Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Kevin Miller and KIDO radio are a blessing to Idaho!

Dear Kevin and KIDO,
You have graciously allowed me to continue to be a daily caller on the morning show for over a year now and i am more thankful than you know.

What began as a means of therapy for myself to try to awaken others to the dire circumstances we face in this country has expanded into something i had never dreamed.

Over time your listeners have began contacting me. Many that just comment and thank us for what we say and do, to know that others agree and to now calling upon me either on the phone, email, my website or twitter asking me to help them with something because they have no where to turn.

These calls are a tremendous blessing to me because i see that people see my intentions and my desire to help but also apparently are a blessing to those that contact me to know someone cares enough for them to listen and to take action where i can.

My post here is to say thank you and to show you the benefits of your good work and trust in me in allowing us to reach out to our community in such a unique way. It is through you that i hope that we may continue to effect real positive change in our community to bring people a ray of hope when things seem so lost!

To bring my point home, here is an email i received today that began from one of your listeners contacting me!

Thank you Kevin and thank you KIDO radio! May we renew a spirit if love, hope, truth and trust back into our communities!

Tom munds

Here is the email:

Thank you, Thank you, Thank YOU!!! so much for having my boys back!! You are a scholar and a gentleman!
I am so very grateful to you and your friends for help! God is so good! I have renewed faith and I am so happy for your help Tom!!

Heres another!

Hello Tom,

I listen to you quite often on KIDO. You, Tony and Kevin Miller are leading this fight for our rights by getting the TRUTH out for the public to hear. If only the public would take more action!

I am sick and tired of spineless leaders who fall for everything because they will stand for nothing. I'm disgusted with RINOs. And I can just feel the liberal cancer spreading over this country and am so frustrated that the American people won't provide the "cure" with their voice and their vote.

There's my rant for the morning......
Take care and thanks for what you do!

Saturday, February 23, 2013

Constitution security force!

February 19, 2013 by Tim Brown
Constitutional Security Force Develops As Result of Police Chief’s Efforts

I wrote last week about Police Chief Mark Kessler’s call to citizens of Gilberton Borough, Pennsylvania to join him and his police department in putting together a “reserve force” that could be called upon to help defend the city in the event of a foreign invasion or more precisely an invasion of the Federal government to confiscate firearms. Well, the response by readers and police departments across the country has been nothing short of incredible and as a result Kessler has expanded his small town “reserve force” to now include states nationwide. He is now referring to the movement as a “Constitutional Security Force.”
I spoke with Chief Kessler a day or so after I released the article and he said the encouragement and response was tremendous. In fact, he indicated to me at that time that he was unprepared for the desire of other police departments to implement something similar in their areas, but he welcomed the opportunity to lead in that endeavor.
Several people wrote to Chief Kessler and several people even wrote to me expressing their support of such a movement and wondered how they might become involved.
As a result, Kessler posted the following about how others can become involved and now anyone, not matter their location, can become part of the Constitutional Security Force. Kessler writes:
I plan on taking the CONSTITUTIONAL SECURITY FORCE nationwide with chapters all over the country; there is much work to be done to achieve this historic feat. We are currently looking for monetary donations, equipment donations, so we can offer Firearms Training /certification Classes, First Aid Classes, Recon Courses, Basic Survival Courses, Sniper Course, Tactical Close Combat Firearms Training, and Much More!
As I stated in the previous article, this is not a militia, but a reserve force that can be called upon to assist police departments at certain times.
Here’s the list of requirements to join.
So far, in just one week his small “reserve force” has grown to become a nationwide project, headquartered in Pennsylvania. As of February 16, 2013, Chief Kessler had five active chapters in Indiana, West Virginia, Texas, South Carolina, and Kentucky!
Four more chapters have come on board with contact information since then. New York, Florida, New Jersey, and Missouri all now have contact information for their respective states!
What an amazing thing to witness in these desperate times as people begin to stand up for freedom! To see what one person stepping forward to do the right thing and how it is impacting others around the country is truly incredible. If you wish to support the efforts of Chief Kessler and the Constitutional Security Force, you can go here to help.
Chief Kessler will also be interviewed about these developments on Arising Republic Radio this Friday, February 22, 2013 at 9pm EST.

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/02/constitutional-security-force-develops-as-result-of-police-chiefs-efforts/#ixzz2LOt9GBrS

Saturday, February 16, 2013

Is fighting to keep your guns constitutional?

If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight?

This man has put down on paper what many people are thinking but are too cautious to express openly.

