ISIS is Israeli Secret Intelligence Service

Friday, May 30, 2014

Still I Rise

Still I Rise

By Maya Angelou
May 30, 2014

You may write me down in history
With your bitter, twisted lies,
You may tread me in the very dirt
But still, like dust, I'll rise.

Does my sassiness upset you?
Why are you beset with gloom?
'Cause I walk like I've got oil wells
Pumping in my living room.

Just like moons and like suns,
With the certainty of tides,
Just like hopes springing high,
Still I'll rise.

Did you want to see me broken?
Bowed head and lowered eyes?
Shoulders falling down like teardrops.
Weakened by my soulful cries.

Does my haughtiness offend you?
Don't you take it awful hard
'Cause I laugh like I've got gold mines
Diggin' in my own back yard.

You may shoot me with your words,
You may cut me with your eyes,
You may kill me with your hatefulness,
But still, like air, I'll rise.

Does my sexiness upset you?
Does it come as a surprise
That I dance like I've got diamonds
At the meeting of my thighs?

Out of the huts of history's shame
I rise

Up from a past that's rooted in pain
I rise

I'm a black ocean, leaping and wide,
Welling and swelling I bear in the tide.

Leaving behind nights of terror and fear
I rise

Into a daybreak that's wondrously clear
I rise

Bringing the gifts that my ancestors gave,
I am the dream and the hope of the slave.

I rise
I rise
I rise.

Maya Angelou born Marguerite Annie Johnson; (April 4, 1928 –
May 28, 2014) was an American author and poet. She published
seven autobiographies, three books of essays, and several books
of poetry, and was credited with a list of plays, movies, and
television shows spanning more than 50 years.

She received dozens of awards and over 30 honorary doctoral
degrees. Angelou is best known for her series of seven
autobiographies, which focus on her childhood and early adult
experiences. The first, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings (1969),
tells of her life up to the age of seventeen and brought her
international recognition and acclaim.

Thursday, May 29, 2014

We Rise: A Tribute to Maya Angelou

We Rise: A Tribute to Maya Angelou

By Cynthia Piano
May 29, 2014

As the cool still breath of morning is not yet pierced by the caged
bird's song

We Rise

As the fury of the morning's rat race to work has not yet resumed

We Rise

As the last stars of the pristine black night give way to the
brightness of the sun

We Rise

As the sound of the last perk in the coffee pot echoes in our sleepy

We Rise

As the fresh air of an unspoiled breeze passes beneath our nose

We Rise

As the last petal falls from the spent flowers of yesterday's garden

We Rise

As the inspiration of higher mind and heart from the other side

We Rise

As the last snore erupts from our disturbed slumber

We Rise

As the rock that formed your pedestal of support stands alone

We Rise

As the memory of your heart awakening voice trembles through
our entire body

We Rise

As the absence of your presence in this reality sinks in to our
restless minds

We Rise

As your model of strength, wisdom, determination, perseverance
and self-love lives

We Rise

And the free bird sings within us all

(c) 2014 Cynthia G. Piano

Cynthia G. Piano is Founder, Oneness House ~ A Spiritual Spa;
Writer, Visionary, co-creator of the New Earth, Spiritual Mentor,
Inspirational and Transformational Healer/Teacher/Speaker.

Wednesday, May 28, 2014

Involuntary Servitude

Involuntary Servitude

Via - Susan Elridge
By Eric Williams
WhoRU - 4
May 28, 2014

As I was abandoned as a day old infant 80 years ago, in 1934, I do
not know when or where I was born or who my mother was, much
less my father, nine months removed.

However, I was not made aware of this until I was thirty, in 1964,
at my presumed father’s funeral.

This put me on a quest to learn who “I really was”, which caused
me to become aware of facts that most people refuse to even
consider, which I have determined is due to the extensive
susceptibility of the human mind to mind controlling indoctrination,
intended to convert freeborn people into volunteering themselves
into being docile pay-tri-otic tax-pain-ers.

To make a somewhat long story short, there was an income tax
rebellion in Southern California in the late 1960s, in which I became
a very vocal and effective leader, conducting public meetings
several times each week throughout the Los Angeles and Inland
Empire area of Southern California, for well over a year.

I had a silent partner in that endeavor who never gave one
presentation, never wrote one item against the IRS or income tax
and who never had his picture or name plastered on any of
thousands of meeting advertising flyers we distributed throughout
our area.

I was the one “guilty” of the high crime of telling the truth to those
whom attended, which numbered in the many hundreds, thousands

We were both charged by the IRS, with criminal willful failure to
file and/or pay income tax.

My friend and partner went to trial with an attorney, and spent the
next 2-1/2 years in Federal Prison.

I went to trial all on my own, without filing even one document
with the Court, and walked out in less than five minutes and have
never ever filed or paid income tax and have never ever been
further bothered by the IRS.

However, about three years later I was contacted, personally, at
my place of business, by two special agents of the IRS who asked
me to help them prosecute a man who had not paid his income tax.

I, of course, declined to assist them.

At that time I happened to be walking out to get in my new
Cadillac, to go call on potential customers. The agents were
just then driving into the parking lot of my furniture factory.

The driver had his window down and called to me by name (he
did not ask me who I was, he had a picture of me, one of those
thousands of tax-protest flyers for the tax rebellion).

They knew who I was and what I was doing and where I was doing
it and they have never ever bothered me for my “failure” to file
or pay.

So what was my “magic”?

As I wrote above, in 1970 I was prosecuted by the IRS in Federal
Court in Los Angeles for criminal failure to file or pay income tax.

In the opening phase of that criminal prosecution I challenged the
IRS prosecutor, during his opening statement, where he had said,
“Citizens of the United States have an obligation to blah, blah,
blah…”, whereupon I stood and entered my objection to his
implication that I had incurred the obligations he was mentioning.

I challenged the Prosecutor to present documented proof from
his existing file, that I had volunteered myself into a condition
of servitude to the United States, as would be required under
the Thirteenth Amendment in order for me to have incurred
the obligations mentioned by that IRS prosecutor.

When the IRS prosecutor was unable to so do, the Federal Judge
then stated that he was taking the matter under consideration
and that I would be notified.

That took less than five minutes.

That was forty-four yeas ago and I am still waiting.

I have never ever filed or paid income tax and I have never ever
been bothered by the IRS since that one event in California in 1970.

