At the very onset of what would become the Soviet Empire, Vladimir Lenin decreed the creation of a national internal army called the “Cheka.” The Cheka were handed very broad police powers and tasked with the disruption and elimination of any form of dissent within the communist system. Lenin launched what would later be known as the “Red Terror”, in which nearly every Russian population center had an established Cheka office of operations using surveillance, infiltration, nighttime raids, imprisonment, torture and execution to silence opposition to the authority of the state.
Some of these people were active rebels, some were outspoken political opponents and journalists, others were merely average citizens wrongly accused by neighbors or personal enemies. The Cheka created a society of fear and suspicion in which no one could be trusted and little criticism was spoken above a whisper anywhere, even in one’s own home.
It is important to note, however, that the dominance of the Cheka was established incrementally, not all at once.
Agents of the state began their “cleansing” of the Russian population by targeting specific groups at opportune times and worked their way through the citizenry at an exponential pace. The most intelligent, effective and dangerous activists and rebels were slated for destruction first, as they represented a kind of leadership mechanism by which the rest of the population might be mobilized or inspired. More innocuous organizations (like Christian churches and rural farmers) were persecuted as background noise while the political mop-up was underway.
Through this incrementalism, the communists were able to intern or eradicate vast numbers of potential opponents without the rest of Russians raising objections. The general populace was simply thankful that the eye of the Cheka had not been turned upon them, and as long as it was some other group of people unrelated to their daily life that disappeared in the night, they would keep their heads down and their mouths shut.
I would point out that the communists were very careful and deliberate in ensuring that the actions of the internal police were made valid through law and rationalized as a part of “class struggle.” Such laws were left so open to interpretation that literally any evil committed could later be vindicated. Man-made law is often a more powerful weapon than any gun, tank, plane or missile, because it triggers apathy within the masses. For some strange reason, when corrupt governments legalize their criminality through legislation or executive decree, the citizenry suddenly treats that criminality as legitimate and excusable.
Incremental prosecution and oppression is effective when the establishment wishes to avoid outright confrontation with a population. Attempt to snatch up a million people at one time, and you will have an immediate rebellion on your hands. Snatch up a million people one man at a time, or small groups at a time, and people do not know what to think or how to respond. They determine to hope that the authorities never get to them, that it will stop after a few initial arrests, or they hope that if they censor themselves completely, they will never be noticed.
In fact, corrupt governments issue warrants of arrest for a handful of dissenters and initiate imprisonment in a very public manner in the beginning with the express purpose of making examples and inspiring self censorship in the masses so that the authorities do not have to expend large amounts of resources to fight a more complex rebellion.
I bring up the historic example of the Cheka and incrementalism because a trend is brewing within our current establishment by which I believe a similar (if not more sterilized) brand of oppressive action is being planned against the liberty movement.
After the debacle in Burns, Oregon during the refuge standoff, federal officials immediately began a subtle campaign in the media promoting internal police powers that when examined in an honest light, are truly anti-liberty.
It remains my personal position according to the evidence I have seen that the refuge standoff was likely influenced by at least one if not more federal provocateurs and that Ammon Bundy was “encouraged” in his choice of actions and location by this person or persons. The goal? I can only guess that the intent was to trap the liberty movement in a Catch-22 scenario; either we join the poorly planned and executed standoff on some of the worst defensive ground possible and risk everything on one centralized event, or, we refuse to participate in the strategy and watch helplessly as a group of people, many with good intentions but little tactical sense or training, are arrested or killed. Either we gamble everything on the worst possible terms, or, we avoid the gamble and watch as the entire movement is made to look weak or incompetent by association with a few.
The majority of the movement chose the latter action, rightly I feel. Burns was no Bundy Ranch — everything about it felt rigged. And though there were many angry anonymous voices calling us “sunshine patriots” and “keyboard warriors” because we would not participate, apparently none of those loud mouths ever showed up in Burns either, so I am assuming they finally saw the wisdom in our decision.
It would seem as though the feds did not get exactly what they wanted out of the refuge standoff, but they have decided to squeeze as much advantage out of the event as possible.
Cliven Bundy was arrested after arriving by plane in Portland, Oregon, not on any charges relating to the refuge and his son Ammon, but on charges stemming from the Bundy Ranch standoff of 2014.
These charges include a strange and very broad legal measure relating to “interference with the duties of federal officials.” This in particular should be disconcerting to all of us, for “interference” could be any number of activities.
Any duties of federal officials that are not moral or constitutional should be interfered with in a tactically intelligent manner whenever possible. Such charges are a deliberate anathema to civil disobedience designed to counter immoral actions by government authorities. For any opposition could be deemed “interference” given a twisting of precedence, and thus treated as illegal.
