Oregon Live displays their liberal bias right in the first sentence.
As in many blue states, once you get out of the progressive-infested metropolitan cities you’ll find many Second Amendment supporters.
From Oregon Live: The so-called “Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance” declares that those living in counties that approve it have the right to own semi-automatic weapons and high-capacity magazines, regardless of state or federal law. The measure appeared on the ballot in Baker, Columbia, Douglas, Jackson, Klamath, Lake, Lincoln, Linn, Umatilla and Union counties.
The ordinance also empowers sheriffs in those counties to determine if state and federal gun laws are constitutional and whether to prohibit local resources from being used to enforce them.
Partial returns show that the measure passed in all but Jackson and Lincoln counties.
The effort was organized by an Oregon gun rights group called the Committee for the Preservation of the Second Amendment. But it drew broad support among members of two militia groups, the Three Percenters and Oath Keepers, who campaigned and organized for the ordinance across the state.
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
Government Declares war on the American People with the NDAA.
OathKeepers founder Stewart Rhodes addressed the sheriffs and their guests at the Monday evening banquet. (http://www.OathKeepers.org) Rhodes reviewed the history of colonial era tyranny in America and how history is repeating itself in our lifetimes as evidenced by the Bush Administration’s War Powers Act and now the Obama Administration’s NDAA Indefinite Detention provisions recently passed in both houses and signed into law January 1, 2012.
On January 30-31, 2012 over 100 county sheriffs and peace officers, from over 30 states, united to uphold their oaths of office, protect citizen liberty, and stop state and federal tyranny. Inspired and led by the example of former Graham County Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack, the meeting, which was held in Las Vegas, was funded by the generous donations of thousands of Americans from all fifty states, as well as the support of freedom loving sponsors.
Something extraordinary and historic took place mere days ago in Las Vegas, Nevada.
For three days, from January 29 and 31, 2012, in the Tuscany Hotel & Casino, more than a hundred county sheriffs from across the United States of America met in a first annual Constitutional Sheriffs Convention.
This is what Wikipedia says about U.S. sheriffs:
“In the United States, a sheriff is a county official and is typically the top law enforcement officer of a county. Historically, the sheriff was also commander of the militia in that county. Distinctive to law enforcement in the United States, sheriffs are usually elected. The political election of a person to serve as a police leader is an almost uniquely American tradition.”
The first Constitutional Sheriffs Convention is the brainchild of the County Sheriff Project of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA). Here’s a video describing the CSPOA:
The convention’s objective is two-fold:
To increase the understanding and awareness for all sheriffs and peace officers regarding the true power of our constitutional authority and duty to serve and protect the people for whom we work;
To unite in a concerted effort to uphold and defend the United States Constitution.
Given the importance of the convention, it is curious to say the least that the media have chosen to totally ignore it. Curious, too, is the fact that I scoured the Internet yesterday but could find scant news on the convention, much less a report — not even on the website of the County Sheriff Project.
But I did find an audio of a 1.5 hr Revolution Radio broadcast on the convention, interviewing several sheriffs who attended the conference, as well as other attendees, mainly Stewart Rhodes, founder of Oath Keepers. To listen to the audio, click here. I listened to all 93 minutes of the Revolution Radio broadcast. Here are my notes and summary:
Stewart Rhodes said the sheriffs “are working on a series of resolutions” at the convention, among which is a “Resolution of the Sheriff Against NDAA 2012“, drafted by Rhodes and constitutional attorney Richard Fry, for the sheriffs to sign. NDAA is the notorious National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 which effectively nullifies the Bill of Rights by making it lawful for the U.S. President and the military to arrest and detain U.S. citizens without charge or trial. From the Oath Keepers’ website, it appears the sheriffs at the convention did not sign the Resolution as a collective body. Rhodes is asking the sheriffs to sign the Resolution as individual sheriffs.
Rhodes opined that political party labels don’t mean much anymore, referring in particular to how the NDAA is “a bipartisan assault on our civil liberties,” which was spearheaded by Republican John McCain and Democrat Carl Levin.