Neither the IRS Prosecutor or the Federal Judge in that Federal
IRS prosecution mentioned any of the ridiculous points touted
by “Sovereign Citizens”.

There was no mention that “my name” was written in all caps in
the complaint or that I had failed to file any document objecting
thereto; nor did they mention the gold fringed United States flag
that was on display in the courtroom.

The one and only issue considered was the ability of the IRS to
prove I had volunteered myself into a condition of servitude, as is
required, when challenged, under the prohibition of involuntary
servitude provision of the Thirteenth Amendment.

Neither did the Prosecutor or Judge ask me if I had a driver license,
Social Security number; if I used Federal Reserve Notes or traveled
on the government owned roads; had my automobile registered,
licensed and insured; or if I had a hunting license; or was a
registered voter.

There was no suggestion that my utilization of any of those items
would constitute an adhesion contract causing me to have
volunteered to submit myself to the political dominion of the
Federal or any state government, as is believed and proclaimed
by the more than ignorant stupidity of “Sovereign Citizens”.

The licensed BAR association attorney who represented my silent
partner in that income tax rebellion prosecution, failed and refused
to raise the challenge I did, which applied to my friend as well as
me (and to everyone in this country), causing my friend to serve 2
-1/2 years in prison and to be assessed a fine of $10,000.00 (which
he refused to pay).

If all the Pay-Tri-Idiots complicating their position with their
“Sovereign Citizen” claim, were to do as I did, file no papers
with the court, avoid burdening and aggravating the court and
prosecutor, simply raise the challenge of political jurisdiction
as soon as the case is called, and then stand mute, the court
would have no choice but to dismiss because there is no possible
way anyone can be proved to be a citizen of the United States,
unless they voluntarily agree to such status in open court!

(Once the challenge is raised, neither the Prosecutor or Court
has standing to present any manner of questions to the accused.

The burden shifts to the Complainant, as is established in more
than twenty Federal and Supreme Court cases.) K!I!S!S!

Presenting a birth certificate to be issued a driver license does
establish a subservient contractual relationship to the state, but
that falls just a mite short of establishing citizenship.

And such is, in any event, fraudulently induced through the criminal
indoctrination of children in government schools, and is therefore,
quite easily defeated.

Prior to the birth certificate presentation the state has
ZERO political dominion over anyone born on this land.

“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as punishment
for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall
exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”

Before a party can be tried for a purported violation, the charging
party must first establish political jurisdiction that would cause the
party to be obligated to conform to whatever violation was alleged.

This means that the only violations chargeable would be under the
Common Law, not under any statute created by any legislation of
any political organization.

Any other interpretation would be deemed absurd under
the SCOTUS ruling in Holy Trinity Church v. United States.

The Preamble establishes that the purpose of the Constitution
was/is, to secure the Blessings of Liberty to the People of the
United States and their posterity.

This wording excludes any application to mere citizens.

The wording of the Fourteenth Amendment does not establish
citizenship but it does establish that those who volunteer
themselves into that status are subject to the jurisdiction
thereof, meaning to the President, to Obama!

Citizens of the United States have ZERO protection in the
Bill of Rights.

Obama told the truth when he said he was not going after
gun protections established in the Second Amendment.

Obama is not going after the People’s guns, Obama is going
after the guns of United States citizens.

Under the Fourteenth Amendment he does have Constitutional
standing to do just that!

Pay Attention to the words!

Not to what the most dishonest government to ever disgrace
the face of this planet has indoctrinated you to believe, in
its indoctrination centers, known as “public schools”.

I, Eric Williams, am, of course, The Radical In The Twilight Zone.

Saturday, May 24, 2014

Oh, George (Orwell)

Oh, George (Orwell)

By Danny Schechter
May 24, 2014

Oh, George

We need you now,
more than ever, ever
to help us wade through
new words of war by wankers
high on high tech
& fudged perceptions
in a security bubble of insecurity

We need help, George,
penetrating acronyms
of government gone wild
of spies & lies
and the madness
of the overtly clever
and covertly maniacal

Hey, Hey, NSA
How many emails did you ‘process’ today?
How many calls did you convert
into acres of unread metadata
stored somewhere in Utah
until the big roundup
that’s coming soon

Hey, Hey, NSA, why do you play
with code names
coined with a clear intent
to maim
and restrain?
So lame.

Listen to the words,
hear the music
played and sung
in the shadow factories
of Maryland, My Maryland

What a web you weave when
first you practice to deceive
again and again
Lets find, fry
and demystify the
alphabet of outrage

Oh George, help us understand
the art of ‘collecting it all,’
an anal chock full of nuts down
to the very last drop
Yum, what fun

There’s nothing fair about FAIRVIEW
or tasty About STORMBREW
in the world of the
and heartless BLACK HEARTS

All in the domain of our
Alexander The Great,
Superspy extraordinaire who
Loved to sneak undercover into
hackers conventions
in cool T Shirts
and then play at
Cyber war in his own war room
Get ready boys for a new
cyber-kinetic shock and awe
or just plain awful
depending on yr pt of view
Can you say Stuxnet in Farsi?
I can!

The uniformed boys with toys
defending the fort at Meade have
A sense of humor,
building a command module
based on a design, ha ha ha,
Inspired by Star Trek
Beam Me Up, Scotty,
up into my own stratosphere
To look down on We, The Suckers of America,
whose more perfect union
has led to a world of:

Magnetic Emanations
Mineralized Collections
On Raster-based Computer screens

Image on o’ Ship of State
navigating among GENIES,
All plugged into the FIVE EYES
before them,
defending us against THREATS
we are not even cleared
to know about

Redact this O’NSA
Who came up with SOUTHWINDS
in the sinews of a surveillance
soup turned into
a machine
with no OFF switch

George. Help Me Understand this secret language:

“(TS/SI,REL FVEY) If the S2 QFD Review Panel elects to ask
for a HOMING PIGEON to be made persistent, its natural home
would be Incorporation into FAST SCOPE.”)

Of course! I couldn’t put it better myself

Thank you Ed and Glenn
And Laura too
for this TOP SECRET lesson
in how to target US persons
and everyone else
in that mad pursuit
pioneered by Ahab
so many whales ago
to know us better
than we know ourselves,
and keep us down
on the server farm
of forever.

