, and county commissioners have also signed on.  There
presently over 600 cities, counties and states in America signed on to Agenda 21.

Agenda 21 and related programs will eliminate many things we hold dear. These have been declared
“unsustainable” and will be abolished. Here are some of them:

All private property rights (property ownership)[no one will be allowed to own land, houses or other
property]
All forms of irrigation, pesticides & commercial fertilizer
Livestock production and most meat consumption [lab produced ‘meat’ currently in development in Europe – from stem cells].
Privately owned vehicles and personal travel [no individually owned autos]
Use of fossil fuels for power generation or mechanized travel
Single family homes [everyone will have to
live in stack-and-pack hi-rise condos called ‘sustainable
communities’ – multi-use high rises in each city – most of which already have them and are building more]
Most forms of mineral extraction and timber harvesting
Human population must be reduced to fewer than 1 billion people
[The current 6 billion population to be reduced
to 500 million, i.e. the world must be DEPOPULATED! – one can only wonder
just how the powers behind this plan to decrease the population by 5/6th ] – Obamacare factors into the US depopulation,
from denial of treatment, birth control and abortions.

It’s not coming from Washington D.C. or state legislatures for the most part.
It is seeping in through local city and county governments.
Agenda 21 brings with it stealthy code words, comforting words such as
“smart growth,” “social justice,” “bio-diversity,” and “sustained development.”
You will hear them often and find them in abundance in most actions of city/town governments.

Translated these terms effectively mean total environmental
dictatorship and the elevation of the pagan practice of the worship of Mother Earth. Not a
joke.

179 countries, including the United
States, initially signed on to the Agenda in 1992. Many more
have joined since then.   Check out your own state/city – chances are that it is already
firmly entrenched in Agenda 21. http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id=11454

The ICLEI is the governing body under the United Nations – and the above link lists ALL participating countries
and cities therein – you will be shocked to see the LONG list of US cities – it is staggering, just
staggering and mind boggling, shocking, dismaying and downright scary.

Agenda 21 is designed to control every aspect of human life on every
square inch of planet earth. As a biblical worldview dims in the world,
man falls to the bottom of the food chain.

If Agenda 21 succeeds (and it is) animals will become more important than man as will
plants and trees. We can already see ample evidence of this process in motion
today. Agenda 21’s real message is: “Man is the problem. Nature must be
preserved and take precedence. Mother Earth must not be scratched.“

Agenda 21 is just another attempt by man to recreate heaven on earth. David
Chilton, in his insightful book Paradise Restored, presents an
important historical dynamic. Chilton submits that man, ever since he was
expelled from Eden, has tried to get back in. Each time he tries, he creates
another hell on earth. Agenda 21 will be no different.

Many socialistic, communistic, and liberal organizations and international
leaders are behind Agenda 21 and its related programs, most notably Bilderberg.  It will take dedication
of time and effort on our part to truly understand all the implications of this
pervasive program. The investment of time and effort will be worth it – equal to basic survival.

These are not legal or dictionary definitions, but short explanations used to describe words as they are used within the Agenda 21 context.

Bill of Rights: US Constitutional rights that reflect natural law , deemed unalienable- we are born with these rights, they cannot be taken away. Conversely, Human Rights are granted to people under the Declaration of Human Rights. Under this system the government can take these rights away to advance a centrally determined “common good”.

Biodiversity: The dictionary defines it as a variety of plants and animals in their native environments/habitats. It is used by globalists to promote fear around extinction of species so that they can activate the Endangered Species Act which has yet to have a single success! It is used as a weapon to abolish private property.  (prime example of the destruction of the Imperial Valley in California, where water was turned off to the farmlands and ranches, turning the entire area into a dustbowl, with massive loss of jobs, land, wealth – in the name of a tiny fish in the River Delta deemed endangered)

Collectivism: Political philosophy where a small group determines the “greater good” for the masses. While it could take the form of communism, fascism, socialism, etc, the common denominator is control over the population.  Note:  The UN and Bilderberg work in concert to achieve ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT – a goal long sought since early on in the 20th century.

Commerce Clause: The Constitution provides that the federal government has power over commerce between states, but this power has been distorted and expanded beyond its original intention. The federal government uses this as an excuse to regulate resources, businesses and everything else.