Rhodes emphasized that a second American Revolution has already taken place under our noses and our Constitution’s been overthrown. “We have had people who are determined to destroy our Constitutional Republic to create a tyranny.” But this revolution is not fully recognized by the American people, who must be informed and educated. He calls for Americans, especially the military and the police, to emulate the “peaceful revolution of 1800” when Thomas Jefferson and James Madison rose up against the Anti-Sedition Act to sweep federal oath-breakers out of office.
Rhodes was followed by several sheriffs, who spoke one by one. They included:
1. Sheriff Dean Wilson of Del Norte County in Northern California (see a YouTube video of him here)
Sheriff Dean Wilson
2. Sheriff John Cooke of Weld County, Colorado. (Here’s a video of Cooke giving the keynote address at the Union Colony Marines’ 2011 Ball).
3. A sheriff identified as from Northern California’s Siskiyou County. I looked it up, and he should be Sheriff Jon Lopey.
Instead of presenting what each sheriff said, I’ve grouped what they said under categories of issues. Words between quotation marks are straight-forward quotes of the speaker. How many sheriffs attended convention:
120 to 140 sheriffs from all across America. Many (“a great showing”) from California and the western states, but also from Texas, Florida and the eastern seaboard. Some sheriffs also brought their second-in-charge to the convention. A list of the names of the sheriffs who were at the convention will be published. What they did:
There was a Sheriffs Panel in which 8 sheriffs spoke.
There were presentations by various speakers who “spoke powerfully” on Agenda 21 and the Bill of Rights. Even though some of the sheriffs didn’t know about some of the issues, “they are listening” and “have a humility about them.” “They really want to know and are sticking their necks out by coming here.”
What the sheriffs got out of the conference:
1. A renewed knowledge and understanding of the U.S. Constitution and “how it’s related to county sheriffs who are sworn to defend and protect the Constitution.”
2. “A good idea and understanding of what’s been going on” in the sheriff’s own county and in other counties. Sheriff Wilson’s county, as an example, is on the border between Northern California and Oregon. 74% of the county is federal and state land. The county’s agriculture and timber industry are under “attack” by the federal government’s Interior Department and BLM (Bureau of Land Management). Sheriff Cooke described how the federal government wanted to burn some grassland in his county which was adjacent to farmers’ and ranchers’ property. So he issued a warning to the feds not to burn, which was ignored. But the county stood firm — and the federal government backed down and decided not to burn. Sheriff Cooke also said that the federal government tells the sheriffs how to run their jails, although Washington D.C. has no authority over this.
3. The realization that many of the problems experienced by separate counties are common to all sheriffs across the nation, “all part of a larger picture.” Sheriff Cooke calls the conference “awesome”: “We sheriffs tend to live on an island, but the conference makes us realize we have common problems.” Those common problems are the federal government’s over-regulation; “overreach” of its authority on matters such as forest land in Northern California; and “infringement against the Constitutional rights of our citizens.” The sheriffs “heard absolute horror stories on what’s going on from one coast to the other — especially in Connecticut and Delaware.”
4. Not only are these problems common to the counties of all the states, these issues also “affect all the citizens of America.” “The problems we’re facing are universal.”
5. One of those issues that affect all the citizens is the NDAA. The sheriffs at the convention learnt how the NDAA “blatantly strips authority from sheriffs into the hands of the military and the President” as well as stripping “the rights from citizens.”
6. Learning about the limits of the sheriffs’ own authority, even in “little things.” Sheriff Cooke gave an example of a Sheriff Akita who said he “did away with DUI checkpoints because they are unconstitutional” and sheriffs “shouldn’t tolerate it.” Why? Because “it is not right to stop people when they haven’t done anything wrong.” What is needed:
The sheriffs said an organization “like this” (i.e., the convention) is needed “on a national level” to help county sheriffs across America. “The time has come for a nationally recognized organization” of America’s county sheriffs. In the meantime, there are already plans for Northern California’s sheriffs to meet again, scheduled for 2 p.m., Saturday, February 25, 2012. There are also plans for other events in Northern California to discuss land management, land use, water issues, the declining timber industry (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recently issued yet another spotted owl protection), and threats against mining, agriculture, and recreational use. California’s State Sheriffs Association has formed a policy committee to deal with common problems, especially those in Northern California. What most impressed the sheriffs:
1. Sheriff Hagwood: It’s an “eye opener” that the same issues are being dealt with across the country. That’s “disturbing”. At the same time, it’s “good to know that distinguished sheriffs are taking steps to safeguard our Constitution.” They are willing “to stand up, stand tall, to serve the People and stand for the Constitution.”