Thank you FISA for blessing
the marriage of agency and company
all invented words, can
join the now encrypted fondue
before it all shows up
in a selfie on FACEBOOK,
in my file, and your file
and the files of trillions
of the unsuspecting.

As we indict five guys in
China for doing what we do,
As the world looks on
amazed at the chutzpah
Of it all
At the hubris of a mission
All legal of course,
With a secret court
To say so,
and say it again

Neatly divided into an apartheid
of protected ‘US Persons and
the rest of the globe
where we presume the right
to monitor Facebook
fans in Brazil and Chancellors in
Germany in a haze of
anti-terrorist rationales
that terrorize us all.

O’ say do we see?
We see it all
Hear It all
Yes Sir,
Know nothing
Nothing at all

Please accept our privacy
pledge before we invade
Repeat after me:
You have no choice
In this home of the brave
Land of the free, click!

George, your “pure wind”
is back
without a hack
but a vengeance
signaling its time
to disrupt the disruptors
before they
what’s left
the little that is left
of our small d’

A glass to Snowden in Russia
Glenn in Brazil
Laura in Berlin
And, of course, to
the prophetic Mr. Orwell, who
warned us all,
and again
that fiction would

Because we couldn’t
make this up
even if we wanted
to.Only a comedy
channel can do it justice
even if it’s not funny.

Our cause is now more
than probable.

News Dissector Danny Schechter edits and
blogs at, He is now producing a series of
documentaries on the American Surveillance State (ASS).

Wednesday, May 21, 2014

The Role of the Intellectual

The Role of the Intellectual

By Lawrence Davidson
May 21, 2014

Part I -- Watershed Moments

World Wars I and II created watershed moments in the lives of
Western intellectuals, defined here as those who are guided by
their intellect and critical thinking, and understand various aspects
of the world mainly through ideas and theories which they express
through writing, teaching and other forms of public address.

Just how were they to respond to the call of patriotic duty that
seduced the vast majority of citizens to support acts of mass

What constituted a proper response is often debated.

How most of them did respond is a matter of historical record.

During the world wars, most intellectuals on all sides of the
conflicts uncritically lent their talents to their government's
war efforts.

Some did so as propagandists and others as scientists.

Some actually led their nations into the fray, as was
the case with Woodrow Wilson.

Wilson held a doctorate from Johns Hopkins University, had
taught at Cornell, Bryn Mawr, and Wesleyan, and became
president of Princeton University.

Eventually he was elected President of the United States and
having taken the nation to war, sanctioned the creation of
a massive propaganda machine under the auspices of the,
"Committee on Public Information."

He also supported the passage of the Sedition Act of 1918 to
suppress all anti-war sentiments.

Wilson never experienced combat, but another intellectual,
the British poet Siegried Sassoon, did so in the trenches of
the Western front.

After this experience he wrote, "war is hell and those who
initiate it are criminals."

No doubt that was his opinion of the intellectual President
Woodrow Wilson.

In 1928 the French philosopher and literary critic Julien Benda
published an important book, The Betrayal of the Intellectuals.

In this work, Benda asserted that it is the job of the intellectual
to remain independent of his or her community's ideologies and
biases, be they political, religious or ethnic.

Only by so doing could he or she defend the universal practices
of tolerance and critical thinking that underpin civilization.

Not only were they to maintain their independence, but they
were also obligated to analyze their community's actions and,
where necessary, call them into question.

However, as the memory of the intellectuals' complicity in World
War I faded, so did the memory of Benda's standard of behavior.

By World War II it held little power against the renewed demands
of national governments for citizens to rally around the flag.

Thus, in that war, with even greater atrocities being committed,
most intellectuals either supported the slaughter or remained

Some became fascists, others communists, and all too many once
more lent their talents to propaganda machines and war industries
in all the fighting states.

As a result the debate over the proper role of the intellectual
in relation to power and ideology continues to this day.

It is not a question that needs a world war to be relevant.

There are any number of ongoing situations where nationalism,
ethnicity, or religious views spark intolerance and violence.

And with each of them the intellectuals, particularly those whose
home states are involved, have to make the same age-old choice.

Do they follow Woodrow Wilson's path or that of Julian Benda?

Part II -- The Fate of the Jewish Intellectual

This problem has recently been raised in reference to the
seemingly endless Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

On 14 April 2014 Eva Illouz, a professor of sociology at Hebrew
University, published an article in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz
entitled, "Is It Possible to Be a Jewish Intellectual?"

In this piece she sets forth two opposing positions: one is the
Zionist/Israeli demand for the primacy of "ahavat Israel," or the
"love of the Jewish nation and people" -- the claim that all Jews
have a "duty of the heart" to be loyal to the "Jewish nation."

The other position is that of the lone intellectual (here her model
is the philosopher Hannah Arendt), whose obligation is to maintain
the "disinterested intelligence" necessary to, if you will, speak truth
to power.

Illouz explains that Zionists have a "suspicion of critique" and use
"the memorialization of the Shoah" (the Holocaust) and "ahavat
Israel" to mute it.

"The imperative of solidarity brings with it the injunction to not
oppose or express publicly disagreement with official Jewish

It is within this context that she can ask if it is still possible to be
a Jewish intellectual, at least as portrayed of by Julien Benda.

Illouz's conclusion is that it has become exceedingly difficult to be
so, particularly in the diaspora communities, where the demands
for Jewish solidarity are particularly "brutal."

Illouz is unhappy with this situation.

While she feels the allure of ahavat Israel, she ultimately supports
the position of the independent-mindedness of Benda's thinker.

She insists that the "contemporary Jewish intellectual has an
urgent task ... to unveil the conditions under which Jewish
solidarity should, or should not be accepted, debunked, or

In the face of the ongoing, unrelenting injustices toward
Palestinians and Arabs living in Israel, his/her moral duty
is to let go, achingly, of that solidarity."

Part III -- The Primacy of Group Solidarity

While the portrayal of the intellectual as a thinker insisting on
and practicing the right of critical thinking about society and its
behavior is an ancient one (consider Socrates here), such behavior
is not common in practice.

This, in turn, calls Benda's notion of a proper intellectual into

Thus, the description of an intellectual offered at the beginning
of this essay (which is in line with common dictionary definitions)
does not reference any particular direction of thought.