In my recent article “Liberty Activists And ISIS Will Soon Be Treated As Identical Threats,” I examined statements made by the Justice Department’s chief of national security, John Carlin, in an article published by Reuters. Carlin and the Justice Department have made it clear that they intend to apply rules of prosecution used for foreign terrorist organizations to “domestic extremists.” The Oregon standoff was specifically mentioned as an example of such extremism.
Carlin claimed that domestic extremists represent a “clear and present danger,” alluding to the “Clear And Present Danger Doctrine” allowing the government in “times of national crisis” to prosecute almost any citizen giving “material support” to enemies of the state. “Material support” in the past has even included verbal opposition to government policies. Meaning, Carlin is testing the waters of material support laws and such tests may target liberty movement speakers and journalists along with anyone involved in physical opposition. As with the Cheka, no one is really safe.
These charges are also being brought in a retroactive manner, long after the supposed crimes have been committed as we have seen with Cliven Bundy. Meaning, the feds plan to retain warrants and prolong charges, only arresting people later when they think they can get away with it. This is where the incrementalism comes in…
Rumors of further indictments have surfaced possibly including dozens of people involved in the Bundy Ranch standoff. And because of the nature of the incremental game the government is playing, verification is difficult until the arrests are activated.
It has come to my attention from personal sources that there may be a lot of truth to the rumors of pending or retroactive indictments, and that the FBI in particular may be biding its time and waiting to bring charges when particular people are at their most vulnerable and when the movement is less likely to react. These sources have indicated that the federal government is seeking to work around the public relations problems of standoff scenarios like Ruby Ridge, Waco, and Bundy Ranch. The feds may claim that they have “seen the light” in terms of avoiding outright mass murder, but I believe they have just found a better way to sneak past public opinion.
If they can manipulate the liberty movement into participation in poorly planned standoffs like Burns, Oregon, they will. Such standoffs are doomed from their inception and can even be controlled from within by agents provocateur. They are not a real threat.
If a standoff occurs organically, as it did at Bundy Ranch in Nevada, and public support is on the side of the liberty movement, then the establishment will simply back off and pluck activists from their homes or at the airport months later.
It is incumbent upon me to offer a warning to federal agencies in the event that incremental prosecution of liberty activists is truly a strategy they are planning to carry out: It is the general consensus of many in the liberty movement that ANY further arrests predicated on activism at Bundy Ranch or similar opposition events in the past to Bureau Of Land Management abuses of power will result in further and expanded engagements by activists. That is to say, such arrests and indictments will not be allowed to continue.
This is not a threat, this is fair warning to government agencies that they are walking a razor’s edge. Incremental prosecutions and dismantling of the liberty movement will not be tolerated; they represent a non-negotiable line in the sand. The feds may or may not care what the consequences will be for crossing this line. They may even think they want such consequences. Regardless, consequences there will be.
While the refuge occupiers essentially handed their heads to the feds on a platter, and the movement was not able to salvage the situation in any viable manner, this does not mean that liberty activists will not take measures during future events depending on the circumstances. Federal agencies may be quick to forget the massive response at Bundy Ranch. This is a mistake. They should probably expect a similar response, if not a more aggressive one, if further arrests are undertaken.
With the ethereal nature of criminal charges like “material support” or “interference with federal officials,” due process becomes a bit of joke. You see, federal agents and agencies, you have to take into account the reality that the liberty movement is well aware of the government push to remove due process altogether. With the AUMF and the NDAA, among other executive actions, we realize that the friendly mask of due process is worn by government today, but not necessarily tomorrow.
If the movement gives ground and does nothing while dozens or more are retroactively imprisoned one case at a time for opposing federal abuse, then how long will it be before the rest of us are imprisoned on even broader charges? How long before the mask comes off and the rendition and indefinite detention provisions of the AUMF and the NDAA come into play? Do you really expect the movement to put faith in due process given the circumstances? Of course you do not.
I would venture to guess that the feds think that any opposition that does arise during the execution of warrants against liberty activists will be “easily managed.” This would be a mistake.
We have seen this all before in the passive sublimation of past societies. We recognize the signs of trespasses to come. And if such trespasses are brought upon the liberty movement or the population at large, then many of us will adopt the attitude that there is not much left to lose.
Personally, I do not look forward to this kind of fight, but I have no illusions that it can be avoided given the course our country has taken. Federal agencies have deemed it a matter of national security to watch us all very closely. They should keep in mind, though, that we are also watching them.
If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here. We greatly appreciate your patronage.