2. They now feel emboldened: Sheriff Wilson: “Just having an organization like this and meeting sheriffs from across America who are like-minded, emboldens you to take steps that are necessary to stand up for the rights promised in the Constitution, because now you know other sheriffs have his back” and will “stand beside me.” Cooke: “There’s strength in numbers, not fighting it alone.” What the sheriffs promise:
“The U.S. Constitution was founded by devout Christian men and they got it right. Now it’s up to us — sheriffs and peace officers — to keep it.”
“The problems we’re facing are universal. But sheriffs bound together have real strength to push back.”
“Sheriffs all over are going to fight back.” The number of sheriffs who will attend next year’s convention will probably be double the number as this year. Sheriffs are learning “how to fight back with an organization like this.”
“The only thing I’ve ever sworn to is my oath of office and my marriage vows. When sheriffs take a leadership role, the people will also be inspired. We realize that our freedoms are being threatened” on “county, state, and national” levels. “We must energize and educate citizens and officials.”
“Sheriffs are beginning to recognize the responsibility they have to citizens is much larger than upholding the law. We now appreciate the gravity” of the situation. We recognize our larger responsibility is “to protect the liberties [that are] absolutely essential to our way of life.”
The 2012 election is “make or break”. We must realize that “the enemy is within, not without.” We must “demand that the federal government behave.”
“It won’t be easy but we’ll do it.”
That’s when my vision got blurred by the tears streaming down my face….
God bless the county sheriffs who attended this convention. May their numbers multiply.
Pray for our sheriffs! Pray for America! ~Eowyn
In an article for PoliticalVelcraft.org, Jan. 19, 2012, Volubrjotr writes that the senators and representatives who voted “Aye” on December 15th, 2011 (ironically, the Bill of Rights Day), for the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA) have attempted to grant powers which cannot be granted, which violate both the spirit and the letter of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.
Rising on the House floor to oppose the bill based on the military detention provisions for Americans, Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif) said before the House vote:
“Today, we who have sworn fealty to that Constitution sit to consider a bill that affirms a power contained in no law and that has the full potential to crack the very foundation of American liberty.”
Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders said in opposing the final NDAA:
”This bill also contains misguided provisions that in the name of fighting terrorism essentially authorize the indefinite imprisonment of American citizens without charges.”
And in a New York Times op-ed piece, retired four-star U.S. Marine generals Charles Krulak and Joseph Hoar said that “Due process would be a thing of the past.”
Moving quickly on Christmas Day after the US Senate voted 86–14 to pass the National Defense Authorization Act of 2011 (NDAA) which according to the American Civil Liberties Union allows for the indefinite military detention of American citizens without charge or trial, Montanans announced the launch of recall campaigns against Senators Max Baucus and Jonathan Tester, who voted for the bill.
Montana is one of nine states with provisions that say that the right of recall extends to recalling members of its federal congressional delegation, pursuant to Montana Code 2-16-603, on the grounds of physical or mental lack of fitness, incompetence, violation of oath of office, official misconduct, or conviction of certain felony offenses.
Section 2 of Montana Code 2-16-603 reads: “(2) A public officer holding an elective office may be recalled by the qualified electors entitled to vote for the elective officer’s successor.”