For instance, in practice there is nothing that requires an
intellectual to think about societal or government behaviors,
much less take a critical public position on such matters.

And, no doubt, there are many very talented minds who, deeply
involved in aesthetic matters or certain branches of scientific,
linguistic, literary or other pursuits, do not involve themselves
with issues of the use or abuse of power.

In addition, one might well be judged an intellectual and be a
supporter or even a perpetrator of criminal policies and actions.

Woodrow Wilson might fall within this category, as might
Henry Kissinger, Condoleezza Rice, and many others.

Indeed, from a historical perspective most people of high intellect
have sought to serve power and not critique or question it.

This is quite in line with the fact that most non-intellectuals accept
the word of those in power as authoritative and true.

According to Eva Illouz this reflects the primacy of group solidarity
over truth.

She is correct in this judgment.

That, no doubt, is why the independent-minded, outspoken
intellectuals demanding moral integrity and responsibility
from those in power are so rare, be they Jewish or gentile.

Lawrence Davidson is a history professor at West Chester University
in Pennsylvania. His academic work is focused on the history of
American foreign relations with the Middle East. He also teaches
courses in the history of science and modern European intellectual

Monday, May 19, 2014

Losing The Way 30-31

Losing The Way 30-31

By Lao Tzu. Tao Te Ching
Axis of Logic
May 19, 2014


If you use the Way to help a ruler of people,
you never use weapons to coerce all beneath heaven.

Such things always turn against you.

Fields where soldiers camp,
turn to thorns and bramble,
and vast armies on the march,
leave years of misery behind.

The noble prevail if they must, then stop:
they never press on to coerce the world.

Prevail, but never presume.

Prevail, but never boast.

Prevail, but never exult.

Prevail, but never when there's another way.

This is to prevail without coercing.

Things grown strong soon grow old.

This is called losing the Way.

Lose the Way and you die young.


Auspicious weapons are the tools of misfortune.

Things may not all despise such tools,
but a master of the Way stays clear of them.

The noble-minded treasure the left when home
and the right when taking up weapons of war.

Weapons are tools of misfortune,
not tools of the noble minded.

When there's no other way,
they take up weapons with tranquil calm,
finding no glory in victory.

To find glory in victory,
is to savor killing people,
and if you savor killing people,
you'll never guide all beneath heaven.

We honor the left in celebrations,
and honor the right in lamentations,
so captains stand on the left,
and generals on the right.

But use them both as if conducting a funeral.

When so many people are being killed,
it should be done with tears and mourning.

And victory too should be conducted like a funeral.

Transcribed by Axis of Logic from the book,
"Tao Te Ching" as translated by David Hinton.

Saturday, May 17, 2014

The Death of Daniel Somers

The Death of Daniel Somers

By Ron Paul
Ron Paul
Saturday, May 17, 2014

I am reading the heartbreaking suicide note of Daniel Somers,
a US combat veteran who spent several years fighting in Iraq.

Mr. Somers was only 30 years old when he took his own life, after
being tormented by the horrific memories of what he experienced
in Iraq. He wrote:

“The simple truth is this: During my first deployment, I was made
to participate in things, the enormity of which is hard to describe.
War crimes, crimes against humanity. Though I did not participate
willingly, and made what I thought was my best effort to stop these
events, there are some things that a person simply can not come
back from.”

Many who shout the loudest that we must “support the troops”
urge sending them off to unwinnable and undeclared wars in
which there is no legitimate US interest.

The US military has been abused by those who see military force
as a first resort rather than the last resort and only in self-defense.

This abuse has resulted in a generation of American veterans facing
a life sentence in the prison of tortured and deeply damaged minds
as well as broken bodies.

The numbers sadly tell the story: more military suicides than
combat deaths in 2012, some 22 military veterans take their
lives every day, nearly 30 percent of veterans treated by the
VA have PTSD.

We should be saddened but not shocked when we see the
broken men and women return from battles overseas.

We should be angry with those who send them to suffer and
die in unnecessary wars.

We should be angry with those who send them to kill so many people overseas for no purpose whatsoever.

We should be afraid of the consequences of such a foolish
and dangerous foreign policy.

We should demand an end to the abuse of military members and
a return to a foreign policy that promotes peace and prosperity
instead of war and poverty.

Daniel Somers was a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom.
He was part of Task Force Lightning, an intelligence unit.

In 2004-2005, he was mainly assigned to a Tactical Human-
Intelligence Team (THT) in Baghdad, Iraq, where he ran more
than 400 combat missions as a machine gunner in the turret of
a Humvee, interviewed countless Iraqis ranging from concerned
citizens to community leaders and and government officials,
and interrogated dozens of insurgents and terrorist suspects.

In 2006-2007, Daniel worked with Joint Special Operations
Command (JSOC) through his former unit in Mosul where he
ran the Northern Iraq Intelligence Center.

His official role was as a senior analyst for the Levant (Lebanon,
Syria, Jordan, Israel, and part of Turkey).

Daniel suffered greatly from PTSD and had been diagnosed with
traumatic brain injury and several other war-related conditions.

On June 10, 2013, Daniel wrote one final letter to his Family,
before taking his own life.

Daniel was only 30 years old.

Tuesday, May 13, 2014

Official Bundy Ranch Update

Official Bundy Ranch Update

By Ammon Bundy
May 13, 2014

Date: May 6, 2014 Official Bundy Ranch Update

Republic for the United States of America
c/o 3040 SE Persons Court Portland OR 97267

Secured ID: PR364424164RUSA


Read by Ammon Bundy at the Clark County Sheriff Precinct,
May 2, 2014:

As we have had the opportunity to reflect on the events that
took place between March 26th and April 12th, 2014-we have
experienced feelings of concern, confusion, fear, anger, sadness
and joy.

Our peaceful community has been shaken. In many ways, we
are still processing the magnitude of what took place.

We ask ourselves so many questions; did the federal government
really come into this valley and terrorize our community?

Did hundreds of armed forces, in Red Dawn fashion, lock down the
hills and valleys of our peaceful home-threatening at gunpoint,
anyone who stepped off the paved road, with forceful and lethal

Did we really see armed forces convoying through the streets of
our town, diligently recording names and identities, of anyone
who glanced wrong or opposed them in any way?

Was there really heavy equipment in the form of dump trucks
and backhoes, on our mountains, tearing up infrastructure that
we have used for hundreds of years, and is vital to our survival?