You can contact Brandon Smith at:
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
written by shutupnsing , February 24, 2016
A Catholic friend and life-long Lands End customer write to me this morning, outraged over LE's tribute to Gloria Steinhem. I thought of the SCOTUS Same-Sex-Marriage ruling, and how within minutes Corporate America was flying the Rainbow Flag...Bracken nailed it a while back with his Tet Offensive piece. This is why we need to get our acts together locally....pronto! This is the perfect time to do so. Its an election year...Local officials are receptive to sitting down and meeting people. Every County has a Director of General Services who's primary function is to save the county $$$...Enter Oath Keepers CPT!! A community of America's finest, disciplined, well trained, and willing to back up local authorities and liaison into the neighborhoods...for love of country and community! How sweet it is!
written by Rasta Red , February 24, 2016
Here Here!! Well said Brandon.......We are watching them and very closely!!!
written by New England Patriot , February 24, 2016
I was impressed by the level of nuance, maturity, and wisdom on display from the Liberty Movement during the Burns, Oregon event.
Far from being wacko survivalist and militia-types, the Liberty Movement parted from stereotypes and demonstrated the ability to be circumspect and self-examined. I attribute these positive qualities to some of the leadership, including Brandon Smith, getting out in front and speaking sense.
In the end, the ability to hold back and not go in guns-blazing shows a kind of maturity in the movement that speaks well of its prospects.
If we are to restore liberty, it will require that sort of wisdom and steadiness through trying times - not just camouflage jackets and rifles.
written by andysloan , February 24, 2016
That's the spirit Brandon!! May God be with you and may He bestow on you the joyful gift of the Holy, Roman, Catholic Faith.!
"Fight, children of light, you, the few who can see. For now is the time of all ..." - Our Lady of La Salette
See;
http://www.thepopeinred.com/secret.htm
written by William B Stoecker , February 24, 2016
At some point the fascists who control our government will come for our guns or order us to turn them in. Anyone who cooperates, thinking he will live for free another day, will soon be arrested. Anyone who submits to arrest, imagining that his treatment will not be so terrible, will regret it the way the Jews in Auschwitz or the Russians in the Gulag regretted their surrender.
I know it's easier to say "die fighting" than to do it, and none of us knows how he will react when the time comes. But take heart in the fact that we can put far more armed shooters on the street than the government can, and as for their planes, tanks, and high tech gadgets...how did those work out in Vietnam and Afghanistan?
Lock and load and resist, resist, resist.
written by Jus Sayin , February 24, 2016
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
written by Gladstone , February 24, 2016
While acknowledging and in agreement with the stance taken above regarding forceful defense of one's self and neighbors (neighbor being understood in a very wide and general sense), the true ontological nature of the intellect and will overseeing globalism's command and control structures and mechanisms must be properly understood.
Any true Christian must acknowledge that evil is not made manifest merely in the heart of man. Evil men have help. The word psychopath so often used to describe the mindset of the internationalists is true but nevertheless inadequate, because it presumes to explain the plans of that topmost inner circle in solely empirical and clinical terms.
The retail level atheism peddled in government schools, academies, media and by the corporate oligarchies, serves as a sort of grog ration for the ordinary folk: keeping the intellect too dull or distracted to hone any keenness for truth.
The players at the top are in actuality religiously adept occultists. They worship Lucifer. As for that fallen angel, logically speaking, either he exists or he does not exist.
Let's apply a principle that has proved very productive for Brandon Smith here. The incisive author of this blog knows that, for example, the hypothesis that the Fed is a quasi-covert demolition crew for the entire economy has a vastly greater level of explanatory power than simply concluding that these same central bankers are just incompetent. Either the Fed is trying to implode the economy or it is not: which of the above hypotheses is simpler, or explains more than the other? The straining credulity of the alternative media commentators is almost palpable; they practically admit that no one could be so stupid to act in a way that the Fed does. Brandon Smith simply suggests, "maybe they're not."
So let's take this same logically inductive method and apply it to the very top of the pyramid. How could an aggregation of mere men, with all the trappings of wealth and power, as well as all the perennial human disorders inherent in man's nature like pride, rivalry, envy, divisiveness, etc. possibly get this far, for this many generations, in the establishment of their global arrangement? Would not diversions and infighting keep this thing from ever gaining any ground? The broken world in which we live is itself a fact that undermines such an operation. Yet this same sinister worldwide operation advances nonetheless. Why?