Consensus: Facilitators will use the consensus process to reach a predetermined outcome. Minority positions are ignored in consensus. This is also used in education as more value is placed on reaching consensus than objective data.  Investigation of current text books and teaching plans will show a massive change in the content of books and teaching methods – gearing today’s kids expect AND accept the new world order, and believing that America is evil.

Corridors: Areas targeted for control. This word applies to strips of land that interconnect with Wildlands, where human presence and resource extraction are not allowed. This word is also used in relation to transportation routes and power grids as well.  (see NW examples below)

Councils: These organizations, comprised of insiders and stakeholders, are being used to usurp the power of local governments.

democracy_01

Democracy: Mob rule, or majority rule. We live in a Republic that is based in protecting individuals’ rights. Imagine if a lynch mob (the majority) wanted to hang you (the individual). Democracy contrasts with the American system, intended to operate as a Republic, with limited government powers and with the protection of individuals’ Unalienable Rights through a system of due process.

Endangered Species Act: This Act was based on a United Nations model and implemented through international treaties. It is a tool collectivists use to take over land and resources in pursuit of the abolition of private property.  Note:  NUMEROUS cases exist in the US where land has been declared off limits for human use and enjoyment – often from expanding the boundaries around national parks and forests, rivers and lakes etc.

Enumerated Powers: Power given to the congress in Article1, Section 8 of the Constitution, that are further limited by the Bill of Rights.

Equal Justice: Equal Justice is a respect for independence and unalienable rights of the individual and general tolerance for individuality. Equal justice puts a checkmate on mob rule.

Fabianism: Constant, slow change in government. i.e. Incrementalism.

Facilitators: Paid workers who use peer pressure and psychological manipulation to obtain consensus. (perfect example is a training manual produced by the APA *American Planning Assn)

Forfeiture: VIDEO (3 min) about how government can take your personal property.

Gaia: Pagan religion of nature worship honoring Mother Earth. Today, Gaia represents a philosophy that places nature above humans consistent with the Action Plan of Agenda 21. Agenda 21 is designed and used as a means to an end (depopulation and slavery). the Gaia philosophy is predicated on a “higher purpose” – to save nature at all costs.

Governance: To rule, control and manipulate America was based on the principals of a government of protection. G. Edward Griffin suggests we should not even use the word government, but a Protectorate instead.

Green: While we are all dependent upon and concerned about the environment, the environment has been elevated to a status above humans, under the banner of being “green”.

Gerrymander: Division of areas to give special advantages to certain groups; it is a mechanism to adjust Congressional boundaries to meet the ruling political parties’ objectives. Illegal immigration is a symptom of this type of social and political engineering occurring prior to every election season.

Human Rights: Those rights granted by men and capable of being withdrawn by men as outlined in the U.N.’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (Article 29 “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.” This means ‘Human Rights’ can be taken away).

ICLEI:The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (also called Local Governments for Sustainability) is a U.N. accredited Non Governmental Organization (NGO). It implements the Action Plan of Agenda 21 Sustainable Development. Cities pay dues in order to obtain direction from ICLEI in establishing local policy and law. It is a violation of Article 1, Section 10 of the US Constitution which prohibits States and their subdivisions from entering alliances with foreign operatives.  ICLEI is also offering ‘grants’ to lure communities and states into implementing one of many of their ‘sustainable’ programs.

Insiders: A person in power who has access to confidential information and influences decisions, unbeknownst to the vast majority of citizens.

Individualism: The philosophy that the interests of the individual are, or ought to be, paramount. Collectivism is its opposite.

Inalienable Rights: Rights that are granted by the government. What is given can also be taken away. The U.N.’s Declaration of Human Rights is a system of of inalienable rights.

Unalienable Rights: Rights that we are born with. They may not be taken away by government. “That all men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” This political recognition is why the Declaration of Independence is regarded as humanity’s greatest achievement.

NGOgroups

NGO’s: Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs) are accredited by the U.N. for purposes of implementing Agenda 21. They are well funded by governments. tax free foundations, corporations and individuals.

Outcome Based Education: Method of teaching wherein the student must be able to perform according to prescribed standards, and real knowledge and critical thinking are discounted if not all-together ignored.  Generally the standards are lowered to the lowest common denominator, hence more than 50% suffer from lack of adequate education.