I hope it never comes to what he is advocating but I can certainly see where the possibility exists.

God help us all if it ever does happen.

PS : Here is what Wikipedia has to say about the author:
Dean Garrison (born 1955) is a contemporary American author and crime fiction novelist. He was born in Michigan , grew up in the Indiana , Illinois , and Texas , and received his B.A. degree from Ferris State University in Big Rapids, Michigan . Garrison is a Crime Scene Technician in West Michigan . His research in the fields of crime scene investigation and Shooting Reconstruction are widely published in forensic journals under the name "D.H. Garrison, Jr."

Subject: If They Come for Your Guns, Do You Have a Responsibility to Fight?

Posted on January 3, 2013 by Dean Garrison

I feel a tremendous responsibility to write this article though I am a little apprehensive. Thinking about the possibility of rising up against our own government is a frightening thing for many of us. I am not Johnny Rambo and I will be the first to admit that I do not want to die. The reason I feel compelled to write this, however, is simply because I don’t think the average American is equipped with the facts. I feel that a lot of American citizens feel like they have no choice but to surrender their guns if the government comes for them. I blame traditional media sources for this mass brainwash and I carry the responsibility of all small independent bloggers to tell the truth. So my focus today is to lay out your constitutional rights as an American, and let you decide what to do with those rights.
About a month ago I let the “democracy” word slip in a discussion with a fellow blogger. I know better. Americans have been conditioned to use this term. It’s not an accurate term and it never has been a correct term to describe our form of government. The truth is that the United States of America is a constitutional republic. This is similar to a democracy because our representatives are selected by democratic elections, but ultimately our representatives are required to work within the framework of our constitution. In other words, even if 90% of Americans want something that goes against our founding principles, they have no right to call for a violation of constitutional rights.

If you are religious you might choose to think of it this way… Say that members of your congregation decide that mass fornication is a good thing. Do they have the right to change the teachings of your God? The truth is the truth. It doesn’t matter how many people try to stray from it. Did I just compare our founders to God? In a way I did, but please note that I am not trying to insult anyone. For the purpose of the American Government our constitution and founders who wrote it are much like God is to believers. It is the law. It is indisputable.

Our founders did not want a “democracy” for they feared a true democracy was just as dangerous as a monarchy. The founders were highly educated people who were experienced in defending themselves against tyranny. They understood that the constitution could protect the people by limiting the power of anyone to work outside of it much better than a pure system of popularity. A system of checks and balances was set up to help limit corruption of government and also the potential for an “immoral majority” developing within the American People. We have forgotten in this country that we are ultimately ruled by a constitution.

Why is a democracy potentially just as dangerous as a monarchy? Let’s look at something that Benjamin Franklin said because it answers that question more fully and succinctly than I can.

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin

Even 230+ years ago our founders were perceptive enough to realize that democracy was a dangerous form of government. How so? Because the citizens of a country can become just as corrupt as any government. We have seen evidence of this throughout history. Ask Native Americans and African-Americans if this population can become corrupt.

I think in 2012 we are seeing evidence of what Franklin was trying to tell us. Just because a majority of people may support certain ideas it does not mean that those ideas are just. In simple terms, just because most Americans love our president and voted for him, it does not mean that he has the power to go against our constitutional rights.

Next I’d like to review the text of the second amendment. It is very clear. This is the law of this land. So when Senator Feinstein or President Obama talk about taking your guns, you need to think about something. Are they honoring their sworn oath to uphold the constitution?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State , the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
This is a pretty clear statement. The fact is that it took 232 years for the Supreme Court to even rule on this amendment because it has never been successfully challenged. In 2008 a case of Columbia v. Heller the Supreme Court ruled that a handgun ban in Washington D.C. was unconstitutional. One also has to take this into consideration. The Supreme Court supports your right to own guns. If you want to research this decision further you can start here.

For those who try to debate the spirit of the 2nd amendment, they are truly no different from people who will try to take Biblical quotes out of context to try to support their immoral decisions. The founders were very clear on the intent of the 2nd amendment. Let me share a few quick quotes here:

The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. -Thomas Jefferson

Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good. -George Washington

The Constitution shall never be construed….to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. -Samuel Adams

I could find hundreds of quotes like these. This country was built on the right to bear arms. It was built on the rights of an individual to bear arms, regardless of what his government or neighbor happened to think. This is crystal clear. Ironically the people who voice their opinions against this right have their free speech protected by your guns. Without guns in this country, all other amendments become null and void, simply because “We the People” will lose our power of enforcement.