The website Ballotpedia.org cites eight other states which allow for the recall of elected federal officials: Arizona, Colorado, Louisiana, Michigan, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, and Wisconsin. New Jersey’s federal recall law was struck down when a NJ state judge ruled that “the federal Constitution does not allow states the power to recall U.S. senators,” despite the fact the Constitution explicitly allows, by not disallowing (“prohibited” in the Tenth Amendment,) the states the power to recall US senators and congressmen:
“The powers not…prohibited…are reserved to the States…or to the people.” – Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
The draft of Montana’s recall petition says:
The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees all U.S citizens: “a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed…”
Montana residents William Crain and Stewart Rhodes are spearheading the drive. Mr. Crain is an artist. Mr. Rhodes is an attorney, Yale Law School graduate, and the national president of the organization Oath Keepers, a group of military and law enforcement officers, both former and active duty, who vow to uphold their Oath to the US Constitution and to disobey illegal orders which constitute attacks on their fellow citizens.
“These politicians from both parties betrayed our trust, and violated the oath they took to defend the Constitution. It’s not about the left or right, it’s about our Bill of Rights. Without the Bill of Rights, there is no America. It is the Crown Jewel of our Constitution, and the high-water mark of Western Civilization.”
Eighteen states at present have recall laws, ten states’ recall laws do not apply to federal officials. For these and other states to recall federal officials, state legislatures would have to first pass or amend such laws.
H/t our beloved Tina. ~Eowyn
"Oath Keepers" couple reunited with their baby girl
Bob Unruh of World Net Daily reports on October 14, 2010 that the newborn baby girl snatched from her parents a week ago was returned. [See “Govt Snatched Baby From ‘Militia’ Couple“]
When New Hampshire’s Family Child Services took the baby, the father, Johnathon Irish, was ordered to stand with his hands behind his back and was frisked while social workers took away his child.
In the affidavit provided by the state, one of the reasons given was that Irish is a member of an alleged militia group, Oath Keepers. The problem is Oath Keepers is a peaceful organization of patriots, not a militia, and even if it were, membership in a militia is not criminal, but a 2nd Amendment Constitutional right.
Along with the return of the baby, the accusations against Irish have also been dropped, nor are there future court dates scheduled in the case.
The founder and president of Oath Keepers, Stewart Rhodes, did send a letter of protest to New Hampshire state officials, which says:
“This poorly conducted investigation used unsubstantiated and unsupported information regarding our organization. A journey to our website, and a reading of our bylaws, could have easily confirmed what we are and are not. We are an association of currently serving and retired police, military, and emergency personnel. We are not a militia. Our goal is simply to educate all current service personnel on their obligations under the law and in particular our Constitution.”
Oath Keepers’ members promise not to obey any order “to disarm the American people,” conduct warrantless searches, “detain American citizens as ‘unlawful enemy combatants,'” work to impose martial law, invade or subjugate any state, blockade American cities, put Americans in detention camps or “make war against our own people.”
Rhodes himself was a U.S. Army paratrooper injured in an parachuting accident, a former firearms instructor and a former member of U.S. Rep. Ron Paul’s Washington staff. The organization’s board of directors includes Army veteran Sgt. Dave Freeman, Army veteran Capt. Chauncey Normandin, Navy veteran Capt. Gregory Gooch, Celia S. Hyde of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, all retired. Others are Marines, members of the Air Force, local law enforcement and even of the U.S. Army Special Forces.
Rhodes wrote on his website that the citation of his organization, Oath Keepers, as a factor in removing the baby from her parents sends a seriously troubling message:
“Talk about chilling speech! If this is allowed to continue, it will chill the speech of not just Mr. Irish, but all Oath Keepers and it will serve as the camel [nose] under the tent for other associations being considered too risky for parents to dare. ‘Don’t you dare associate with such and such group, or you could be on ‘the list’ and then child protective services might come take your kids.'”
Read the rest of the WND article HERE.
Happily, in this case the state backed down, due in no small part to the publicity generated by bloggers and the resultant public outrage. Thomas Jefferson was right when he wrote in his letter to Edward Carrington, 1787:
“If once they [the people] become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress, and Assemblies, Judges, and Governors, shall all become wolves.”