Public- Private Partnerships (PPP): Corporations or other private entities like foundations, NGO’s, associations, etc that pair with government to enforce rules and policies that benefit the money partner (corporation) or government objectives. Public- Private Partnership is the re-invention of Mussolini’s system of economic fascism.

Private Property: Private property is the relationship between a person and something wherein the owner determines the use and enjoyment of the thing. Private property includes land, personal possessions and intellectual property. Private property also includes one’s own person, body and mind, which is why the protection of property rights are so important.   All such rights are actively threatened at the present.

Land ownership is the primary source of freedom and wealth!  And serves as the basis of the American Dream – growing ever more extinct!

Quality of Life: This phrase is frequently used in propaganda and official documents to sugar coat the underlying policies and intentions.  This is evident in most of the marketing materials supporting Agenda 21.

Regions: Political regions are established in order to replace existing political boundaries thus destroying the power of local governments. A water control agency would be an example of this. Regionalizing resources to remove power from local authorities is the way Russia was Sovietized.

Republic: A system of government that operates by rule of law and exists to protect individual rights. The Republic of the United States has a democratically elected representative government, but this does not make it a democracy.

Smart Growth: Herding people into cities and off rural land, for the purpose of controlling human action. Building up (high-rises), not out, and mixed-use buildings with stores on the ground floor with living spaces above exist within a walkable community. The objective is for people to stay within a small area in order to be easily controlled while the animals roam freely everywhere else.

Stakeholders: A person entrusted with the stakes of bettors. Stakeholders are shadowy entities that have influence and are referenced in many documents. Stakeholders in this new political context are those who combine efforts to drive a stake into the heart of private property.

Sustainable Development: The U.N. document called Agenda 21 lays the blueprint for advancing Sustainable Development. This is a euphemism for depopulation and control. The basis of the design is the “Three E’ program: “Equity”- using sociology and the law to create a global system of governance; “Economy”- meaning redistribution between nations and converting from free enterprise to Public- Private Partnership; and “Environment”- meaning nature above man.

Tenth Amendment: This is the key to the undoing of Agenda 21- the recognition of States’ rights and State sovereignty: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, not prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Wildlands: The counterpart to Smart Growth, it is designed to remove people from the land, using the excuse of “sustaining” wildlife; the plan is to remove people and eliminate resource extraction from over 50% of America’s landscape.

agenda21maplinks to UN plan/map:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_q8bGPnL50

http://www.takingliberty.us/Narrations/usa/usa/player.html  (map and explanation)  MUST VIEW

AGENDA 21 – IT’S ALL ABOUT COMMUNITARIANISM AND BEST YOU BEWARE NOW

Posted by Karen S on September 2, 2011 at 7:49pm

I send this information which is valid all over the country and I urge, URGE each person reading this to go to their local City Government or Council and start asking questions. You will likely find that your community is heavily into Agenda 21 – and you need to know and understand just how you and your community are now at risk.

UN Local Agenda 21 – The Smoking Cannon

Many more “normal” people are talking and writing about the global government these days. So many more people are actually exposing the global government’s matrix that our ACL research has been elevated from “conspiracy theory” to necessary and vital information. The Big Plan for global Utopia is finally coming out into the open, because People are asking the right questions.

I’m not talking about the movie, “The Matrix,” although it was based in the Hegelian dialectic and matrix101 links directly to our antithesis. I’m not referring to a secret plan handed out at the Bilderberg or Club of Rome, although evidence shows elite groups participated in the creation of the NWO. I’m not talking about Bible prophecy, and I’m not talking about Luciferian Enlightenment or the secret British-Masonic-Zionist plan to make a better world either, although some communitarian teachers do admit they worship at the alter of Satan.

I am talking about the published plan to build a One World Bureaucracy. It’s the blueprint for Sustainable Development handed out at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. It does exist and it’s completely verifiable, as more and more people will now admit. They have to.

United Nations Local Agenda 21 Programme for Sustainable Development is the “smoking gun” for the New World Order. Adopted by all member nations in 1992, this is the model for redesigning a communitarian world. If you’re like a lot of people who sense something is very wrong, if you’re looking for concrete, irrefutable evidence for the New World Order in your neighborhood, nothing comes close to asking your local officials about Local Agenda 21 (LA21).