Were we truly in the cross-hairs of snipers, and under surveillance
by the latest in technological weapons?

Did these forces actually point their rifles in the faces of our little
children, while beating their unarmed fathers to the dirt and
hauling them off in chains?

Did they really body-slam our friend, a 59 year old woman to
the ground, and sic German Shepherds on our neighbors-even
a pregnant woman?

Did they actually shock a man multiple times with a 50,000 volt
Taser for honorably protecting his aunt, while she gathered herself
out of the dust?

We reflect in sadness and awe that this could take place in our
little town. The terror of armed men occupying our land will never
be forgotten.

The feelings of despair of these events will long reside in our
hearts. Thoughts of anxiousness that this may ever happen again,
will awaken us from our pillows from time to time.

During quiet reflection, we may ask ourselves if we did the right
thing by resisting. Were we in the right when we acted to safeguard

When the only response to our multiple pleas for help was silence,
when we were left alone to clean our cuts and wounds, did we have
a divine right, duty, and obligation to protect our family and

We recall the many times we pleaded with our local government
to protect us; the numerous times we called 911, and begged our
Sheriff to send his deputies to assist.

Our cries of distress were met with silence.

We ask ourselves, "Did we try hard enough to get our local
government and law enforcement to act as a buffer and perform
their duty to protect and serve?"

Were the hundreds of phone calls not enough, or is it just that our
elected leaders and Sheriff have forsaken the people in trade for
power and money?

We whole-heatedly want to believe that our Sheriff would not
abandon us, but where has his shielding influence been?

Why was he not here to represent and protect the very men,
women and children of his county that he swore an oath for?

Why did he stand silent and neutral, knowing our community
was in terror?

What was his motivation of inaction; was it fear of the federal
government or political reprisal from powerful politicians?

The scars of this traumatic event will heal over time. We hope
our community will eventually return to a sense of normalcy.

We fervently hope and pray that these heavy-handed tactics
will not be used on us or any other American ever again.

We wonder if our hopes will be in vain; will they return?

Will they come back with greater force and more cunning
tactics than before?

Will our Sheriff keep his oath this time, and use his lawful forces
to stop them, or will the people be left to their own protection?

Will the good people of this nation yet again have to come
running to the rescue of a neighbor?

Will veterans, retired police force, churches, businesses, families
and individuals have to unite once again to confront these acts of
governmental terror upon the American people?

Will our local government rouse themselves from disaffection
and intervene-protecting the people?

Will they stop fearing to do the right thing and come to
the realization that the people are more important than
a government agency?

Will they fight for the rights of the state and her people?

They must stop putting personal gain and advancement in
front of the rights of citizens.

They need to recognize, that as our elected representatives, they
have more power than those governing in brute force, as they have
the might of the people of this state backing them.

With that power we invest in them, they have the obligation to
safeguard our livelihoods, combat forces of fear, and protect our
lives with their own.

A few weeks ago, our community was in a state of innocence and
naivety. We felt safe and mostly kept to ourselves. We thought the
world's problems would only affect us through television, and could
be shut off with the push of a button.

Our innocence has left us now, we have experienced first-hand the
breath of force upon our necks. We have gasped in desperation as
our lives and agency were threatened. Our cries have been ignored
by our guardians in the next room.

We faced a choice-either lie down and submit helplessly in defeat,
or bite, scratch, and fight until help would come.

We are eternally and profoundly grateful for the many heroic
neighbors who heard our desperate cries and crashed through
the windows to rescue.

We additionally thank the thousands that came from every States in
this great nation, and stood in front of raised guns in our defense,
and for the hope that those same guns would never come to their
doors and their families.

We are grateful for those that arrived with pen and camera, those
that arrived with faith and prayers, and those that arrived with fist
and gun.

The variety of support from all walks of life has shown that this was
an event that truly touched the good hearts of many Americans.

We cannot thank you all enough-you have restored our faith in the
goodness of the American people.

Our message to all, is that it is time to make things right.

It is time to adhere to the supreme law of the land-
The Constitution of the United States.

It is time to understand right, stand for what's right,
and do whatever it takes to make it right.

We must continue the vision of our Founding Fathers in preserving
the freedoms of the American people and the sovereign rights of
the States.

A nation can never abandon its fate to an authority it cannot

Men must decide if their rights and freedoms are God-granted
or are assigned by a federal government.

We believe in the rule of laws and sustain a limited government.

May God bless us to protect this sacred instrument.

Thank you,
The Bundy Family

Wednesday, May 7, 2014

History Of The Democrats And The KKK

Why The Democrats Started The Ku Klux Klan

By Free Republic
May 7, 2014

The original targets of the Ku Klux Klan were Republicans, both
black and white, according to a new television program and
book, which describe how the Democrats started the KKK and for
decades harassed the GOP with lynchings and threats.

An estimated 3,446 blacks and 1,297 whites died at the end of
KKK ropes from 1882 to 1964.

The documentation has been assembled by David Barton of Wallbu
More..ilders and published in his book "Setting the Record Straight:
American History in Black & White," which reveals that not only did
the Democrats work hand-in-glove with the Ku Klux Klan for
generations, they started the KKK and endorsed its mayhem.

"Of all forms of violent intimidation, lynchings were by far the
most effective," Barton said in his book.

"Republicans often led the efforts to pass federal anti-lynching
laws and their platforms consistently called for a ban on lynching.
Democrats successfully blocked those bills and their platforms
never did condemn lynchings."

Further, the first grand wizard of the KKK was honored at the 1868
Democratic National Convention, no Democrats voted for the 14th
Amendment to grant citizenship to former slaves and, to this day,
the party website ignores those decades of racism, he said.

"Although it is relatively unreported today, historical documents
are unequivocal that the Klan was established by Democrats and
that the Klan played a prominent role in the Democratic Party,"
Barton writes in his book.

"In fact, a 13-volume set of congressional investigations from
1872 conclusively and irrefutably documents that fact.

"The Klan terrorized black Americans through murders and public
floggings; relief was granted only if individuals promised not to vote
for Republican tickets, and violation of this oath was punishable by
death," he said.

"Since the Klan targeted Republicans in general, it did not limit its
violence simply to black Republicans; white Republicans were also included."