We need to keep this in mind as our “representatives” try to push gun bans. I don’t care if 99% of people are in support of gun bans (which is far from the case), it is a violation of our constitutional rights, plain and simple.

A constitutional republic protects the rights of the individual even when their ideas are very much in the minority. If I were the only person in America who believed in the 2nd amendment, I would still be within my rights to call upon it. You would all think I was insane and possibly celebrate if I was gunned down, but in the end I would be the only true American among us.

Our framers were very clear on this. If my government comes to take my guns, they are violating one of my constitutional rights that is covered by the 2nd amendment.

It is not my right, at that point, but my responsibility to respond in the name of liberty. What I am telling you is something that many are trying to soft sell, and many others have tried to avoid putting into print, but I am going to say it. The time for speaking in code is over.

If they come for our guns then it is our constitutional right to put them six feet under. You have the right to kill any representative of this government who tries to tread on your liberty. I am thinking about self-defense and not talking about inciting a revolution. Re-read Jefferson ’s quote. He talks about a “last resort.” I am not trying to start a Revolt, I am talking about self-defense. If the day for Revolution comes, when no peaceful options exist, we may have to talk about that as well. None of us wants to think about that, but please understand that a majority cannot take away your rights as an American citizen. Only you can choose to give up your rights.

Congress could pass gun ban legislation by a 90%+ margin and it just would not matter. I think some people are very unclear on this. This is the reason we have a Supreme Court, and though I do not doubt that the Supreme Court can also become corrupt, in 2008 they got it right. They supported the constitution. It does not matter what the majority supports because America is not a democracy. A constitutional republic protects the rights of every single citizen, no matter what their “elected servants” say. A majority in America only matters when the constitution is not in play.

I just wrote what every believer in the constitution wants to say, and what every constitutional blogger needs to write. The truth of the matter is that this type of speech is viewed as dangerous and radical or subversive, and it could gain me a world of trouble that I do not want. It is also the truth. To make myself clear I will tell you again. If they come for your guns it is your right to use those guns against them and to kill them. You are protected by our constitution.

Most of the articles I am reading on the subject are trying to give you clues without just coming out and saying it. I understand that because certain things in this country will get you on a list that you don’t want to be on. I may well be on that list. This blog is small and growing so I may not be there yet, but I have dreams. I also have my own list of subversives and anyone who attempts to deny my constitutional rights is on that list.

I am not the “subversive” here, it is the political representatives who are threatening to take away my inalienable rights. If they come to take my guns and I leave a few of them wounded or dead, and I somehow survive, I have zero doubt that I will spend a long time in prison and may face an execution. But I would much rather be a political prisoner than a slave.

If I go down fighting then I was not fighting to harm these human beings. I was simply defending my liberty and yours. It is self-defense and it is what our country was built on. We won our freedom in self-defense. We would not be ruled by a tyrannical government in the 1770′s and we will not be ruled in 2012 by a tyrannical government. There is no difference.

This is a case of right and wrong. As of now the 2nd amendment stands. It has never been repealed. If Feinstein or Barack have a problem with the constitution then they should be removed from office. They are not defending the constitution which they have sworn an oath to protect. It is treasonous to say the least. They would likely say the same about me, but I have the constitution, the founders, and the supreme court on my side. They only have their inflated egos.

I am not writing this to incite people. I am writing this in hopes that somehow I can make a tiny difference. I have no idea how many of my neighbors have the will to defend their constitutional rights. 2%? 20%? I am afraid that 20% is a high number, unfortunately. When push comes to shove many people may give up and submit to being ruled. I believe that our government is banking on this.

What I do know is that this country was founded by people who had balls the size of Texas and Patriotic Americans take shit off of no one, especially our own government. For evidence of that, you might research the Revolutionary War. My question is how many Patriots are left?

I would hope that our officials come to realize that, regardless of our numbers, we still exist because they are calling Patriotic Americans to action. They are making us decide if we want to die free or submit to their rule. I cannot tell you where you should stand on that. I do know that it may make the difference between living a life of freedom or slavery.

You must start thinking about this because I believe that the day is coming soon and I personally believe it has already been planned. Not all conspiracy theories are hogwash. They may throw down the gauntlet soon and my suggestion is that you prepare yourself to react.

I mean no disrespect to our elected officials but they need to understand that “We the People” will not be disarmed. If they proceed then it is they that are provoking us and we will act accordingly. We are within our rights to do so.