Don’t just use the Internet to find your plan, although many of our LA21 plans and their affiliate agencies are available online. Exercise your authentic power. Call or stop by your local City Hall. Meet face-to-face with your elected public officials. Ask to review all local planning actions that come under UN guidelines for Sustainable Development (SD). Ask to review any local agreements with ICCLEI.

The existence of a master plan for global government can almost be verified in one call to our City or County Clerk. Asking whether there has been anything locally adopted or resolved that promotes Sustainable Development is not a hard question anymore. Even people outside government groups have heard this new term by now. Most people think it’s a good thing because they believe it arose naturally. It has a huge following. Hell, everything is going “sustainable” now. >From agriculture to industry to lifestyles to education, the whole world is promoting sustainability.

So, if every body’s doing it, it must be a good thing, right? What’s the big deal?

Well, first of all, if sustainability really just meant a benign way of healing the planet from corporate poisoning, it would not include so many laws that govern common people’s lives. There is nothing benign about Sustainable Development to the common man. SD is a set of global community laws that supplant individual liberty, formally maintained within national, state and local property and privacy laws.

Second of all, communitarian laws always “balance” the rights of the individual against the community; therefore SD only protects the global community government from the common man. Every nation in the world is experiencing a “wrenching transformation” of national laws into compliance with international SD law. LA21 could also be called “No Nation Left Behind.”

American homeowners are almost totally clueless as to why so much of the Stimulus Package is directed into upgrades that allow the government to monitor and control them inside their homes. What kind of system puts monitors on garbage trucks so that the trucks can scan our garbage cans in order to spot the cans that have recyclable items in the wrong cans? What kind of a system establishes neighborhood groups who monitor their neighbors for SD compliance and report infractions of new community biased regulations? What kind of a system puts RFID trackers in garments and Retinal Scans in Driver’s Licenses? What kind of a system builds a huge database of every one’s most private and personal information?

Think you know what your nation stands for? Still believe that SD is a local solution written by locals for a local purpose? Prove it. Go ahead. Stop reading this. Pick up a phone right now and call your City Clerk. Ask to review and copy anything having to do with U.N. Local Agenda 21 or Sustainable Development.

Because there are so many local programs implementing global SD, you will probably be told your request is “too broad.” So, okay, narrow your focus. This means get specific.

Ask your public servant (who works for you) which city and county agencies have already adopted Sustainable Development. After the usual “Why do you need this information?” which you do not have to answer with anything but a smile, the honest answer will likely be, “all of them.” If there’s any lingering doubt about how prevalent SD is in your home town, read and copy every local agency’s Mission Statement.

How do you tie Sustainable Development to the United Nations if your local government claims their Sustainable Development has no connection to U.N. Local Agenda 21? Ask them to give you a clear and legal definition for Sustainable Development. They have no choice but to waffle or cite the 1987 United Nations Bruntland Commission’s “official” definition for Sustainable Development http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2009/envdev1026.doc.htm.

You’ll see the terms for engagement very quickly. Once you’ve started, be prepared for the worst a TV trained government agent can throw at you. If you have property or own a local business, you are definitely taking risks. The risk is worth it though, since the ultimate price we’ll all pay is what happens to private property and privacy under the plan; it’s completely abolished.

And, since all U.S. constitutional law is based in private property rights, any plan to abolish private property is treason, pure and simple. They know this too.

How much can you find out about how far down the LA21 road your neighborhood has gone? This could be a real adventure if you took it on. Nothing incites the senses like following the path of your enemies into your own home. This is a global war. The real fight is over our land, our people and all our resources. It’s being fought every day on all our home fronts, from London to Kenny Lake, Alaska.

There are several other key terms to look for: livability, quality of life, common good, vision for the future, community values, to name just a few. When Americans find unfamiliar (new) terms used in any U.S. government document, because of our Federal (F.O.I.A.) and State Public Disclosure laws, we can request a clear, legal definition of the word or phrase. We can read and copy every government agent’s documents related to the use of the term too, from hand scribbled notes to polished propaganda. This is what real transparency in government means. Many other Western nations have similar laws.

If the idea of a war is too hard to accept, think of it as a fishing expedition. Stay quiet and calm so you don’t scare the fish away. Gently remove the hook and throw back all the small fish you catch, or use them as bait. Bide your time, wait for the granddaddy of all fish to smell the blood. This breed of fish devours its own, like a shark, so when you have the Big One on the hook, you’ve hooked them all on one line.