What is happening to America? This is so shocking, I’m still shaking my head. Oath Keepers (OK) is a voluntary, non-partisan, and non-violent association of currently serving military, reserves, National Guard, veterans, Peace Officers, and Fire Fighters. OK members have sworn an Oath to the United States Constitution — “to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us God.” Oath Keepers is NOT a militia, and even if it were, there’s nothing wrong with it. On the contrary, free Americans forming voluntary militia groups is our Constitutional right.
In this video, a young couple claims that their newborn baby girl was taken from the hospital by New Hampshire’s Family Child Services because of the couple’s “association with the militia group, Oath Keepers.”
A newborn baby was ripped from its mother’s arms by officials from the New Hampshire Division of Family Child Services accompanied by police last night after authorities cited the parents’ association with the Oath Keepers organization as one of the primary reasons for the snatch, heralding a shocking new level of persecution where Americans’ political beliefs are now being used by the state to kidnap children.
What was supposed to be one of the most joyous occasions of their lives turned into a nightmare for John Irish and Stephanie Janvrin, after they were told by The Director of Security and the Head Nurse at Concord Hospital that their baby would be taken to be checked by the hospital pediatrician.
“They lied to us – they got us to allow them to take our daughter under false pretenses, we didn’t even have a choice,” said Irish.
When Irish tried to stop his daughter being taken, the baby was immediately wheeled out in a bassinet, after which Irish saw three men in suits accompanied by uniformed police officers as well as detectives and social workers. who proceeded to try to search Irish.
“They forced me to stand up, held my hands behind my back and patted me down,” said Irish, before police told him they were taking the baby. “My fiancé didn’t even get any time to bond with the baby – they came in and stole our child,” said Irish. The parents were given a couple of minutes with their daughter before being forced by police to leave the hospital. Irish was subsequently told that a “security officer” would follow his every move. The affidavit in support of the decision to take the child, which has been verified by Oath Keepers, states, “The Division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the Oath Keepers,” confirming that political beliefs were, amongst other reasons, one of the primary factors behind the snatching of the baby. Even if the additional reasons cited in the affidavit, which are unproven at this time, could be considered sufficient reason for the state to take the baby, the fact that political affiliations were even mentioned is a frightening indictment of how far the government’s war on Americans who dissent against authority has advanced.
“Regardless of the other allegations, it is utterly unconstitutional for government agencies to list Mr. Irish’s association with Oath Keepers in an affidavit in support of a child abuse order to remove his daughter from his custody.” writes Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes. “Talk about chilling speech! If this is allowed to continue, it will chill the speech of not just Mr. Irish, but all Oath Keepers and it will serve as the camel under the tent for other associations being considered too risky for parents to dare. Thus, it serves to chill the speech of all of us, in any group we belong to that ‘officials’ may not approve of. Don’t you dare associate with such and such group, or you could be on ‘the list’ and then child protective services might come take your kids.” The parents were not even full members of the Oath Keepers organization, they were merely on a discussion list related to the group. This makes the case even more shocking – you don’t even have to be directly associated with a group that the government deems to be a “militia” to have your baby stolen – you merely have to be involved in online discussions of issues relating to the constitution and freedom in America. Irish’s own web page clearly states that he supports a “NON-violent, law abiding gathering of like minded Patriots,” and that he is “AGAINST ANY acts of violence or illegal activity.” “The Sons of Liberty Riders does not endorse or tolerate radical, extreme, violent or racial postings,” states the website.
The Oath Keepers organization is not a “militia,” as the affidavit claims, it is merely a loose network of current and former military and law enforcement professionals who have sworn not to obey unconstitutional orders such as gun confiscation, warrantless searches and mass internment of Americans. The group is committed to non-violence.
If this case is allowed to stand it opens up a hellish future for free speech and political discourse in America. If parents live in fear of having their children stolen by the state because they criticize the government, the United States can rank itself amongst the worst dictatorships in history who invoked the threat of taking people’s children if they spoke out against tyranny.
Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes has announced that a legal defense fund will be created to help Irish, and that the organization, “will actively pursue aggressive legal remedy and redress.”
“We will assist in locating competent local legal counsel in New Hampshire and additional expert legal counsel from around the country in First Amendment and child custody law,” wrote Stewart on the Oath Keepers website.