They must have preternatural help from the creature that they worship as god. What else can explain such uniformity of both intention and result across multiple generations? To be certain, the forceful evildoer in the material order must be resisted forcefully to defend the innocent; but physical force alone cannot stop the one whom the globalists worship. It is this one that is the true enemy. This is the one who wants 90% of us gone, and enslaved to his demonic self, forever. Above all, this is the fight. What tactics ought we use? What weapons have we? With what shall we fight?
written by not very hopeful , February 24, 2016
I'm confused about why the "liberty movement" would sit by while Cliven Bundy was arrested, but claims it will stand up to further arrests. As much as I believe there may be a "liberty movement" in people's hearts and minds, I have yet to see any material proof of a liberty movement. There is no one organization or person or group of people who can unite those believing themselves to be part of the liberty movement. That's why incremental prosecution has started and will continue in this country. I'm not 100 percent convinced that there were provocateurs in Burns. I think the liberty movement lends itself to hotheads, who can't control themselves or take orders. There is a lot of justified anger out there, but it will not be put to good use if it is not organized. As of yet, no one has stepped up to lead and organize. And while Bundy Ranch was effective as it turned out, it wasn't very well organized or executed. Lavoy's murder and Cliven's arrest are an unfortunate sign that there will be no resistance. It was a test, and the American people failed.
written by Brandon Smith , February 24, 2016
@not very hopeful
You are asking the wrong question. What you should be asking is, if YOU believe that Oregon was the fight worth fighting, then why weren't YOU THERE? You should stop worrying about when everyone else is going to "organize" and fight the battles you believe in and start fighting those battles yourself.
As for the rest of the movement, I already outlined in the article above along with many other articles the reasons why the refuge failed. No one with any intelligence is going to jump into a poorly planned standoff possibly influenced by agent provocateurs. And so we bide our time. The feds did not rush into Bundy Ranch for the same reason; it was a lose/lose situation for them. They were smart enough to wait for a better opportunity (Burns, Oregon), an opportunity they likely created. We have to maintain our composure and pick our battles carefully.
written by Brandon Smith , February 24, 2016
@Tobias
You have missed the point. Under the broad interpretations afforded by Clear and Present Danger Doctrine, ANYTHING could be construed as "seditious speech". Do you really think I care about the corrupt interpretations of the corrupt laws of a corrupt government?
written by Brandon Smith , February 24, 2016
@Tobias
I don't think I'll be feeling all that compelled to justify anything to them. I would say good luck to them as well. They are going to need it.
written by Judge Dred , February 24, 2016
Here Scalia was murderd, and the local sheriff was told to stand down.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/apnewsbreak-scalia-suffered-from-many-health-problems/2016/02/23/0be23b7e-daaf-11e5-8210-f0bd8de915f6_story.html
It was clear in Texas that this sheriff had jurisdiction to perform an autopsy, but crony's prevented him form doing his job, why no obstruction here?
...
The case in Oregon is that the People elect the judge and Sheriff, in the case of Grazny and Ward neither were elected, both are hand picked puppets of NEO-CON ( Big uranium )
A true liberty movement supports its Sheriff and elects its judge, in Oregon its illegal for FED's to enforce local law, ,yet FEDS step in and ignore the Oregon Constitution.
Time to Secede and nothing more,
Oregon Constitution say's
"People have the power to abolish and/or alter their Government"
Time is now, Fed's refuse to stand-down in Oregon, and they have removed our elected Judges and Sheriff's, what is left?
written by Sparticus , February 25, 2016
Extremely broad. Extremely vague.
Makes me want to establish multiple identities under different names just to be able to give a name that has an address, library card, etc.
Maybe I'll start using Cliven Bundy to confuse things.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/36/327.24
prev | next
§ 327.24 Interference with Government employees.
(a) It is a Federal crime pursuant to the provisions of sections 111 and 1114 of Title 18, United States Code, to forcibly assault, resist, oppose, impede, intimidate, or interfere with, attempt to kill or kill any civilian official or employee for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers engaged in the performance of his or her official duties, or on account of the performance of his or her official duties. Such actions or interference directed against a Federal employee while carrying out the regulations in this part are violation of such regulations and may be a state crime pursuant to the laws of the state where they occur.
(b) Failure to comply with a lawful order issued by a Federal employee acting pursuant to the regulations in this part shall be considered as interference with that employee while engaged in the performance of their official duties. Such interference with a Federal employee includes failure to provide a correct name, address or other information deemed necessary for identification upon request of the Federal employee, when that employee is authorized by the District Commander to issue citations in the performance of the employee's official duties.
written by kellyt - CO , February 25, 2016
"everything about it felt rigged"
You've drawn a line in the sand which I agree with.. But, as the feds start their retroactive prosecution - one case at a time - which case will trigger a response? The next one? The second one?
What if it all "FEELS RIGGED?"
If it doesn't "feel right" do we all just sit back and watch until it does feels right?
written by tommytunes , February 25, 2016
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2...nment.html
http://cascadebusnews.com/news-pages/e-headlines/4733-knowledge-a-courage-what-the-west-needs-to-take-back-our-public-lands
http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/federal-assets-above-and-below-ground/
Whats interesting is that the Center for Biological Diversity is not protesting the Uranium Mining, http://www.blm.gov/or/energy
, or this PIPELINE PROJECT , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsIfFKJIweY
written by ? , February 25, 2016
tommytunes-
Look into the background of the neo-cons and those who scream anti-Semitism loudest as to where they come from and what they believe (and the true loyalties of both political parties).