Who wants to show Americans and the rest of the world the extent of our new global laws, global-to-local development plans, and all our local partnerships with global associations (and funding). They may be openly revising their national constitutions in South America and the EU under supremacy of communitarian law, but in most Western free and open “democracies,” LA21 plans are anything but open.

For those who need to know more, Sustainable Development is based in communitarianism (see above and below definition). This philosophy drives every aspect of the emerging supra-national system. If you understand the theory, you’ll understand the new tactics. Once you’ve verified for yourself that LA21 plans exist for your area, do a little Internet search for the term “communitarianism.” The results will amaze you.
communitarianism

Political and social philosophy that emphasizes the importance of community in the functioning of political life, in the analysis and evaluation of political institutions, and in understanding human identity and well-being. It was developed in the 1980s and ’90s in explicit opposition to the theoretical liberalism of thinkers such as John Rawls. According to communitarians, liberalism relies on a conception of the individual that is unrealistically atomistic and abstract; it also places too much importance on individual values such as freedom and autonomy. Its chief representatives include Amitai Etzioni, Michael Sandel, and Charles Taylor. See also collectivism.

http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/communitarian/niki.htm

http://www.scribd.com/doc/19167385/Communitarism-versus-Neoliberalism

This is truly sickening!

Further links of utmost importance:

http://www.un.org/esa/agenda21/natlinfo/countr/usa/natur.htm

http://americanpolicy.org/sustainable-development/agenda-21-in-one-…

http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id=iclei-home (the group in charge)

“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 principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore contributes to social injustice.” From the report from the 1976 UN’s Habitat I Conference.

What is not sustainable?

Ski runs, grazing of livestock, plowing of soil, building fences, industry, single family homes, paved and tarred roads, logging activities, dams and reservoirs, power line construction, and economic systems that fail to set proper value on the environment.” FROM:  UN’s Biodiversity Assessment Report.

Hide Agenda 21’s UN roots from the people

“Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy- fixated groups and individuals in our society… This segment of our society who fear ‘one-world government’ and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined ‘the conspiracy’ by undertaking LA21. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.” J. Gary Lawrence, advisor to President Clinton’s Council on Sustainable Development.

Who is behind it?  (start with Bilderberg and George Soros, then add in the UN and all those listed below)

ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability (formally, International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives). Communities pay ICLEI dues to provide “local” community plans, software, training, etc. Additional groups include American Planning Council (the same group that is now instituting a national training program to overcome objections to A21 – a well funded, sophisticated manual to train people around the US to battle for and institute A21), The Renaissance Planning Group, International City/ County Management Group, aided by US Mayors Conference, National Governors Association, National League of Cities, National Association of County Administrators and many more private organizations and official government agencies. Foundation and government grants drive the process.

NOTE: Cities sign on to get grants – their greed and avarice overshadowing the massive strings attached, and the dire consequences to all communities. Money talks, BW walks and these people have plenty of money to throw at towns and cities across America and the world –

In my humble opinion, THIS is the greatest threat to this nation and it encroaches from within – at community levels – by pleasant sounding names that spell danger and destruction to the American way of life – and that means home ownership, business ownership, owning land and cattle, farming or personal gardens, living life as YOU choose – all GONE.

There can’t be enough written about AGenda 21 or Project 60, not nearly enough and EVERY CANDIDATE for state or national office should be trained in and propel this issue to the forefront of their campaign strategies.

Currently there is a big land grab in the works to supposedly expand the Olympic National park around the the Quinault area as well as several other spots on the Olympic Peninsula. In Oregon – Bandon Marsh Wildlife Refuge. This is a wholesale trampling of individual rights focused on the Coquille River near Bandon!
There are several websites with information concerning this crime against hard working Americans – a $900 Million Dollar Agenda 21-ICLEI land grab.

You won’t know it’s happening until many people have had their homes stolen right out from under them.

I figured I’d get the word out on this (Olympic National Park) attempt to buy up 210,000 acres . The website opposing all this is at http://www.workingwildolympics.com/ .

Also you can go to http://www.muddyexp.com/index2.html for more details.