For those who are in support of taking the guns, you need to ask yourself a very important question, and I am not just talking about the politicians, because if you support them, you have chosen your side.

Are you willing to die to take my guns?


Through regulations, taxation, inflation of the money supply, trade restrictions, and tethers on private associations, government itself is nothing but a massive drain on prosperity. The situation has become deeply dangerous for the future of freedom in America, with young people unable to find jobs, opportunities being destroyed in sector after sector, banks and corporations living on the dole, and so many regulations that we are living under something nearly as egregious as Soviet-style central planning.

"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him --- better take a closer look at the American Indian." Henry Ford

Warren L. Grover

Friday, February 15, 2013

Guest opinion the media wouldn't print

Idaho Sheriffs are Running to Their Clubhouse

Guest Editorial, G. Scott Swearingen

In Oregon, Linn County Sheriff Tim Mueller sent a letter of opposition to the White House.
In Wyoming, HB0104 Firearms Protection Act is moving steadily through the Statehouse.
In between the two, Idaho sheriffs are running to their clubhouse.

In the face of President Obama’s rhetoric, southeast Washington and north central Idaho sheriffs declared their support for the second amendment. They promised support of the Second Amendment similar to that shown by Sheriff Mueller of Linn Co. Oregon among others nationwide. One local Idaho sheriff even stated he would make a motion at the next Idaho Sheriffs’ Association (ISA) meeting to show that support. Instead, the Club crawfished on its bet.

Mike Kane, the paid lobbyist for the ISA said on January 23, that they would take a measured and thoughtful position. He said, “We aren't going to bring legislation to restrict concealed weapons or that restrict the right to open carry. These are constitutional rights.”

But on February 5, the ISA, funded by the Federal Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), put forth the “Idaho Sheriffs’ Association Position on Gun Rights.” In actuality, their position is that of the National Sheriffs’ Association, word for word. It is a full typewritten page of “whereas” and “therefore(s)” that resolves to enforce whatever laws are passed, by whomever, constitutional or not.

This position of the ISA is not nearly as clear as Linn County, Oregon Sheriff Tim Mueller’s letter to Vice President Biden. Mueller tells the White House,

“Any federal regulation enacted by Congress or by executive order of the President offending the constitutional rights of my citizens shall not be enforced by me or by my deputies, nor will I permit the enforcement of any unconstitutional regulations or orders by federal officers within the borders of Linn County Oregon.”

Mueller’s words, much stronger than those chosen by the sheriffs’ associations, were echoed by sheriffs around the country.

The ISA’s Those weakly chosen words led the Idaho Statesman to run a headline stating, “Idaho sheriffs agree to support gun laws.” The article described the position paper accurately, but reaction to it surprised the ISA.

Ada County Sheriff Gary Raney, who heads the statewide association, told the Statesman that their coverage of the Idaho Sheriffs Association position on gun legislation misstated the sheriffs’ position.

Did the Statesman’s coverage really misstate the ISA’s position? In short, no. If anybody misstated the ISA’s position, it was the sheriff’s themselves. Still, I don’t think they are misstated. The club is just acting politically.

It is after all, the same club who has proposed legislation for the clear purpose of embedding themselves in their own positions. I speak of legislation that would require deputies to quit their jobs before challenging their bosses in an election. Then they thought that only POST certified officers should be able to challenge them, taking the citizen sheriff out of the competition.

Most recently, a felon had the audacity to run for sheriff in northern Idaho. So enter the ISA, to propose an amendment to the Idaho Constitution banning felons. They don’t want competition from a felon. Politicians don’t like competition, especially from another professional.

They use our tax dollars, from county treasuries, from the Federal Drug Enforcement Agency and from private donations and memberships to fund their club and keep citizens out.

The club is trying to sneak this past us, hoping not to endanger their relationship with their golden goose, the DEA. I urge you not to let them. Insist they stand up for your Second Amendment Rights like so many other sheriffs around the country are doing.

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

America is a police state- an Obamanation

Proof Of A U.S. Police State

February 11, 2013 by Bob Livingston

America has fast descended into a police state. The trouble is that we want to believe in the rule of law and the system that alleges to support and enforce it. But when reality collides with illusion, it is too late. No matter how bad things seem, we always think that times will get better and that government will do the right thing.

Only a few people left Germany in the early 1930s. They could clearly see the evolving tyranny. Many who stayed thought that things would not get so bad or that times would get better. They suffered from normalcy bias, a form of cognitive dissonance. They paid.