Know thy enemy.
written by Tammi , February 25, 2016
I have had the same thoughts as kellyt. I fear that the moves the govt makes will be so incremental, so small that we won't know when it's time to get busy. Sort of like standing ready in a race waiting to hear the gunshot only you don't hear the shot so you just keep standing until the race is finished and you never even took a step.
Like the Hammonds being sent back to jail or Cliven Bundy being arrested or the poor man being killed LaVoy. Or in even bigger events like gay marriage being forced on us or partial birth abortions or child pornography or sex trafficking...or all the "pc" bullying to shut down free speech but only against white, Christian conservatives or how about what the govt/elites have done to our economy or the citizens that were attacked and ruined because they didn't want to provide flowers or cakes for gay weddings??
I mean it just goes on and on.
When exactly will enough be enough??
I think there are a great many people that are awake and that will fight instantly if something giant and glaring happens. Problem is it seems it's going to be such small hidden "lawful" seeming steps that we will wake up one sunny morning and realize we never left the gate and now that gate is locked.
No disrespect intended here just voicing my concerns.
written by Brandon Smith , February 25, 2016
@kelly
Why are you asking me which event should trigger YOUR response? Can you not decide for yourself, or are you another one of those people waiting around for everyone else to act before you do?
All I can say is, when the time is right for you, you will know. And, if you have no training and are easily led by your emotions, then you are better off not doing a thing, otherwise you may only end up making the situation more difficult for the rest of us to deal with, as Ammon Bundy and his team did.
written by the stranger , February 25, 2016
The Malheur situation was really poorly executed. When you have people who are armed, talking about dying and defending themselves and one of those people gets killed later; it is hard to argue this was political speech and not rebellion. And, that is how it played out in the public.
It seems to me that the liberty movement should have a few people (braver than the ones who talk so much about their guns) who will go into a Malheur type situation unarmed and do a sit-in as a peaceful protest. When the arrests happen, it will generate sympathy and positive opinions about the liberty movement. Instead of talking about dying and defending oneself, they would take the opportunity every time there is a tv camera or a microphone to educate the public about the outrages committed on western ranchers or whatever the cause is.
The government is not smart. The government is not stupid either. It knows that the public has to view the ones they are after as the "other". As long as we continue to be perceived as the other, the government can come for us en masse or one by one and it won't matter. When people realize that they cannot build a pond, dig a well, or plant a garden or do other things that the government is telling them they can't do then we become part of the public and government action will be seen as impacting them directly. That is when the government will have to stand down. Threatening the government with violence is no deterrent. The government, as George Washington said, "is force".
Look at the homosexual movement--a group that was vilified and cast as mentally ill just a generation or two ago is about as mainstream as you can get now. However, there are proportionally speaking no more homosexuals now than there were then. People don't need to become a liberty activist to help our cause. They need to know a liberty activist and have some sympathy for them. How many people do you know who know what you stand for and don't agree but don't want to see your harmless activities criminalized? Do you homeschool, garden, shoot guns, smoke weed or do something else that is harmless but that is being prosecuted by the government? Make that your speech to your sympathetic neighbor. Recruit people to the cause, not as activists or militia members, but as sympathetic members of the public who see what you do as harmless and deserving of the right to exist.
Then, when some group occupies, unarmed, a building or a street or whatever, the public will say that the government is overreaching or overreacting. Maybe there would be militia members standing by just in case but the protest has to be clearly in the realm of political speech with some modicum of support from a sympathetic public. If there were no sympathetic public in German occupied territory during WW2, where would the resistance fighters hide, get food, get medical care, etc? We need to cultivate a sympathetic public. Otherwise we fail, whether it goes hot or not.
written by Brandon Smith , February 25, 2016
@stranger
The refuge event would have failed as a sit in as well, because the location was strategically meaningless. The problem with non-violent activism is that most of it is done in a strategically inept way. If you do not have a directed and specific goal and a solid plan, no brand of protest is going to succeed.
If the Hammonds had agreed to stay out of jail and fight back, then Ammon would have had a legitimate goal, at least. Most of us would have backed a play to prevent them from being arrested. When the Hammonds decided to capitulate and go to jail, then Ammon should have accepted that the plan was a no go. Instead, he relied solely on emotional response and went forward anyway without a strategy or specific goal. Thus, the event was doomed to failure.
Whether armed or unarmed, activism without planning is worthless.
written by Cal , February 25, 2016
One way to get the general public to understand what is going on and accept that THEY must change it is to use "the courts".
Let me explain my reasoning here.
