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

BUNDY RANCH
BUNKERVILLE, NEVADA

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
action?

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
ourselves?

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
ourselves?

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
control.

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

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
wrote.

"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
Democrat.

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
plan.

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
promises."

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
serious.

"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.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2309727/posts

An Open Letter To Chauncey DeVega

An Open Letter To Chauncey DeVega

From: tony whitcomb expotera.ceo@gmail.com
Date: Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 8:49 PM
Subject: AN OPEN LETTER TO CHAUNCEY DEVEGA
To: chaunceydevega@gmail.com

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
STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT" Mr. DeVega.

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
"BARACK OBAMA" and to "THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL
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
SWITCH!!"

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
to "THE ESTABLISHMENT" and Mr. DeVega, if a "BLACK PERSON"
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
than a "BARACK OBAMA LOVING FOOL."

Sincerely,

Tony E. Whitcomb
Founder/CEO Expotera

State Domination

State Domination

By Robert Higgs
Lew Rockwell.com
April 30, 2014

Familiarity may indeed, as the saying goes, breed contempt,
but it also breeds a sort of somnolence.

People who have never known anything other than a certain
state of affairs, even an extraordinarily problematic state of
affairs, have a tendency not to notice it at all, to relate it,
so to speak, as if they were sleepwalking through it.

Such is the situation of modern people in relation to the state.

They have always known it, and they take it completely for
granted, regarding it as one might regard the weather: whether
it brings rain or sunshine, lightning bolts or soothing spring
breezes, it is always there, an aspect of nature itself.

Even when it proves destructive, its destruction still qualifies
as something akin to “acts of God.”

We relate to the state in this sleepwalking fashion, however,
not because doing so is hardwired in our genes, but because
our conditions of life and our long historical accommodation
to living under the state’s domination predispose us to react
to it in this oblivious manner.

People who have lived in other circumstances, however,
have reacted quite differently.

Only when human populations adopted settled agriculture
did they prove amenable to state domination.

During the vastly longer epoch of human existence in small hunting
and gathering bands, the state was impossible: people had few if
any nonperishable stores of wealth to be plundered, and if someone
attempted to impose state-like domination on a band, its members
simply ran away, putting as much distance between themselves and
the exploiters as necessary to escape the would-be state’s
predation.

For the past 5,000 to 10,000 years, however, ultimately for nearly
all of the world’s people, the state has existed as an ever present
predator and all around abuser of human rights, its power to
dominate and plunder propped up by its adroit exploitation of
people’s fears, many of which have been of the state itself, others
of external threats to life and limb from which the state purported
to protect its subjects.

In any event, nearly everyone eventually became incapable
of even imagining social life without a state.

For the few who have succeeded in wrenching themselves out
of this dreamlike condition in relation to the state, however,
two main questions come rushing to mind:

(1) Who do these people—that is, the state’s kingpins, Praetorian
guards, bootlickers, and key private-sector supporters, think they
are to treat us as they do?

(2) Why do nearly all of us put up with the state’s outrageous
treatment?

These questions can easily form, and indeed already have
formed the core of countless books, articles, and manifestos.

Although nothing even approaching a consensus has emerged, it
seems fairly clear that the answers to question (1) have much to
do with the widespread prevalence of wicked, arrogant people
with a comparative advantage in violence and the bamboozlement
of their victims.

Faced with the fundamental choice between what Franz
Oppenheimer called the economic means of getting wealth (by
production and exchange) and the political means (by robbery
and extortion), members of the ruling classes have opted
decisively for the latter.

Pope Gregory VII (1071-85), the leader of the momentous Papal
Revolution that began during his papacy and ran its course over
a span of nearly fifty years (even longer in England), minced no
words when he wrote (as quoted by Harold Berman):

“Who does not know that kings and princes derive their origin from
men ignorant of God who raised themselves above their fellows by
pride, plunder, treachery, murder, in short by every kind of crime,
at the instigation of the Devil, the prince of this world, men blind
with greed and intolerable in their audacity.”

It is possible, of course, that some political leaders have sincerely
believed that they had a just basis for their domination of their
fellows nowadays especially the belief that an electoral victory is
equivalent to divine anointment seems to have many under its
spell, but such self-deception does nothing to alter the realities of
their situation.