The wisdom today is in being able to see what is happening and having the vision to discern what is going to happen. Sorry. Anyone who still believes in the illusion of the rule of law will not see reality until it’s too late to do what is necessary to survive and keep their assets.

Today, the rule of law is what the 1 percent (the government) says it is. The government holds the police power and the military power. Its main purpose is to be the silent force to contain the population.

The population in the United States is well-armed. That fact does not escape the 1 percent. That is why the 1 percent is so eager to find a basis upon which to justify disarming the people. The armed populace is all that stands between the people and full-blown tyranny.

We have entered the last days of the fiat regime. It is evidenced by a falling confidence in government and the government’s stepped-up oppression of the people. This fact continues to be hidden by the mainstream media, which is under the control of the government.

The vast majority refuse to see or admit the regime is failing and descending into totalitarianism. They cite the fact that Americans are free to worship, free to travel, free to work, free to express themselves and free to vote as evidence that America remains free. But there are many signs that America is not far removed from tyranny seen in the former Soviet Union and the depths of Mao-ruled Chinese empire.

The state, meaning the apparatus of government, is “the system” that controls the American people.

Most people foolishly believe that they control the political system through elections. Little do they know that the government and the corporate state own and control the state and, through it, the people. This fact is kept invisible through constant conditioning of the public mind. There has never been any more sophisticated propaganda than in the United States today. No serious issues are ever discussed on national media.

The nature of government and the nature of people put them at natural enmity. Everything that the government is and has, it must extract from the people. It takes so much that it cannot disclose how much. The state and all that it has comes from the production and savings of the people by taxation and inflation.

If there is constant enmity and actually silent war between the State and the people, why is there no physical conflict? The answer is because of constant deceptive propaganda and the fact that the process is gradual over a long period of time. Gradualism clouds reality. Gradualism fogs the mind and suppresses rebellion. Rulers know this.

The elected elites know the proper code words to use to deceive the unthinking populace. Any and every law, no matter how oppressive, can be sold to the people by invoking these words. The Constitutionality of these laws does not matter and is not discussed. The court system does not help. All major legal decisions since the United States became a nation have been in favor of the government.

The Internet has thrown a wrench into the cogs that run the government propaganda machine and suppress the people. Information is now available that was once hidden or manipulated in favor of the state. The wall of propaganda has been breached.

This has thrown the elites off their game. Where they preferred to continue with their glacial march toward full-blown tyranny, an awakening populace has recognized the stepped-up oppression and has begun to push back. The physical conflict that had been so long avoided seems almost inevitable.

It’s obvious the American regime is preparing for it:

President Barack Obama’s regime has invented “legal” grounds to justify assassinating American citizens with drones. So far, three Americans have been executed without trial, including a 16-year-old from Colorado. This is mission creep far beyond what little George W. Bush began and Congress enabled with the false “war on terror” and the 4th Amendment-nullifying USA Patriot Act of 2001 (since extended).
2009 Nobel Peace Prize nominee Jim Garrow, Ph.D., who is noted for his work saving thousands of babies in China from certain death through the country’s one-child policy, claims in a Facebook post that a military member and “hero” who everyone would recognize confided in him that Obama is using as a litmus test of military leadership that involves their willingness to fire on U.S. citizens and is removing those who say they will not.
The Department of Homeland Security has ordered another 21.6 million bullets to add to the 1.6 billion it has bought in the last year. Before the order, DHS had more than enough bullets to shoot every U.S. citizen four times and keep hundreds of millions of rounds in reserve. For perspective, during the height of the Iraq war, U.S. soldiers were using 5.5 million rounds per month.
The immigration reform legislation currently under discussion would place many more drones into U.S. airspace to spy on citizens along the border and within the 100 mile border zone over which DHS claims jurisdiction. It also calls for biometric ID cards maintained by the government at considerable expense — and no doubt wrought with considerable problems and shortcomings — that would be necessary to secure employment and perform other interactions with government functionaries and bureaucracies.
Police officers are teaming with National Guard and other U.S. military units to carry out training exercises that resemble military invasions on U.S. soil in violation of Posse Comitatus.
The Obama regime aided by a complicit Congress passed into law just more than one year ago the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which gives the regime the power to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens without habeas corpus.
Police across the country are becoming more militant and more militarized. Almost daily now are media reports of cops training their weapons on children, tazing and arresting them in schools, and shooting down civilians in their homes during no-knock warrant executions.
The surveillance state is growing more intrusive by the day. Police now have scanners that can peer beneath our clothes and in our cars and homes on street corners and in mobile units. Cameras and audio recording devices are everywhere.
High Schools students are being required to carry microchipped cards that record their whereabouts and to submit hair samples for mandatory drug testing.
Lawyers are being arrested for informing people of their rights.
Police officers are accompanying electric workers to enforce installation of so-called “smart meters” on houses that have the capability of spying on homeowners and supplying the state with terabytes of data on day-to-day activities. This opens the homeowner up to abuse from state enforcers and identity theft from thieves.
The elite behind the scenes count on the ignorance of the American people — who have been dumbed down with drugs, tobacco, alcohol, debauchery, a craze for national sports, instant gratification, debt and no rule of law — to ignore these and the many other loses of freedoms as they advance their agenda to confiscate all the world’s wealth and enslave the populace.