Many feel that criminal, even treasonous actions are being committed by those serving within our government. They understand that we are a nation of "laws".
But they do not understand not charging those who serve with the actual crimes they have committed or it is believed to have committed.
They even believe we have corrupt judges, and that they must be removed, but believe the LIES that they are serving in that position for life, rather then that they are allowed to serve for life as long as they use the constitutionally required "Good Behaviour" while serving.
The US Constitution tells us what is "Good Behaviour" by the duties it lists for the judges - state and general - and by the Oath required of them to take and KEEP.
The people will stand up for and behind what they believe is LAWFUL actions. That is why those who serve within our government and are working to destroy it are USING laws. It is something the mass public understands.
But those in the RESTORE the US Constitution do not use laws, not even the supreme LAW of our nation. That is why there is a division.
Those corrupt and even treasonous who serve within our government know to use what is accepted by the general public, even though those in the general public believe what they are doing is corrupt the actions are accepted solely because they are labeled as "law", though here in the USA it cannot ever be law.
(Convoluted I know)
So if a person who serves within our government went against the Supreme LAW of our land, or broke the Oath (felony, crime of perjury) and are charged with such crimes and no real penalty is done, it is openly shown to the people that the criminals serving within our government are OPENLY breaking the law. Why? Because charges are a recognized part of OUR system, and accountability was being attempted in a recognized-by-the-general-public in a LAWFUL way.
This is something the "people" can understand and get behind.
Yes, they are aware that the courts are corrupt, but remember that occasionally a few "win one" which is what assists in keeping the people quiet. But when it is OPENLY shown that an Oath is broken, that crimes (pedophilia, theft, gunrunning, treason, etc) and the courts do nothing, then when someone says we must replace them and this is how the US Constitution requires of us to do so, the people will listen and understand as it IS OUR LAW being enforced against the corrupt.
Basically it is something they understand. It opens their minds to the US Constitution and its requirements of the people. But it all has to be done by things that the GENERAL public understand and accept.
That is why those in government make any headway at all. If someone direct from the UN came here and started implementing "laws", they would fight as they would view it as an invasion. They would fight to defend our legitimate government.
But when a person serving within our government "gives" power/authority to that foreign entity, though the people feel uneasy and that it is "wrong", criminal in that action, they do not understand the whys/hows/etc of that wrongness. So they uneasily let it slide.
We can show the wrongness, the corruptness of those who serve through our constitutional laws to the general people. By using our US Constitution we give IT strength and backing, we show how it is enforced and much more is accepted.
I am not sure exactly how we can do all this, but it is very important that we start using and enforcing the US Constitution and required Oaths as the laws that they are soon.
written by Plain Clothes Man , February 25, 2016
When it comes to the so called "Standoff," I believe there were agents within the Oregon group, that were receiving orders from their handlers, who had pre-planned the start date, the duration, the day and route that would be taken to meet with the sheriff, and the location where the traffic stop would take place.
After initiating the first stop there were most likely shots fired at Lavoy's truck to cause him to flea toward the waiting kill zone. Because they planned to spill blood the road was blocked on a blind curve to cause the possibility of a crash, and create the appearance that Lavoy rammed them with his truck, so deadly force could be authorized.
Being unable to stop on the slick icy road, Lavoy tried to go around and got stuck in the snow bank, where his executioners were waiting. People in positions of authority are not above using a variety of dirty tricks against anyone they perceive as a threat to their power.
On the other hand, natural born killers, that have no respect for the sanctity of life, know what type of behavior to expect when they trap a victim, and how to use it to their advantage.
Lavoy was the lamb that was chosen by the wolves to be the blood sacrifice, he never saw it coming, he never had a chance.
In this world, the wolves think the lambs were created to be sacrificed.
I'm a lamb, and I think the wolves were put here to be eviscerated...
____________________________________________
written by Oregon Patriot/OATHKEEPER , February 25, 2016
"...deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government..."
July 4, 1776, Declaration of Independence
"WE the People..." have the power and the means to end this tyranny now! Blood WILL be necessary to continue our Constitution and the Freedom it guarantees! When will the next George Washington step forward and lead we lll% against this current Tyrannical Government and unAmerican President? That is the fundamental question Patriots are all seeking!
written by pablo , February 25, 2016
So, Cal says we just got to use the law, to fight the powerful, and change the rules.
So, what case are you going to file?
you can't sue the govt. and win, it don't work that way.
you can try, here is enough info to get you started:
http://www.constitution.org/grossack/bivens.htm
plan on spending the rest of your life, in court.
I'm sure the Hammonds had a long look into how they could best utilize their time here on earth, and decided not to waste the rest of their lives, in a costly legal battle that they would loose.