As for why we submit to the state’s outrages, the most persuasive
answers have to do with fear of the state (and nowadays, for many,
fear of self-responsibility as well), with apprehension about sticking
one’s neck out when other victims may fail to join forces with those
who resist first and, probably most important, with the ideological
“hypnosis” (as Leo Tolstoy characterized it) that keeps most people
from being able to imagine life without the state or to understand
why the state’s claim to intrinsic immunity from the morality that
binds all other human beings is the purest bunk.

If an ordinary individual may not morally commit murder, or
steal, neither may the individuals who compose the state; and,
of course, private individuals may not delegate their rights to
rob or murder to the state because they have no such rights in
the first place.

Like Tolstoy, many writers have recognized that the ruling
classes work very hard to imbue their victims with an
ideology that sanctifies the state and its criminal actions.

In this regard, one feels compelled to agree that many states
historically have been amazingly successful in this quest.

Thus, under the Nazis, ordinary Germans thought they were
free, just as today ordinary Americans think they are free.

The capacity of ideology to blind people and incline them
toward the Stockholm Syndrome seems to have few limits,
although a regime such as that of the USSR, which locked
the mass of the people in persistent poverty, may find that
its attempts to produce ideological enchantment in its
subject victims eventually produce progressively diminishing
returns.

Thus, an astute, if ever shifting, combination of arrogant force
and impudent fraud may be seen as the prime ingredients the
state employs in its multifaceted efforts to induce somnolence
in its subject victims.

Of course, a certain amount of cooptation adds essential spice
to the mix, and so all states make some efforts to give back to
their victims a morsel of the bread it has snatched from them.

For this gracious gift, they are generally ever so grateful.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/04/robert-higgs/state-
domination

War Head

War Head

By Otep
April 29, 2014

Revolution

Why?

The King Of Lies Is Alive

Look Around, Look Inside

Infidel

Infidel

It Begins Here

It Ends Now

The Prince Must Pay

His Head Or The Crown

Rob The Poor

Slaughter The Weak

Distort The Law

Perfect Deceit

Do I Need A Gas Mask?

Should I Get Inoculated?

Will This War Last?

Will We Be Incinerated?

False Gods

Death Squads

Blind

This Is A Catastrophe

Weapon Systems Activated

Puritans Have Invaded

This Is A Catastrophe

To Protect Against The Threat

Order Must Be Kept

Do I Need A Gas Mask?

Should I Get Inoculated?

Will This War Last?

Will We Be Incinerated?

False Gods

Death Squads

Blind

The Elephants March To War

Concede

Conform

Concede

Conform

Deny The Big Lie

My Tribe

Join Me

An Alliance Of Defiance

In The Warhead

All Are Welcome Here

Give Me Your Tired

Give Me Your Sick

Give Me Indulgence And Decadence

He lied, They Died

Keep The Peasants Terrified

This Is A Catastrophe

You Must Lead, If They Get Me

On My Command,

Break Free

Born In The U.S.A.

Born In The U.S.A.

By Anon
Via-Evolefest
April 25, 2014

Your Birth Certificate Bond Is Worth Billions

When your birth certificate was monetized and converted into
a UNITED STATES Government Bond shortly after your birth
by your Mother, your net worth became unlimited, into Billions
of Dollars, without your, nor your Mother’s, and Father’s,
knowledge.

When the UNITED STATES declared bankruptcy in 1933 under
the bankruptcy (Straw man) law known as HJR 192, pledged
all Americans as collateral (debt slaves) against the
national debt to the International Bankers; gave all the
land to the international bankers (Federal Reserve
Corporation); and confiscated and outlawed all the gold
except for one ounce for each person; thus, eliminating the
lawful means (Gold and Silver Coins) by which you could
legally pay your debt, the UNITED STATES also assumed legal
responsibility for providing a new way for you to pay.

In 1933, the UNITED STATES Government declared that they would
pay all of YOUR debts with the money they receive from your labor,
birth certificate, and Social Security registered number by what is
known as your Reserve Account worth Billions!

The UNITED STATES Corporation Government did that by
providing what is known as the Exemption Account.

The bankers loan credit and not money, because there has
not been any lawful money since 5 June 1933.

The Exemption Account is your exemption from having to
pay for anything.