Barton also has covered the subject in one episode of his American
Heritage Series of television programs, which is being broadcast
now on Trinity Broadcasting Network and Cornerstone Television.

Barton told WND his comments are not a condemnation or
endorsement of any party or candidate, but rather a warning
that voters even today should be aware of what their parties
and candidates stand for.

His book outlines the aggressive pro-slavery agenda held by the
Democratic Party for generations leading up to the Civil War, and
how that did not die with the Union victory in that war of rebellion.

Even as the South was being rebuilt, the votes in Congress
consistently revealed a continuing pro-slavery philosophy on
the part of the Democrats, the book reveals.

Three years after Appomattox, the 14th Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution, granting blacks citizenship in the United States,
came before Congress: 94 percent of Republicans endorsed it.

"The records of Congress reveal that not one Democrat, either in
the House or the Senate, voted for the 14th Amendment," Barton

"Three years after the Civil War, and the Democrats from the
North as well as the South were still refusing to recognize any
rights of citizenship for black Americans."

He also noted that South Carolina Gov. Wade Hampton at the
1868 Democratic National Convention inserted a clause in the
party platform declaring the Congress' civil rights laws were
"unconstitutional, revolutionary, and void."

It was the same convention when Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest,
the first grand wizard of the KKK, was honored for his leadership.

Barton's book notes that in 1868, Congress heard testimony
from election worker Robert Flournoy, who confessed while
he was canvassing the state of Mississippi in support of the
13th and 14th Amendments, he could find only one black, in
a population of 444,000 in the state, who admitted being a

Nor is Barton the only person to raise such questions.

In 2005, National Review published an article raising similar points.

The publication said in 1957 President Dwight Eisenhower, a
Republican, deployed the 82nd Airborne Division to desegregate
the Little Rock, Ark., schools over the resistance of Democrat
Gov. Orval Faubus.

Further, three years later, Eisenhower signed the GOP's 1960
Civil Rights Act after it survived a five-day, five-hour, filibuster
by 18 Senate Democrats, and in 1964, Democrat President Lyndon
Johnson signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act after former Klansman
Robert Byrd's 14-hour filibuster, and the votes of 22 other Senate
Democrats, including Tennessee's Al Gore Sr., failed to scuttle the

Dems' website showing jump in history.

The current version of the "History" page on the party website
lists a number of accomplishments from 1792, 1798, 1800, 1808,
1812, 1816, 1824 and 1828, including its 1832 nomination of
Andrew Jackson for president.

It follows up with a name change, and the establishment of
the Democratic National Committee, but then leaps over the
Civil War and all of its issues to talk about the end of the
19th Century, William Jennings Bryan and women's suffrage.

A spokesman with the Democrats refused to comment for WND
on any of the issues.

"You're not going to get a comment," said the spokesman who
identified himself as Luis.

"Why would Democrats skip over their own history from 1848
to 1900?" Barton asked.

"Perhaps because it's not the kind of civil rights history they want
to talk about, and perhaps because it is not the kind of civil rights
history they want to have on their website."

The National Review article by Deroy Murdock cited the 1866
comment from Indiana Republican Gov. Oliver Morton condemning
Democrats for their racism.

"Every one who shoots down Negroes in the streets, burns Negro
schoolhouses and meeting-houses, and murders women and children
by the light of their own flaming dwellings, calls himself a
Democrat," Morton said.

It also cited the 1856 criticism by U.S. Sen. Charles Sumner,
R-Mass., of pro-slavery Democrats.

"Congressman Preston Brooks (D-S.C.) responded by grabbing a stick
and beating Sumner unconscious in the Senate chamber. Disabled,
Sumner could not resume his duties for three years."

By the admission of the Democrats themselves, on their website,
it wasn't until Harry Truman was elected that "Democrats began
the fight to bring down the final barriers of race and gender."

"That is an accurate description," wrote Barton.

"Starting with Harry Truman, Democrats began that is, they made
their first serious efforts, to fight against the barriers of race; yet
Truman's efforts were largely unsuccessful because of his own
Democratic Party."

Even then, the opposition to rights for blacks was far from over.

As recently as 1960, Mississippi Democratic Gov. Hugh White had
requested Christian evangelist Billy Graham segregate his crusades,
something Graham refused to do.

"And when South Carolina Democratic Gov. George Timmerman
learned Billy Graham had invited African Americans to a
Reformation Rally at the state Capitol, he promptly denied use
of the facilities to the evangelist," Barton wrote.

The National Review noted that the Democrats' "Klan-coddling"
today is embodied in Byrd, who once wrote that, "The Klan is
needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth
here in West Virginia."

The article suggested a contrast with the GOP, which, when former
Klansman David Duke ran for Louisiana governor in 1991 as a
Republican, was "scorned" by national GOP officials.

Until 1935, every black federal legislator was Republican, and
it was Republicans who appointed the first black Air Force and
Army four-star generals, established Martin Luther King Jr.'s
birthday as a national holiday, and named the first black
national-security adviser, secretary of state, the research reveals.

Former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice has said: "The first
Republican I knew was my father, and he is still the Republican
I most admire. He joined our party because the Democrats in
Jim Crow Alabama of 1952 would not register him to vote. The
Republicans did. My father has never forgotten that day, and
neither have I."

Barton's documentation said the first opponents of slavery "and
the chief advocates for racial equal rights were the churches (the
Quakers, Presbyterians, Methodists, etc.).

Furthermore, religious leaders such as Quaker Anthony Benezet
were the leading spokesmen against slavery, and evangelical
leaders such as Presbyterian signer of the Declaration Benjamin
Rush were the founders of the nation's first abolition societies."

During the years surrounding the Civil War, "the most obvious
difference between the Republican and Democrat parties was
their stands on slavery," Barton said.

Republicans called for its abolition, while Democrats declared: "All
efforts of the abolitionists, or others, made to induce Congress to
interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient [to initiate]
steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most
alarming and dangerous consequences, and all such efforts have the
inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people."

Wallbuilders also cited John Alden's 1885 book, "A Brief History of
the Republican Party" in noting that the KKK's early attacks were
on Republicans as much as blacks, in that blacks were adopting
the Republican identity en masse.

"In some places the Ku Klux Klan assaulted Republican officials
in their houses or offices or upon the public roads; in others
they attacked the meetings of negroes and displaced them,"
Alden wrote.