Ever pick a fight with a much stronger opponent?
the only method that works is to not use the same systems as your enemy.
remember how we won the revolution?
we did not stand in a line, like the English.
we shot from behind trees, like the Indians.
(or so I am led to believe)
This is the nature of what we are seeing, our gov no longer represent the people, it has become just like the English, and we should start thinking differently about the future.
written by Spartan , February 25, 2016
Although shocking to some, I think it may be about time to implement the Henry Bowman plan. What say you?
written by owler , February 26, 2016
a good book to read regarding the police state to the extreme is "the bridge to andau" by james a michener.
its about the hungarian revolution in the 50's when the people rose up against communism
it was suggested reading by jeremiah johnson in one of his articles on shtfplan.com
http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/how-to-survive-occupied-america-red-dawn-just-started-and-youre-in-it_02092016
the story is a real shocker. very sobering when you think of how things could well play out here
written by the messenger , February 26, 2016
@Tobias
A word of caution to useful idiots like yourself: Hitler executed his brown shirts when they finished serving their purpose. Your ilk will suffer the same fate so it would be in your best interest to bone up on some history before choosing your side.
written by Cal , February 26, 2016
Hey Pablo, funny enough we agree. I am saying that using the laws of our land, including the US Constitution and each state Constitution will let the people get behind and understand the restore the US Constitution movement.
Can we win in the courts? Sure, but it will be a difficult process of HOLDING JUDGES TO THEIR OATH AND Constitutionally assigned duties. Showing the people that the judges are only ALLOWED to occupy that position for as long as they use the constitutionally defined "Good Behaviour", and that we are willing to remove them from that position.
We are not suing the government, we are charging them with crimes committed/believed to have been committed. When in court we are INFORMING the juries of their LAWFUL duty under the US Constitution, not what corrupt judges and prosecutors tell them they are allowed to do.
We also use the Grand Jury Investigation and Grand Juries. They are the people's tools, not those who serve within our government.
“The grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It is a constitutional fixture in its own right. In fact the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people”.
“Thus, citizens have the unbridled right to empanel their own grand juries and present “True Bills” of indictment to a court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding. Our Founding Fathers presciently thereby created a “buffer” the people may rely upon for justice, when public officials, including judges, criminally violate the law.” (Misbehavior, “Good Behaviour” requirement)
“The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside, we think it clear that, as a general matter at least, no such “supervisory” judicial authority exists. The “common law” of the Fifth Amendment demands a traditional functioning grand jury.”
“Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the judicial branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm’s length. Judges’ direct involvement in the functioning of the grand jury has generally been confined to the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together and administering their oaths of office. The grand jury’s functional independence from the judicial branch is evident both in the scope of its power to investigate criminal wrongdoing, and in the manner in which that power is exercised.”
“The grand jury ‘can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not.’ It need not identify the offender it suspects, or even “the precise nature of the offense” it is investigating. The grand jury requires no authorization from its constituting court to initiate an investigation, nor does the prosecutor require leave of court to seek a grand jury indictment. And in its day-to-day functioning, the grand jury generally operates without the interference of a presiding judge. It swears in its own witnesses and deliberates in total secrecy.”
“Recognizing this tradition of independence, we have said the 5th Amendment’s constitutional guarantee presupposes an investigative body ‘acting independently of either prosecuting attorney or judge”
“Given the grand jury’s operational separateness from its constituting court, it should come as no surprise that we have been reluctant to invoke the judicial supervisory power as a basis for prescribing modes of grand jury procedure. Over the years, we have received many requests to exercise supervision over the grand jury’s evidence-taking process, but we have refused them all. “it would run counter to the whole history of the grand jury institution” to permit an indictment to be challenged “on the ground that there was incompetent or inadequate evidence before the grand jury.” (Nor would it be lawful of them to do so.) Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority said In the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992)
The US Constitution tells us what to do, we just need to follow it no matter what ways the traitors come up with to stop us. IT is our legitimate governmetn
written by Josh McDowell , February 26, 2016
Article 10. Right of Revolution[edit]
New Hampshire is one of several states that codify a "Right of Revolution" in their state constitutions. The Right of Revolution dates back to the Revolutionary War. Article 10 reads:
“
Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind."
'Cause that Constitution thing was OUR idea.
written by Justice Just-US , February 26, 2016
Let's see bar attorneys are 100% AIPAC
Judges are 100% Bar attorneys
Being judged by your peers in the USA is impossible
There never was and never will be recourse in the courts, the court is just a way of 'legalizing' plunder by AIPAC.
Freedom will be fought on the streets and in the homes, and NOT in the court of law in the USA.
Batiste long ago pointed out that the 'law' is just "War by other means", not unlike Politics, which today is OWN$ED by AIPAC.
written by Anonymous Coward - Waiting for "the event" , February 27, 2016
I really appreciate your website and commentary. When you mentioned that the feds might be planning to pick off the leadership of the liberty movement, I was concerned. BECAUSE THAT'S YOU!