In practical terms, though, this meant giving each American
something to pay with, and that something is your credit.

This secret has been hidden for over 79 years.

Your value to society was then and is still calculated using
actuarial tables.

At birth, average value bonds were created from your birth
certificate.

I understand that this is currently between one and two
million dollars at your birth when your mother unknowingly
gave her baby, you, away to the UNITED STATES Government.

These birth certificate bonds were collateralized by your birth
certificate and your mother’s maiden name under an Act of
Congress in 1921.

Then your birth certificate bond became a negotiable instrument
just like any security instrument under UCC Article 3, code of
commercial law in which the world trade falls under.

The bonds are hypothecated and traded on the stock market
until their value is unlimited for all intents and purposes.

People all over the world buy and sell your bond every day
over the stock markets as investments.

All that credit created is technically, and rightfully, yours.

In point of fact, you should be able to go into any store in
America and buy anything and everything in sight, telling
the clerk to charge it to your Exemption Account, which is
identified by a nine-digit number that you will recognize as
your Social Security number, without the dashes.

It is your EIN, which stands for Exemption Identification Number
from the UNITED STATES CORPORATION of America."

~ Anon

http://educationcenter2000.com/take_back_your_strawman.html

"Why Does Obama Suck?"

"Why Does Obama Suck?"

Via - Robert Steven Knight
Santiago, Chile
Wednesday, April 23, 2014

"Why does Obama suck?"

If you're not sure, ask Google.

It seems that millions of Americans already have asked this
question, along with:

"Why does the government want to kill us?", and

"Can the government take your gold?"

These are among the jewels of Google autocomplete-- instantly displaying results from the most popular searches.

Try it yourself. The results vary slightly based on geography,
but if you type, for example, "Obama is ", I get the following:

Not exactly the hope and change he was looking for I suppose.

(Canadians and Brits, don't feel left out. Google tells us that
Stephen Harper is, "the anti-christ" and David Cameron is, "a
lizard".)

While I'm sure we can all appreciate the humor, the reason these
searches show up instantly in Google is because so many people
are looking.

For example, when I type "Is America", Google completes it with
the most popular hit-- "Is America doomed"...

Typing in "Why does the government" conjures all sorts of
interesting queries, ranging from:

- need to collect taxes?
- want to kill us?
- lie?
- restrict seditious speech?

Or, typing "Why does the Federal Reserve. . . ", Google asks,
"still exist?" Good question.

On the topic of the dollar, Google tells us "the dollar is" collapsing,
dead, crashing, dying, devalued, not backed by gold, losing value,
etc.

Apparently more and more people are starting to question the
value and worth of their currency.

They're starting to have second thoughts about a system in which
we award a tiny banking elite with totalitarian control of the money
supply.

And they're starting to realize that that their government is
corrupt, far too powerful, and overrun with liars and thieves.

In fact, for proof, I typed "does homeland s", and Google completes
with:

"Does Homeland Security pay well?" - and -
"Does Homeland Security hire felons?"

So it seems that convicted felons are looking for highly paid
government employment.

Perfect.

This is rather fitting given that typing "Will Ob" (not even the
full word) returns "Will Obama declare martial law?"

People are certainly wondering.

Getting to this point of mistrust has taken years
of endless warfare.

The embarrassing failures of Obamacare.

NSA and IRS scandals.

Constant stories of police brutality.

Higher taxes. Higher consumer prices.

It didn't happen overnight. But over time, people have
lost confidence not only in individual politicians, but in
the system itself.

The institution of government is now viewed as the problem,
not the solution.

And this represents a complete breakdown in the social
contract.

From the Romans to the Ottoman Empire to the Venetians,
history is full of examples which show that once societies
lose confidence in the system, substantial change and turmoil
often follows.

I suspect that if Google had been around in the mid-1780s,
autocomplete would probably tell us things like "Why does the
King Louis" suck? And, "Will France" collapse?

It did.

And when the French stormed the Bastille in 1789, they entered
a 26-year period of revolution, civil war, hyperinflation, and
genocide.

I'm not suggesting that we're in for exactly the same fate.

But we would be foolish to presume that this lost confidence
and mistrust is a consequence-free environment.

Until tomorrow,

Simon Black