“There can be no freedom of speech, no freedom of association, no freedom to even open your mouth and “speak truth to power,” no freedom AT ALL, if your children can be black bagged and stolen from you because of your political speech and associations — because you simply dare to express your love of country, and dare to express your solidarity and fellowship with other citizens and with active duty and retired military and police who simply pledge to honor their oath and obey the Constitution. It was to prevent just such outrageous content based persecution of political dissidents that our First Amendment was written.”
UPDATE : 10/07/2010 10.53PM PST — We have confirmed that the affidavit in support of the order to take the child from her parents states, along with a long list of other assertions against both parents, that “The Division became aware and confirmed that Mr. Irish associated with a militia known as the Oath Keepers.” Yes, there are other, very serious allegations. Out of respect for the privacy of the parents, we will not publish the affidavit. We will leave that to Mr. Irish. But please do remember that allegations do not equal facts — they are merely allegations (and in my experience as a criminal defense lawyer in small town Montana I saw many allegations that proved to be false).
But an even more fundamental point is that regardless of the other allegations, it is utterly unconstitutional for government agencies to list Mr. Irish’s association with Oath Keepers in an affidavit in support of a child abuse order to remove his daughter from his custody. Talk about chilling speech! If this is allowed to continue, it will chill the speech of not just Mr. Irish, but all Oath Keepers and it will serve as the camel under the tent for other associations being considered too risky for parents to dare. Thus, it serves to chill the speech of all of us, in any group we belong to that “officials” may not approve of. Don’t you dare associate with such and such group, or you could be on “the list” and then child protective services might come take your kids. Note that there is no allegation that Oath Keepers is a criminal organization or that Mr. Irish, in the context of his association with Oath Keepers, is committing any crime. We are not advocating or planning imminent violence, which is the established line where free speech ends and criminal behavior begins (See Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S.444 (1969), which, as Wikipedia notes, “held that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless it is directed to inciting and likely to incite imminent lawless action. In particular, it overruled Ohio’s criminal syndicalism statute, because that statute broadly prohibited the mere advocacy of violence.” We don’t even advocate that the current serving use violence of any kind, let alone imminent violence. We ask them to merely stand down. Neither is Oath Keepers a militia, for that matter. However, EVEN IF WE WERE, that also would not be a valid reason to take someone’s child away. PRIVATE MILITIAS, JUST LIKE OTHER VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS, ARE NOT ILLEGAL, and it is not a crime to associate with them. To the contrary, we have an absolute right, won by the blood of patriots, and protected by our First Amendment, to freely associate with each other as we damn well please so long as we are not advocating or planning imminent violence or directly harming our children (and no, teaching them “thought crime” like “All men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,” or that those who swear an oath should keep it, does not count — at least not yet). A parent associating with a militia is not engaged in child endangerment and is not evidence of child endangerment (despite the shrill screeching of people such as Mark Potock of the SPLC, who desperately wants it to be so). Just recently a Time Magazine article described how the reporter visited the happy home of a militia member and his family — and those kids are still at home, where they belong, as is the case with many th0usands of children across this country who have parents who “associate” with private militias and all manner of other non-criminal groups. You had damn well better defend the rights of those parents to freely associate in their militias and keep their kids while doing so. You can bet that if you let such an association be listed as grounds for taking children from their parents that it won’t only be militia folks who have their rights violated. Homeschoolers, evangelical Christians, gun owners, etc. will also be on the hit list. Just wait.
Here’s an excerpt from the affidavit (h/t Infowars): Contact info for New Hampshire Dept of Health and Human Services:
Telephone (603) 271-4711
Toll Free Number (800) 852-3345
Fax Number (603) 271-4729
Email:Click here to email. Contact info for Concord Hospital:
Telephone (603) 225-2711
Toll Free Instate: (800) 327-0464
Email: Click here to email.
I hope the baby’s parents sue New Hampshire’s Family Child Services until they cry bankruptcy.
H/t beloved fellows May, FS, andBarb. ~Eowyn