"Its ostensible purpose at first was to keep the blacks in order and
prevent them from committing small depredations upon the
property of whites, but its real motives were essentially political.
The negroes were invariable required to promise not to vote the
Republican ticket, and threatened with death if they broke their

Barton told WND the most cohesive group of political supporters
in American now is African-Americans. He said most consider
their affiliation with the Democratic party long-term.

But he said he interviewed a black pastor in Mississippi, who
recalled his grandmother never "would let a Democrat in the
house, and he never knew what she was talking about."

After a review of history, he knew, Barton said.

Citing President George Washington's farewell address, Barton
told WND, "Washington had a great section on the love of party,
if you love party more than anything else, what it will do to a
great nation."

"We shouldn't love a party [over] a candidate's principles or values,"
he told WND.

Washington's farewell address noted the "danger" from parties is

"Let me now warn you in the most solemn manner against the
baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally. The alternate
domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit
of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages
and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is
itself a frightful despotism," Washington said.

Thursday, May 1, 2014

An Open Letter To Chauncey DeVega

An Open Letter To Chauncey DeVega

From: tony whitcomb
Date: Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 8:49 PM

Dear Mr. DeVega:

My name is Tony Whitcomb and I am a 48 year old African
American male, who presently lives in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Mr. DeVega, I am now writing this open letter to you in regards to
an article that you recently wrote and published on your "We Are
Respectable Negros" Blog, which was entitled "Charlie Delta is an
Uncle Tom Who Deserves His Own Action Figure" and Mr. DeVega,
I am not sure if "Charlie Delta" really "Deserves His Own Action
Figure" at this present time, but Mr. DeVega, the one thing here
that I am most absolutely certain of, is that "Charlie Delta" is most
certainly, not, an "Uncle Tom" but Mr. DeVega, by now writing this
article in regards to "Charlie Delta" being an "Uncle Tom" you, Mr.
DeVega, have now fully exposed yourself as being the real "UNCLE
TOM" here, from both a historical perspective, as well as from a
factual perspective, and now Mr. DeVega, let me fully explain to
you how, and why this is.

You see Mr. DeVega, "Charlie Delta" is currently standing up for,
and has now publicly taken the side of a "White Man" by the name
of "Mr. Cliven Bundy" and Mr. DeVega, Mr. Bundy, is currently
standing up to, and currently fighting against, the exact very same
group of individuals, and their ancestors, who "KILLED" Dr. Martin
Luther King Jr., back on April 04, 1968, and who "CAPTURED" and
"ENSLAVED" all of our "ANCESTORS" over 400 years ago, "THE UNITED

So Mr. DeVega, how can absolutely "ANYONE" including "YOU" now
publicly claim from both a historical perspective, as well from a
factual perspective, that "Charlie Delta" is an "Uncle Tom" when
"Charlie Delta" is the one "Black Man" here, who is very clearly
standing up to and fighting against both "THE MAN" and "THE
ESTABLISHMENT" where as you Mr. DeVega, are now very clearly
the one "Black Man" here, who has now publicly taken the side
of both "THE MAN" as well as "THE ESTABLISHMENT" Mr. DeVega.

You see Mr. DeVega, inorder for a black man to be considered to
be a true "UNCLE TOM" and/or a true "SELLOUT" by the individual
members of his community, that black man would now have to be
open openly working for, and/or openly lending his support to the
very "THE MAN" and to very "THE ESTABLISHMENT" that is currently
"OPPRESSING" his very own "PEOPLE" which in this particular case
and scenario, is quite logically, as well as quite obviously, "YOU"
Mr. DeVega, because you are now lending your direct support to
GOVERNMENT" and Mr. DeVega, for the record, it was the
"DEMOCRATS" who originally "CAPTURED and "ENSLAVED" all of
our "ANCESTORS" and Mr. DeVega, it was the "DEMOCRATS" who
fought against "FREEING" our "ANCESTORS" from being "SLAVES"
back during the "CIVIL WAR" and, Mr. DeVega, it was also the
"DEMOCRATS" who started the 'KLU KLUX KLAN" as well, Mr. DeVega.

So Mr. DeVega, now that I have fully proven the title of your
article to be both factually, as well as historically, 'INCORRECT"
I think the most honest, as well as the most honorable thing for
"YOU" to now do here Mr. DeVega, would be to issue an immediate
"RETRACTION" of this very personal "RANT" on your part, as well as
offer "Charlie Delta" a "WRITTEN" and "PUBLISHED" apology, on your
"We Are Respectable Negros" Blog, as well, Mr. DeVega.

Because to be completely honest with you Mr. DeVega, in my eyes,
you are now not looking like a very "RESPECTABLE NEGRO" for
attacking a young, African American, United States Marine, for
simply standing up and lending his help and assistance, to a "WHITE
MAN" even though during the the "CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT" Dr.
Martin Luther King Jr., literally had "THOUSANDS OF WHITE PEOPLE"
from all across this "COUNTRY" who "VOLUNTARILY" came to his
direct aide, and to his direct assistance, and at the "RISK" of their
own personal "SAFETY" and at the "RISK" of their own personal
"LIVES" as well, Mr. Devega.

You see Mr. DeVega, if "Mr. Cliven Bundy" was a "BLACK MAN" you
would probably have absolutely no problem with "Charlie Delta"
now standing with him, but because "Mr. Cliven Bundy" is a "WHITE
MAN" you now have a problem with "Charlie Delta" which just simply
means Mr. DeVega, that not only are the the real "UNCLE TOM"
here, but Mr. DeVega, this now also means that it is indeed "YOU"
and not "Mr. Cliven Bundy" who is also the real "RACISTS" here, as
well, Mr. DeVega.

Mr. DeVega, as I previously mentioned above I am a 48 year
old black man, who lives, and who was raised, in a State called
Minnesota, and Mr. DeVega, in Minnesota, we are known as
being the land of "10,000 LAKES " as well as the land of 10,000
"WHITE PEOPLE" for every 1 "BLACK PERSON" living here, as well,
Mr. DeVega.

So Mr. DeVega, as a kid, I personally grew up with the majority of
my friends and classmates being "WHITE" and for this I was often
called by black people who really didn't know me a "UNCLE TOM"
and/or a "SELLOUT" which I always thought was really kind of a
"JOKE" simply because how can anyone be responsible for where
they were born, and for where their parents decided to live, after
they were born??