We must help these people get the word out about this despicable abuse of power if Obama completes this theft of homes/land from hard working Americans, who among us will be next, and where?

This is Agenda 21 on the rise – now.

I urge you to check out the UN maps for Agenda 21(see above links) – in reference  to each state. You will notice that there is very little land designated for human use in most of the West.

Chief Justice Roberts Is A Genius?

June 28, 2012 4 comments

Posted on June 28, 2012 by I.M. Citizen

Before you look to do harm to Chief Justice Roberts or his family, it’s important that you think carefully about the meaning – the true nature — of his ruling on Obama-care. The Left will shout that they won, that Obama-care was upheld and all the rest. Let them.

It will be a short-lived celebration.

Here’s what really occurred — payback. Yes, payback for Obama’s numerous, ill-advised and childish insults directed toward SCOTUS.

Chief Justice Roberts actually ruled the mandate, relative to the commerce clause, was unconstitutional. That’s how the Democrats got Obama-care going in the first place. This is critical. His ruling means Congress can’t compel American citizens to purchase anything. Ever. The notion is now officially and forever, unconstitutional. As it should be.

Next, he stated that, because Congress doesn’t have the ability to mandate, it must, to fund Obama-care, rely on its power to tax. Therefore, the mechanism that funds Obama-care is a tax. This is also critical. Recall back during the initial Obama-care battles, the Democrats called it a penalty, Republicans called it a tax. Democrats consistently soft sold it as a penalty. It went to vote as a penalty. Obama declared endlessly, that it was not a tax, it was a penalty. But when the Democrats argued in front of the Supreme Court, they said ‘hey, a penalty or a tax, either way’. So, Roberts gave them a tax. It is now the official law of the land — beyond word-play and silly shenanigans. Obama-care is funded by tax dollars. Democrats now must defend a tax increase to justify the Obama-care law.

Finally, he struck down as unconstitutional, the Obama-care idea that the federal government can bully states into complying by yanking their existing medicaid funding. Liberals, through Obama-care, basically said to the states — ‘comply with Obama-care or we will stop existing funding.’ Roberts ruled that is a no-no. If a state takes the money, fine, the Feds can tell the state how to run a program, but if the state refuses money, the federal government can’t penalize the state by yanking other funding. Therefore, a state can decline to participate in Obama-care without penalty. This is obviously a serious problem. Are we going to have 10, 12, 25 states not participating in “national” health-care? Suddenly, it’s not national, is it?

Ultimately, Roberts supported states rights by limiting the federal government’s coercive abilities. He ruled that the government can not force the people to purchase products or services under the commerce clause and he forced liberals to have to come clean and admit that Obama-care is funded by tax increases.

Although he didn’t guarantee Romney a win, he certainly did more than his part and should be applauded.

And he did this without creating a civil war or having bricks thrown threw his windshield. Oh, and he’ll be home in time for dinner.

Brilliant.

Follow I.M. Citizen at IMCitizen.net

SCOTUS: obamacare Scheme, mandate Is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, but will survive AS A TAX.

June 28, 2012 4 comments

[UPDATE:  Let’s be clear here.  The obamacare scheme, AS PRESENTED TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.  obama and his regime LIED to the American people  when they told us it was NOT A TAX.  When they INSISTED that this was not a tax, they LIED……. AGAIN.   SCOTUS simply defined it as a tax, which is the ONLY way it can be legally upheld.   We, The People, MUST fight this mess and get it repealed asap.   Thank a glassy eyed DIM for advocating more tax hikes and for SUPPORTING A REGIME FULL OF MARXIST LIARS.]

 

828 Days ago, on Christmas Eve,  the obama regime, with the help of their fat-fingered union thugs, shoved their obamacare scheme down the throats of each and every American Citizens without regard to our opposition to it for Constitutional reasons.  Today, SCOTUS hands down the following decisions regarding the obamacare schemes…….

 

THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE IS RULED UNCONSTITUTIONAL, BUT IT WILL SURVIVE AS A TAX

 Soooooooooooooooooo….. Justice Roberts joins with the commies there at SCOTUS, enabling the obamacare schemes.

obama and his thugs have imposed the highest tax hike in the history of this Nation.  Thanks a lot. 

Be sure to thank a so-called “teacher” today.

More information to follow.

 

 

 

 

 

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's photo

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

%d bloggers like this: