Tag Archive: Kansas


Kansas farmer sues Monsanto over genetically modified wheat find in Oregon

Filed under: Bioethics, bureaucracy, Community, Corporate Assault on Our Lives And Our Health, Crossroads News : Changes In The World Around Us And Our Place In It, Food Production, Fundamental Rights, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), Greed, Hypocrisy, Ineptitude, Justice, Lack Of Transparency, Medical Research, Politics, Politics, Legislation and Economy News, Secrecy, Special Interests, Unethical — Leave a comment
June 6, 2013
OregonLive.com

 

The Associated Press By The Associated Press

on June 04, 2013 at 12:09 PM

 

 

genetically modified food

 

wheat.JPGView full sizeA wheat field in Moro, Ore.Beth Nakamura, The Oregonian, 2012

WICHITA, Kan. — A Kansas farmer has sued seed giant Monsanto over last week’s discovery of genetically engineered experimental wheat in an 80-acre field in Oregon, claiming the company’s gross negligence hurt U.S. growers by driving down wheat prices and causing some international markets to suspend certain imports.

 

The federal civil lawsuit, filed Monday by Ernest Barnes, who farms 1,000 acres near Elkhart in southwest Kansas, seeks unspecified damages to be determined at trial.

U.S. Agriculture Department officials said last Wednesday that the modified wheat was the same strain as one designed by Monsanto to be herbicide-resistance that was tested in Oregon and several other states through 2005 but never approved. The USDA has said the Oregon wheat is safe to eat and there is no evidence that modified wheat entered the marketplace.

It’s believed to be the first lawsuit stemming from the discovery. Similar lawsuits are in the works, Barnes’ attorney said, and the cases will likely be consolidated for the purposes of discovery, a process where evidence is investigated and shared among parties.

No genetically engineered wheat has been approved for U.S. farming. Many countries will not accept imports of genetically modified foods, and the United States exports about half of its wheat crop. Since the announcement, Japan — one of the largest export markets for U.S. wheat growers — suspended some imports. South Korea said it would increase its inspections of U.S. wheat imports.

Barnes referred all calls to his attorneys. One of them, Warren Burns, said that the scope of the damage is potentially in the hundreds of millions of dollars. He said the lawsuit seeks to make sure their client is compensated for his losses.

“These types of suits serve the purpose of helping police the agricultural system we have in place and make sure farmers are protected,” Burns said in a phone interview Tuesday from Dallas.

 

Read Full Article Here

 

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

It’s on! Farmers begin suing Monsanto over genetic pollution of wheat crops

Monsanto

Wednesday, June 05, 2013
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com

(NaturalNews) The next wave of farmer backlash against Monsanto has just been unleashed by Ernest Barnes, a wheat farmer in Morton County, Kansas. He filed suit this week in the U.S. District Court in Wichita, Kansas, alleging that Monsanto’s genetic pollution has financially damaged himself and other farmers.

Barnes’ case appears to be well supported by the facts: Last week the USDA announced the shock discovery that genetically engineered wheat strains from Monsanto’s open-field experiments had escaped and spread into commercial wheat farms. Almost immediately, Japan and South Korea cancelled wheat purchase contracts from the United States, and more cancellations are expected to follow. The more countries reject U.S. wheat due to GMO contamination (genetic pollution), the lower wheat prices will plunge and the more economic damage will be felt by U.S. farmers.

Monsanto now a confirmed genetic polluter

GMO wheat (i.e. “GE wheat”) has never been commercially grown in the United States… at least not on purpose. Experimental fields were approved by the USDA and planted across 16 U.S. states. Until now, it was not known that these GE wheat experiments escaped their designated field plots and began to spread as a form of self-replicating genetic pollution.

For the record, Natural News openly warned about this possibility in a 2012 article called, “Stop Out-of-Control Science.” There, I wrote:

Humanity has reached a tipping point of developing technology so profound that it can destroy the human race; yet this rise of “science” has in no way been matched by a rise in consciousness or ethics. Today, science operates with total disregard for the future of life on Earth, and it scoffs at the idea of balancing scientific “progress” with caution, ethics or reasonable safeguards. Unbridled experiments like GMOs have unleashed self-replicating genetic pollution that now threatens the integrity of food crops around the world, potentially threatening the global food supply.

Those words, it turns out, were prophetic. We are now faced with precisely this situation in the U.S. agricultural sector, and farmers are starting to feel the economic losses. GMOs are just one of several areas where so-called “science” actually threatens humanity with total destruction.

See my infographic of all 12 dangerous sectors of science with this infographic:
http://www.naturalnews.com/Infographic-SOS-Stop-Out-of-Control-Scienc…

Monsanto engaged in genetic contamination

As Yahoo News reports:

The petition filed by Barnes claims Monsanto knew there was a high risk the genetically modified wheat it was testing could contaminate other varieties of wheat, and the company failed to follow proper procedures to keep the wheat contained.

Monsanto tested the wheat in many states, including Kansas, the top U.S. wheat-producing state, but did not disclose to farmers in those states that it was testing the controversial wheat there, the petition states.

Monsanto to sue the farmers?

Monsanto claims it will mount a “vigorous defense” against the lawsuit, expressing that it takes no responsibility whatsoever for all the genetic pollution it spews across America’s farm lands. If Monsanto’s genetically modified, toxin-producing crops just happen to infect your commercial crops, then that’s your fault!

In fact, I’m surprised Monsanto hasn’t announced plans to sue all these farmers for “stealing” its “intellectual property.” That’s what the company has done before, of course: sued farmers whose fields were contaminated by Monsanto’s genetic pollutants.

Is this not the height of corporate evil? When British Petroleum spills billions of gallons of oil in the Gulf of Mexico, it at least pretends to be sorry about it. But when Monsanto spews its genetic pollution all over the planet, it blames the farmers! It would be like if BP drove an oil tanker right into your front yard, dumped a thousand gallons of oil on your lawn, then sued you for stealing their oil.

That’s the Monsanto model. And it’s yet another example of the total runaway criminality of this evil corporation that frankly should have its corporate charter yanked. This is one business that deserves to be permanently put out of business and never allowed to operate again. When corporations become such arrogant, destructive and threatening monsters that stomp on our farmers and spew their genetic jizz all across the planet like a bunch of sicko ag perverts, something has gone terribly wrong and needs to be stopped.

The recent March Against Monsanto was only the beginning. I even foresee a day when millions of citizens from around the world engage in a far more aggressive march on the Monsanto headquarters and literally tear the place apart brick by brick until this corporate demon is permanently excised from our planet.

We are winning the war against Monsanto

I also predict — but do not condone this violence — that if Monsanto continues to engage in its crimes against farmers, nature and humanity, we are going to start seeing well-planned “acts of justice” against Monsanto executives, employees and scientists. I literally had a bizarre, disturbing dream the other night where a band of activists had kidnapped a Monsanto executive, tied him to a chair, and forced him to admit to all the crimes Monsanto has committed while being filmed on camera. The videos were then released on the internet. I realize this sounds a lot like the plot of a major motion picture, but I believe this could become reality if Monsanto continues on its current path.

Again, for the record, I do not condone the kidnapping of Monsanto executives. Kidnappings and executions are no way to resolve problems in a civilized society. If such an act actually takes place, it would actually hurt the anti-GMO movement and allow the government to paint all GMO protesters as “potential terrorists.” So if anyone out there is actually thinking of doing this, please redirect your energy and focus into non-violent protests and other similar actions that are already making tremendous progress. As I said recently on Natural News, I believe we have reached a tipping point of success against Monsanto. Let’s continue to pressure Monsanto in a grassroots, non-violent way, okay?

After all, we are winning this war against Monsanto and GMOs. They are in full retreat and completely surrounded… by the truth.

 

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

Related articles
About these ads
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Comment

Tyranny Got You Down?

Filed under: Community, Crossroads News : Changes In The World Around Us And Our Place In It, Freedom, Fundamental Rights, Government Overreach, Hypocrisy, Politics, Politics, Legislation and Economy News, Power Struggle, State Sovereignty, Taking Matters Into Our Own Hands, The American Constitution, Voting — Leave a comment
May 30, 2013

By on May 28, 2013

 

Tyranny surrounds us.

It can be downright terrifying and morally decimating. Usurpations continue as rights are whittled away and the constitutional principles eroded. The demands on citizens and states from a supposedly “limited” and “defined” federal government are now innumerable . The Union looks more and more like a consolidation of states instead of a federal republic.

So, what do we do? What are the options to fight this reversal of the founder’s vision?

Political philosopher and economist Murray Rothbard contemplated this very question.

“We face the great strategic problem of all “radical” creeds throughout history: How can we get from here to there, from our current State-ridden and imperfect world to the great goal of liberty?”

Some Wacka-doo’s recommend taking up arms in resistance. Only death will result. The strongest and most heavily armed will ultimately earn the victory. Freedom cannot reign when the request for your volition is at the point of a gun.

So how about a good protest? We can march on D.C. We can carry poignant signs. Maybe we can sign a petition. But they don’t listen. And ultimately, aren’t we just begging the federal government for their acquiescence? Why ask permission where none is required?

Another option lies in hoping those black-robed federal employees at the Supreme Court will finally hand down an opinion limiting federal power in keeping with the intent of the founders. But somehow, throughout more than 200 years of American history, they’ve voted in favor of the federal government most of the time. And even if they do get one right, that doesn’t make us safe.  Judges can even overrule their OWN opinion! Heck, they don’t even have to listen to a case, just like they did with the NDAA this year! Is this your last hope? That’s not what the founders believed. The last arbiter of constitutionality is the people of the states, not nine black robed mystics of the Constitution.

Or, you can look for hero to save you.

Maybe if you just vote in the right guys, we can take back our country. I mean, why would this bum fail you? He has all the right qualifications! He’s that no-name stooge with a D or an R next to his name.

Look: we’ve tried all of this ad nauseum. Our political strategy brings to mind the definition of insanity often attributed to Albert Einstein: doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result. We’ve protested. They ignore us. We’ve voted the bums out. We get new bums. We counted on the courts. They failed us.

What can we do?

First and foremost, stop acting like a Disney Princess!

No one is coming to save you. The hero you are looking for…..is YOU!

Americans have broken and twisted the founders’ message. Those who formed this country preached liberty, self-government, decentralization and self-sufficiency within communities. Today, the federal government wants you to be dependent on them for everything. including your safety, your health care, the products you buy, the things you grow and the decisions you make.

Time to change that message.

Rothbard  pointed the way toward the path to liberty.

“On one point there can scarcely be disagreement: a prime and necessary condition for libertarian victory (or, indeed, for victory for any social movement, from Buddhism to vegetarianism) is education: the persuasion and conversion of large numbers of people to the cause.”

We’ve seen the power of everyday people getting involved at the grassroots during the recent gun debates.

Early this year, the Obama administration called for “common sense” gun laws to prevent another mass shooting after Sandy Hook. These “common sense” laws include banning so-called “assault rifles,” creating a national registration, minimizing magazine capacity, and even restricting collectable, antiquated firearms. The pure evil that caused the deaths of children and teachers was deplorable, but it shouldn’t be used as a tool to criminalize law abiding citizens.

As a preemptive tactic, the Second Amendment Preservation Act was introduced in 31 states in an effort to hold the federal government within its constitutionally prescribed role. Eleven states passed the act through one of its legislative chambers, while four pass it through both houses. Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback signed the Second Amendment Preservation Act into law on April 16. Alaska and Missouri are expected to have their bills sent to their governors soon.

The Kansas bill had no easy journey, but with grassroots support, the bill made it all the way to the governor’s desk. He signed it without hesitation. And when U.S. Attorney General  Eric Holder threatened the state, Brownbacks’ response was simple and tactful.

The State of Kansas is in receipt of your letter in which you place Kansas on notice regarding the view of the Obama Administration concerning the state’s Second Amendment Protection Act.

The right to keep and bear arms is a right that Kansans hold dear. It is a right enshrined not only in the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, but also protected by the Kansas Bill of Rights. The people of Kansas have repeatedly and overwhelmingly reaffirmed their commitment to protecting this fundamental right. The people of Kansas are likewise committed to defending the sovereignty of the State of Kansas as guaranteed in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the United States Constitution”

In the wake of Kansas’ stand, local  action to nullify unconstitutional federal gun laws is spreading like wildfire in the state, as well as in Missouri, Colorado and even Alabama. In fact, many cities across the Union have introduced and passed local legislation. With enough resistance from cities, towns, counties, and states, federal gun control will become unenforceable. Through this effort, citizens in every locality are educating their communities and garnering support from sheriffs, representatives and neighbors.

 

Read More Here

Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comment

Federal supremacists The Economist and the Montgomery Advertiser revive the now totally worn out rhetoric of those who believe and follow the Constitution ignorant and racist.

Filed under: Fundamental Rights, bureaucracy, The American Constitution, Government, Government Overreach, Politics, Legislation and Economy News, History, Special Interests, Power Struggle, Secrecy, State Sovereignty — 1 Comment
May 16, 2013

It’s  amazing  how little the liberal  rhetoric  has  changed.  Whenever there is  an  issue  with  policy  or Federal encroachment on State  sovereignty .  They drag  out the  worn out race  card and  insults.

The  amusing  point to all this  is that they  believe  themselves  so  intelligent  and  have  such  lofty  impressions of  themselves  that  they  do not take the  time  to look at   the  people  they are insulting.  WE  are  made  up of minorities,  disillusioned   Democrats,  fed  up environmentalists, disgusted working class  Americans.  And  yet  we  are  all ignorant  rednecks  with a  racists  agenda.  LOL!!

The lines  are getting old  and the only thing  they  have  accomplished is to expose  their ignorance  of  the   Law of  The  Land.  Perhaps,  they  need a memorable  lesson to assist  in the assimilation  of  the necessary  information  to  permeate those  thick  skulls.  Not  to mention  a  bit  of  air  let  out of  those  over bloated  egos would be in  order……

~Desert Rose~

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

A Basic Civics Lesson for Pseudo-Historians

Posted by

i-will-learn-my-lessonI need a civics lesson.

This according to the keepers of acceptable opinion at two divergent publications.

Both The Economist and the Montgomery Advertiser recently ran opinion pieces skewering nullification, specifically state efforts to block unconstitutional federal gun laws in Kansas and Alabama. Interestingly, both the author of  The Economist piece and the editorial board over at the Alabama newspaper used the same strategy. They both try to make their readers believe anybody who actually views nullification as legitimate must not be too bright. Their implication? “The federal government enjoys absolute supremacy and  a bunch of dumb racist, rednecks who don’t know anything about the U.S. government want states to ignore laws they don’t happen to like.”

From the Economist: “It is remarkable that a civics lesson like this is necessary.”

The Montgomery Advertiser editorial board gets even snarkier.

“That body (the Alabama Senate) has taken a plunge into the past by revisiting and embracing the long-discredited practice of nullification, the notion — abandoned decades ago by most people who passed sixth-grade civics.”

Talk about groupthink. Federal supremacists apparently find the whole “civics lesson” theme clever. I have to admit – it does effectively create the impression that nullification supporters wander around in ignorance among the illiterate and uneducated. But the mockery would prove even more effective if the writers actually knew what in the hell they were writing about.

Here’s the problem: these amateur historians actually think the three things they leaned in their government school sixth-grade civics class make them some kind of experts. They might want to move on from pre-civics to basic civics before they try demeaning those of us who actually know the historical and the philosophical basis for nullification.

Let’s touch on a few basics, shall we?

1. Federal Supremacy – These wanna-be historians actually think the federal government stands absolutely supreme all the time, no matter what. They apparently never bothered to  put down the sixth-grade textbook and read the actual supremacy clause in the Constitution. If they did, they would find that only acts “in pursuance of” the Constitution stand supreme. Yes Virginia, federal supremacy actually has limits! Alexander Hamilton made this clear in Federalist 33.

“If a number of political societies enter into a larger political society, the laws which the latter may enact, pursuant to the powers intrusted [sic] to it by its constitution, must necessarily be supreme over those societies and the individuals of whom they are composed….But it will not follow from this doctrine that acts of the large society which are  not pursuant to its constitutional powers, but which are invasions of the residuary authorities of the smaller societies, will become the supreme law of the land. These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such. Hence we perceive that the clause which declares the supremacy of the laws of the Union, like the one we have just before considered, only declares a truth, which flows immediately and necessarily from the institution of a federal government. It will not, I presume, have escaped observation, that it expressly confines this supremacy to laws made  pursuant to the Constitution.”

2. The extent of federal power – While we’re on the subject of limits, our civics professors apparently need a reminder. The federal government can’t just do whatever it wants. It operates under strict limits. The feds can only exercise powers delegated to it in the Constitution.  James Madison described the extent of federal power in Federalist 45. He insisted that the powers delegated to the general government were “few and defined,” and those left to the states and people were “numerous and indefinite.” The ratifiers even insisted on a Bill of Rights “in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers.”

3. Who decides constitutionality? - Federal supremacists sell you a load of crap. They want you to believe the people of the states created a federal government with limited, enumerated powers, insisted on further “declaratory and restrictive clauses” – the Bill of Rights -   and then left it to that government to decide the extent of its own power. This idea not only earns them an F on their civics test, they also fail their logic test. Basically, these geniuses want the Dallas Cowboy player to referee the Dallas – New York Giants football game. How do you think that would turn out for the Giants?

Fact: the  people of the states created the federal government in the first place. Therefore, the people of the states retain the right, in the last resort, to determine the extent of the powers they gave to the government they created. So yes, Kansas can determine what limits the Second Amendment places on federal regulation of firearms. Granted, this idea may fall into the realm of advanced civics, so maybe we should let a real expert explain it. How about we call on Madison, the “Father of the Constitution?”

“The States then being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity, that there can be no tribunal above their authority, to decide in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently that as the parties to it, they must themselves decide in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition.”

Read Full Article Here

Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Comment

Sam Brownback Brushes off Eric Holder’s Opinions on 2nd Amendment Protection Act

Filed under: Fundamental Rights, Freedom, The American Constitution, Security, Legislation, Government Overreach, Politics, Legislation and Economy News, State Sovereignty — 1 Comment
May 4, 2013

Posted by

Today, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback sent a letter in response to Eric Holder’s direct threat against the state for its new law, the 2nd Amendment Protection Act.  It reads, in part:

The State of Kansas is in receipt of your letter in which you place Kansas on notice regarding the view of the Obama Administration concerning the state’s Second Amendment Protection Act.

This first sentence of Brownback’s letter is the most important. Holder’s letter took the position that the new Kansas law is unconstitutional – without question. And because of Holder’s view that he is the decider of all that is constitutional or not in this country, he threatened the state – and thus the People – of Kansas.

Brownback showed quite a bit of savvy with that sentence. He absolutely brushed off Holder by pointing out that his letter only represented “the view of the Obama Administration…”

Just because Eric Holder claims that the Kansas law is unconstitutional, doesn’t make it so. And Holder’s claim that he had no idea about “fast and furious” probably doesn’t make that so either.

Sam Brownback did a great service to the People of Kansas by reminding them that Holder is just sharing his opinion.

He also noted that the Kansas nullification law comes from the source of political power to which no American government is above – the People themselves.

“The people of Kansas have clearly expressed their sovereign will.”

Eric Holder doesn’t get to tell the People what THEIR constitution means. It’s the other way around.

Read the full statement below. Take action in support of Kansas – details here:
http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/holder/

Sam Brownback responds to Eric Holder over 2nd Amendment Protection Act by Tenth Amendment Center

Read More Here

Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comment

Bill Nullifying Acts Violating The Second Amendment Passes Missouri Senate 26-6

Filed under: Freedom, Fundamental Rights, Government Overreach, Legislation, Politics, Legislation and Economy News, Security, State Sovereignty, The American Constitution — 1 Comment
May 4, 2013

Posted by

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (May 2, 2013) – Just one day after Eric Holder sent a letter threatening Kansas if it enforces its recently passed Second Amendment Protection Act, the Missouri Senate thumbed its nose at the Attorney General and passed the Show-Me-State version of Second Amendment protection by a veto-proof majority.

HB 436 passed the Senate 26-6 on Thursday.

The House passed already passed the bill 115-41,  also a veto-proof majority. But the Senate added three amendments, and the bill must no go back to the House for concurrence.

If passed into law, HB436 would nullify virtually every federal gun control measure on the books – or planned for the future.   It reads, in part:

All federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations, whether past, present, or future, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution shall be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, shall be specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.

(2) Such federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations include, but are not limited to:
(a) The provisions of the federal Gun Control Act of 1934;
(b) The provisions of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968;

 

Read More  Here

Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comment

Texas Action Alert: 2nd Gun Control Nullification Bill Hits the House Floor on Saturday

Filed under: Freedom, Fundamental Rights, Legislation, Politics, Legislation and Economy News, Rule Of Law, State Sovereignty, The American Constitution — 2 Comments
May 4, 2013
**************************************************************************************************

Posted by

Joining HB1076 for a full Texas State House vote on SATURDAY, May 4th, is HB928. Both are based on the same principle – that no one working for government in the state of Texas will enforce federal gun control measures. 1076 focuses only on new federal gun control enacted on or after January 1, 2013. But HB928 makes no distinction – and virtually all federal gun control measures will be unenforceable within the state of Texas.

This would make a HUGE dent in any new federal effort to further restrict the right to keep and bear arms in Texas.As Judge Andrew Napolitano has said recently, such widespread noncompliance can make a federal law “nearly impossible to enforce” (video here). And in those limited situations where enforcement does occur, Rosa Parks has taught us all the power of “NO!”  Passage of HB928 would mark the beginning of the end of federal gun control measures in Texas.  HB928 also provides for a mechanism to ensure that local governments don’t decide to start helping out the Feds – state grant monies would be withdrawn from those localities that assist federal gun control.

Quite simply, the federal government absolutely cannot enforce gun control in Texas without the help of Texas.

YOUR PHONE CALLS ARE NEEDED NOW TO SUPPORT THIS BILL

Since the vote is on Saturday, make a CALL – emails won’t have impact. Call after business hours if you have to – and leave a message. Any and every phone call will help move this bill forward.

1. Call your STATE Representative and ask them to vote YES on HB928

FIND YOUR REP:
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/find-your-representative/

Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comment

Eric Holder Threatens Kansas in Letter on Gun Control Nullification Law

Filed under: bureaucracy, Corruption, Excessive Use Of Force, Freedom, Fundamental Rights, Government, Government Overreach, Hypocrisy, Indoctrination, Legislation, Politics, Politics, Legislation and Economy News, Power Struggle, Psy - Ops, Secrecy, Special Interests, State Sovereignty, The American Constitution, Unethical — 6 Comments
May 3, 2013

 

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

Posted by

On Thursday, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback received a letter from Federal Attorney General Eric Holder threatening action against the state should it enforce SB102 which Brownback signed into law last month.

The new law states, in part:

Any act, law, treaty, order, rule or regulation of the government of the United States which violates the second amendment to the constitution of the United States is null, void and unenforceable in the state of Kansas

The bill also provides for criminal penalties against federal agents who attempt to enforce specific federal laws on guns manufactured in the state of Kansas and sold within the state – as the state takes the position under the new law that the federal government does not “interstate commerce” authority over such items.

In his letter, Holder didn’t take too kindly to such a proposition.  He wrote:

“In purporting to override federal law and to criminalize the official acts of federal officers, SB102 directly conflicts with federal law and is therefore unconstitutional.”  

He continued, “Under the Supremacy Clause…Kansas may not prevent federal employees and officials from carrying out their official responsibilities.  And a state certainly may not criminalize the exercise of federal responsibilities.  Because SB102 conflicts with federal firearms laws and regulations, federal law supercedes this new statute; all provisions of federal laws and their implementing regulations therefore continue to apply.”

Let’s take Eric apart here.

1. Kansas is NOT purporting to criminalize the exercise of constitutional federal responsibilities.  On the contrary, the bill criminalizes what the state has determined is unconstitutional.   It is the position that such federal acts are indeed a violation of the Constitution.  No matter how much Eric might believe it to be otherwise, his view is obviously not universal – especially in Kansas.

2. The Supremacy Clause.  Holder takes the position that all tyrants do – that everything they do is authorized, anything to the contrary – worthless.  But Holder is wrong.  The Supremacy Clause doesn’t say that “any law in conflict with federal law” is void.  It says that only those laws “in pursuance” of the constitution are supreme.  The new Kansas legislation, again, takes the position that such federal acts are not constitutional, and therefore not supreme.

3. Historical Precedent.  The 1850 Fugitive Slave Act was a federal law that basically required all states in the north to act as slave catchers for black people claimed as property in the South.  It’s one of the most disgusting acts in American history.  A number of northern states passed laws similar to the new Kansas law, criminalizing federal agents for attempting to kidnap people in their states.    Although the feds still claimed the same kind of authority that Eric Holder has claimed today, they didn’t have the manpower to enforce.  Read more about that here.    As an aside, if Holder would like to take the position that such resistance to federal slave laws was wrong, he’s welcome to publicly state that.

Eric capped off his letter by assuring the People of Kansas that the federal government will continue to enforce all federal gun laws.  He wrote:

“I am writing to inform you that federal law enforcement agencies, including the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the United States Attorney’s Office…will continue to execute their duties to enforce all federal firearms laws and regulations.”

4.  Manpower.   That brings us to the most important fact, the federal government simply does not have the manpower to enforce all its laws already.  The new Kansas law doesn’t just deal with firearms made within the state.  It also bans all state and local agents from enforcing federal gun control measures.  (learn about the bill in detail here).  As Judge Andrew Napolitano has affirmed recently, such widespread noncompliance makes federal gun control laws “nearly impossible to enforce” (video here).  So Eric can promise to enforce these federal acts all he wants.  But if Kansas doesn’t help him, he might be able to get a 2% enforcement rate.  Or, he’ll have to pull resources from other states.

WHAT SHOULD THE RESPONSE BE? 

Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comment

Maddow Blog article, “Pointless Nullification in Kansas.”…. Apparently MSM hasn’t a clue as to what State Sovereignty means.

Filed under: Fundamental Rights, bureaucracy, Freedom, The American Constitution, Government, Security, Legislation, Government Overreach, Corruption, Hypocrisy, Complacency / Apathy, Politics, Legislation and Economy News, Freedom of Information, Special Interests, Conspiracy Theories, Power Struggle, Secrecy, Indoctrination, Unethical, Lack Of Transparency, State Sovereignty, Main Stream Media Manipulations/Lies — 1 Comment
April 27, 2013

MSNBC: Where it’s Always Opposite Day

Posted by

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 10:53 — 10.0MB)

86241I get it.  I really do.  But that doesn’t mean I’m going to ignore it.

It seems obvious to me that in order to hold a place of prominence at MSNBC you either need to be a partisan hack, or totally clueless of history.

Probably both.

So when MSNBC’s The Rachel Maddow Show producer Steve Benen shares his opinion, it’s usually just best to turn a blind eye to his idiocy.

But, sometimes it’s important to pay attention to what they say because it can actually give us insight on just what we should do for liberty.  In fact, if you believe in the right to keep and bear arms and wonder what to do to support that right, you’ll get all the advice you need in Steve’s recent Maddow Blog article, “Pointless Nullification in Kansas.”

Surprised?  Read on.  It’s true.

BACKSTORY 

This month, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback signed into law the “Second Amendment Protection Act,” a bill that reasserts the state’s role in protecting the right to keep and bear arms of those living there.   The bill reads, in part:

“Any act, law, treaty, order, rule or regulation of the government of the United States which violates the second amendment to the constitution of the United States is null, void and unenforceable in the state of Kansas.”

In conjunction with the above clause, the bill defines what is meant by “the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States,” and that it isn’t based off a decision by the Supreme Court.

The second amendment to the constitution of the United States reserves to the people, individually, the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Kansas was admitted to statehood in 1861, and the guaranty of that right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Kansas and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Kansas in 1859 and the United States in 1861.

By definition, state and local agents cannot enforce any acts or actions that are “null, void and unenforceable in the state of Kansas.”  Based off this text, the state of Kansas now cannot participate in any federal gun control measures that restrict the individual right to keep and bear arms as understood when Kansas became a state in 1861.

I happen to think such a state law is a big deal.   In Steve’s blog “report” on the issue, he quoted me as saying that this bill is “potentially the most important state level bill passed in modern American history.”

He didn’t take too kindly to that opinion, though, and spent some time talking about my “hyperbole” and the “cause for alarm” over the fact that Brownback signed this bill into law.

In fact, Steve spent quite a bit of time explaining how such an act is a waste of time.  He even said the law doesn’t make “any sense at all.”

SENSE 

So here’s some sense for our propagandist.  According to Steve, the courts, and the court only, determine what the constitution actually means.  But that flies in the face of what James Madison had to say.  You know Madison, the guy referred to as the “Father of the Constitution.”   In his own words:

“The States then being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity, that there can be no tribunal above their authority, to decide in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently that as the parties to it, they must themselves decide in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition.”

 

Read Full Article Here

Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comment

Fear and Oath-ing in D.C. – NDAA

Filed under: Conspiracy Theories, Corruption, Excessive Use Of Force, Fraud, Freedom, Fundamental Rights, Government, Government Overreach, Harassment, History, Human Rights, Hypocrisy, Indoctrination, Invasion Of Privacy I, Legislation, Politics, Legislation and Economy News, Psy - Ops, Secrecy, Security, Special Interests, Terror Plots / Suspects, The American Constitution, Unethical — Leave a comment
February 22, 2013

Published on Jan 27, 2013

The NDAA and indefinite detention.

http://www.facebook.com/AmidstTheNoise
http://www.twitter.com/AmidstTheNoise

©2013 Amidst The Noise
Please do not copy this vid and upload, just link to it. Thank you very much.

Sources:
Congressional Records
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/Legislativ…

HR1540 Statement by the President
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-o…

HR1540 (2012 NDAA signed into Law)
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-11…

HR4310 (2013 NDAA signed into Law)
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-11…

Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comment

20+ years prison for federal agents? State Nullification bill proposes kidnapping felony charges for trying to “indefinitely detain” under NDAA.

Filed under: Activism, Blow back, bureaucracy, Complacency / Apathy, Conspiracy Theories, Excessive Use Of Force, Fraud, Freedom, Fundamental Rights, Government, Government Overreach, Harassment, History, Human Rights, Hypocrisy, Indoctrination, Irrational Violence, Kidnapping / Abduction, Lack Of Transparency, Legislation, Politics, Politics, Legislation and Economy News, Power Struggle, Provocation / Incitement, Psy - Ops, Rule Of Law, Security, Self_Defense / Crime Prevention / Security, Special Interests, State Sovereignty, Surveillance, The American Constitution, Unethical, War on terror, Wars and Rumors of War — 5 Comments
February 8, 2013
  NDAA Alexa O'Brien
…

Resistance to NDAA Kidnapping Powers is our Duty

Posted by

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 12:04 — 11.1MB)

i-am-the-resistance-270Representative Brett Hildabrand of Kansas’ 17th district has introduced a bill, HB2161, to nullify the so-called “indefinite detention” powers of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). HB2161 has many co-sponsors including Representatives: Bradford, Claeys, Garber, Grosserode, Hedke, Houser, Howell, Montgomery, O’Brien, Peck, Petty, Read and Rothlisberg. This bill is currently in the Committee on Corrections and Juvenile Justice.

This bill is different from and quite a bit stronger than previous bills introduced around the country to nullify NDAA indefinite detention. It includes kidnapping charges for federal agents attempting to arrest people in Kansas without due process. This concept stands on a strong leg, because when you remove due process from the equation, “indefinite detention” is little more than government-sanctioned kidnapping.

The bill states, in part: “A person who violates the provisions of this section may also be prosecuted for, convicted of, and punished for kidnapping or aggravated kidnapping, K.S.A. 2012 Supp. 21-5408, and amendments thereto.”

Violators of this bill could be subject to the following criminal penalties, if convicted of kidnapping:

Kidnapping is a severity level 3 felony with a potential of 8 years in prison. Aggravated kidnapping is a severity level l felony with a prison sentence of over 20 years being possible. Both of these felonies are subject to a fine “to not exceed $300,000″. The exact imprisonment time is determined by a variety of variables and guided by a complex grid and attorneys.

“Indefinite detainers” could also be charged with a misdemeanor charge of “denial of due process” which could include “a definite term of confinement in the county jail which shall be fixed by the court and shall not exceed one year” and “a sum not exceeding $2,500.”

This bill also states, “the provisions of this act shall not apply to the court martial of any member of the United States military pursuant to the uniform code of military justice, 10 U.S.C. Chapter 47.”

“When I first heard that the federal government was considering indefinite detention, I was horrified, but I was unaware of how to fight it at the state level. After reading about anti-NDAA legislation introduced in Texas, I knew we needed to attempt the same thing in Kansas,” said Representative Hildabrand.

He continued, “The kidnapping portion was added to convey the seriousness of the offense. If a non-government official were to take someone against their will and hold them without access to the outside world, we would consider that a kidnapping. If a government official does the same thing, without granting access to a lawyer or the courts, I see no difference.”

Representative Hildabrand’s bill will not release jurisdiction from the state of Kansas to the military. “I believe that a person either supports the whole Constitution, in every circumstance or they do not support it at all. Therefore, when any one is denied due process, I consider it an assault on the Constitution. I feel that is a key concept to convey to those serving in law enforcement and the military. If a bill violates the Constitution, it has no authority. The often misquoted Supremacy Clause states “laws pursuant to the Constitution.” The key being that it is pursuant to the Constitution to have validity.”

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT……

 

Read Full Article Here

Related articles
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comment
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 827 other followers