But speaking of being "RESPONSIBLE" Mr. DeVega, my parents
who were both "African American" grew up in Mississippi, back
in the 1930's and 1940's and Mr. DeVega, my parents used to
tell us all of the time, that their two families were so "POOR"
back during the "DEPRESSION" that they didn't even realize that
there was a "DEPRESSION" even taken place in this Country.

You see Mr. DeVega, despite each of my parents very difficult and
extremely challenging circumstances and upbringings as a couple
of young black kids growing up in the very deep south back in the
1930's and 1940's, my parents Mr. DeVega, never, ever, complained
about how hard it was back when they were growing up as kids, and
Mr. DeVega, my parents, never, ever, ever, made any "EXCUSES" for
themselves, and Mr. DeVega, my parents never, ever, ever, blamed
for anyone else for any of their "PROBLEMS" and Mr. DeVega, my
parents got up and went to "WORK" every single day, Mr. DeVega.

Mr. DeVega, you are now personally "HATING" on "Mr. Cliven Bundy"
as well as now jumping on the bandwagon and now trying to
publicly accuse him of being a "RACISTS" simply because "Mr.Cliven
Bundy" posed a very "HYPOTHETICAL" question, which was simply
"Were we as black people better off 400 years ago as slaves, or are
we as black people any better off now, sitting around on porches,
and waiting for a welfare check once a month?"

Well Mr. Devega, as a "BLACK MAN" let me be the very first to say
to "Mr. Cliven Bundy" that no Mr. Bundy, we as black people, were
absolutely "NOT" better off 400 years ago living, and working as
"SLAVES" but Mr. DeVega, I would now like to expand on "Mr. Cliven
Bundy's" very obvious "BLUNDER" here, by now directly asking you
the question "BLACK MAN" to "BLACK MAN" are we as black people,
any better off today, than we were only just 40 years ago, back
during the "CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT" Mr. DeVega??

You see Mr. DeVega, I was raised back during the Civil Rights
Movement, and my parents Mr. DeVega, ran a very "STRICT" as well
as a very "DISCIPLINED" household, and as kids, we were "ALWAYS"
expected to keep our rooms clean, to keep our grades up, and to
keep our mouths shut, whenever an adult was talking or speaking,
Mr. DeVega.

Mr. DeVega, my parents had an absolute "ZERO" tolerance, for any
of their kids talking back and/or disrespecting any "ADULT" or any
"AUTHORITY FIGURE" and Mr. DeVega, if my Mother heard me, or
one of my siblings, using a "CURSE WORD" the very next thing that
you would hear coming out of my Mother's mouth was, "GO GET A

Mr. DeVega, if my Father, heard me, or one of my siblings, using
the "N-WORD" the very next thing that you would hear coming out
of my Father's mouth was, "WHERE'S MY BELT!!"

You see Mr. DeVega, my parents, like most black parents "BACK
THEN" weren't afraid of taking on the full "RESPONSIBILITY" of
raising their own "CHILDREN" nor were my parents ever afraid,
to "DISCIPLINE" any of their children as well, Mr. DeVega, and
when a young person is raised in this type of environment, and
in this type of household, they usually grow up to be "EDUCATED"
and they usually know how to speak proper "ENGLISH" and they
usually now how to carry and conduct themselves accordingly in
"PUBLIC" at all times, and they usually know how to go fill out a
"JOB APPLICATION" as well as how to 'WORK" for a living, and for
all of the things they want in this life, Mr. DeVega, versus growing
up not being "EDUCATED" and not knowing how to speak proper
"ENGLISH" as well as not knowing how to properly carry and conduct
themselves accordingly in "PUBLIC" at all times, as well as not
knowing how to fill out a "JOB APPLICATION" as well as not knowing
how to go out and "WORK" for a living as well, Mr. DeVega.

Mr. DeVega, there really is no secret to my parents generations
incredible "SUCCESSES" here in the raising of the children who
grew up during the Civil Rights Movement, like myself, just like
there really is no secrets to our current generations epic "FAILURES"
here in the raising of our kids who are now growing up here in 2014
as well, Mr. DeVega.

In 2014 Mr. DeVega, the majority of our kids are now being force
to try to "RAISE" themselves, with the help of both the State Run,
"WELFARE SYSTEMS" as well as with the help of the State Run,
"PRISON SYSTEMS" because as "BLACK PEOPLE" Mr. DeVega, we
have now "COLLECTIVELY" turned over the "RESPONSIBILITY" of
both setting a good "EXAMPLE" as well as "DISCIPLINING" our
own "KIDS" to the "STATE" and to the "FEDERAL GOVERNMENT."

But Mr. DeVega, whenever a "WHITE PERSON" mentions this,
or very "AWKWARDLY" tries to even bring this subject up like
"Mr. Cliven Bundy" did, they are automatically shouted down
and then called a "RACISTS'' by those of you who are presently
working for, and lending your support to both "THE MAN" and
like me, or like Dr. Bill Cosby, or even like "Charlie Delta" for
that matter, tries to bring any of this up for public discussion,
we as "BLACK MEN" are then called "REPUBLICANS" or "UNCLE
TOMS" by those of you who are presently working for, and lending
your support to both "THE MAN" and to "THE ESTABLISHMENT" as
well, Mr. DeVega.

Mr. DeVega, the very simple truth, and the very straight forward
reason for all of this can now be best summed up in the very
eloquent, and truthful words, of Mr. Booker T. Washington below:

"There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don't want
the patient to get well, because as long as the disease holds out
they not only have an easy means of making a living, but also an
easy medium through which to make themselves prominent before
the public."

So inclosing Mr. DeVega, "Charlie Delta" is not a "UNCLE TOM" he is
just a younger version of "ME" and, he is even a younger version of
"DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR." in the respect that he is a young
man that is now very clearly willing to put "EVERYTHING" including
his own "LIFE" if necessary, on the line, for something that he really
believes in, and for something greater beyond himself, and for this
he should be "COMMENDED" by the members of his own community,
instead of being "CONDEMN" by the members of his own community,
because "Charlie Delta" Mr. DeVega, is truly the "EXCEPTION TO THE
RULE" where as you Mr. DeVega, are now looking like nothing more


Tony E. Whitcomb
Founder/CEO Expotera