You should work with the other patriot groups and setup a deadman's switch to notify each other.
Here is just one example:
https://www.deadmansswitch.net/
Also you may want to consider setting up a statement on your website that says something like "As of today {todays Date} I Brandon have not been coerced by any government entity... " Both are just simple attempts at a way to notify us if you get picked off by the criminals headquartered in dc. You are smart guy you can probably come up with something better, but I wanted to give you the idea.
written by Brandon Smith , February 27, 2016
@anonymous
I have already released a statement outlining that I would never and will never -
Commit suicide.
Overdose on drugs.
Drive a vehicle off a cliff or bridge (I think I added this in the article, if not, then yeah, I won't drive off a cliff), or into a tree causing my vehicle to magically explode.
Commit murder. (If I do kill anyone, it will be in self defense or to protect others)
Disappear off the face of the Earth without a trace by choice.
That said, I have long been a proponent of leaderless resistance, at least, to the point that the movement does not centralize around any one person or group. The Liberty Movement should be able to function at all times regardless of what happens to those of us who are more prominent voices.
written by Anonymous Coward , February 28, 2016
We have been watching for a long time.
We have seen how the US Deep state eliminates any leadership of threats to its agenda. ie. JFK,RFK,MLK etc.
You like to think a few steps ahead, and may not want to disclose, but have you and the liberty movement created a list of actions and suggested "reactions"?
That could be published either today, or automatically upon an event making you unavailable?
written by Pologrounds , February 28, 2016
What type of change would you like to see? I think the system is too far gone for salvage. I haven't given up hope for mankind, but have lost hope for the current system completely.
written by Pologrounds , February 29, 2016
Nice information in the response. I will take a look tonight or tomorrow. On the microcosm of the United States, in the near term, this information is relevant. I am willing to fight for my human rights, as well as my beliefs. My fight will most likely not be a physical one though. My beliefs about this country may differ from the romantic ideal of our Founding Fathers thinking hundred of years into the future in their wording of initial documents to essentially look out for us, the citizens.
In a macro view, I feel that they were following orders from Europe (although this could very well be directive from the Middle East or Tibet), and the handover of power from Britain to the colonies was planned. Basically, the United States' rise to world hegemony was an allowance of power. Now, the power is exoterically shifting back east, but with money already flowing south. To verify this, be prepared to go down many, many deep rabbit holes (secret societies, royal bloodlines, analysis of religious figures/concepts/doctrines across ages, scientific/biological theories, mythology, astronomy/astro-archaeology, geological possibilities and much more).
I understand that many have died trying to defend this country. What stinks (for all of us) is that many people sacrifice their lives for an ideal, but that ideal has been twisted since the founding of the Virginia Colony. The reality is that they sacrifice only to keep corruption churning.
My main question is, why can't people see this?
written by Recon_Scout23 , March 03, 2016
The calls and appications for an article V Convention of states have been denied or completely ignored by both the judicial and legislative branches there have been multiple suits filed due to this and they have recieved nothing but silence here is a link to the Friends of the Convention of States http://www.foavc.org/ really useful information about the steps some have already taken to correct the corruption and treachery within our government. The courts are corrupted already so trying to use the judicial system to fix this problem will only put the peoples names and groups in thier dissident black book. There are several ways to go about this but only when the right crisis at the right time happens. There has not even been a concerted effort to gather in D.C
In mass numbers to demand his and his lackeys' resignations. We need to march on the white house several million deep and demand "Resignations or REVOLUTION" they cant stop or kill all at once if that fails then we should examine other options as individual persons, families, neighbors, neighborhoods, communities/cities, states. If the arab world can make it happen then why the hell cant we? Just the number of unemployed people in our nation with the support of the working class could do it. Another case i want to share with you all just to give an example of the corruption happening all over the nation!! We the People are being robbed blind by the very individuals who were elected to represent us.They are using the laws they have enacted against us to protect themselves under the COLOR OF THE LAW & JUSTICE!! Please visit https://supremecourtcase.wordpress.com/
for a more thorough explanation of the last few sentences. The Constitution is the Law of the Land not statutory law taken from Roman civil law these treasonous traitors hide behind!
written by Valiant , March 12, 2016
According to Fritz Springmeier. Do these Nevadans belong to the same family as McGeorge Bundy, National Security Adviser?
Why would you name your kid "Ammon"? It is the land of Molech worship.
Alexander the Great was said to have descended from Ammon Zeus, the ram-horned god.
It wouldn't surprise me if the Bundys were Freemasons.
Oh nevermind it turns out they're Mormons, which is a masonic religion.