How long will it continue before the pushback commences?

Sunday, February 10, 2013

Idaho sheriffs statement against its people!

Here is the most ambiguous and ignorant statement i have ever seen from a lical executive branch authority, i am outraged and am still willing to call out any sheriff on his position selling the people of the state to unbridled control and submission to the feds! I am outraged!

Here is their pathetic sellout statement!

We, the sheriffs of the State of Idaho support the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms and we oppose any intrusion upon those rights. The resolution recently passed by the National Sheriff’s Association eloquently states the exact position of the Idaho Sheriff’s Association and therefore, we adopt it as ours. The resolution reads:
National Sheriff’s Association Resolution: 2013-1
WHEREAS, the elected Sheriff is recognized throughout the United States as the chief local law enforcement officer and is directly accountable to the people through the electoral process; and
WHEREAS, all sheriffs take an oath of office to enforce and defend the United States Constitution and state constitution and laws; and
WHEREAS, a primary mission of sheriffs is to ensure public safety; and
WHEREAS, gun safety is vitally important to our nation’s public health and the 3,080 sheriffs of this nation; and
WHEREAS, the cause of violence, including gun violence, must be addressed on many fronts, including improved mental health treatment, media violence, drugs, gangs, breakdown of the family, strengthening laws that prevent or reduce the access of legally prohibited persons to firearms and vigorous enforcement of existing laws; and
WHEREAS, the National Sheriffs’ Association represents the interests of all sheriffs who are sworn to support and defend the United States Constitution; and
WHEREAS, sheriffs strongly support our citizens’ protected right to bear arms under the Second Amendment and the National Sheriffs’ Association does not support any laws that deprive any citizen of the rights provided under the Constitution and Bill of Rights; and
WHEREAS, the doctrine of judicial review grants to the United States Supreme Court and the lower courts the power to determine the constitutionality of any law and sheriffs do not v possess the legal authority to interpret the constitutionality of any law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the National Sheriffs’ Association supports the rights conferred by the Second Amendment and further recognizes the ultimate authority of the courts in interpreting the scope of those constitutional rights
The Idaho Sheriffs’ Association recognizes that the efforts of our state legislature, congress and president are to provide for safer communities by a reduction in gun violence. We take different paths, but the goal is the same. In order to achieve success we must work together on issues upon which we can agree. Citizens expect it and our children deserve it.
Please contact your sheriff for further explanation as to his/her position on various bills being proposed by state legislators and Congress. We encourage all citizens to contact their state legislators and Congressional representatives and let them know how they feel about this issue.
Idaho Sheriffs’ Association, 1087 W. River St. Ste100, Boise, ID 83702, 287-0001, idahosheriffsassociation.com

Healthcare hearing-my statement

Healthcare state exchange statement February 7, 2013

Greetings Mr. Chairman and committee members, my name is Tom Munds from Caldwell, Idaho.

As Americans, It is our duty to challenge government authority whenever necessary as a means to remain vigilant preserving freedom for our posterity, but with the constant increasing barrage of assaults on our personal liberties and few standing against this assault, I stand before you with the respect I once had that has given way to genuine concern.

My concern is the continual encroachment on the rights of the people, specifically, but not limited to the federal governments assault on the states and the forceful submission to blind mandates with a variety of unknowns by a government that lacks the right, the authority or the proper jurisdiction.

As I attended the healthcare debate weeks ago, it was mentioned several times that we have a socialized system. If those in support of this system, state this as truth and the supreme court charged with guaranteeing a constitutional republican form of government also support this system, does this not only violate their oath, supporting a foreign form of government but prove that the supreme court rather than protecting and upholding the constitution has been hijacked and that they are nothing more today that nine tyrants or nine King Georges in black robes, not protecting our rights but now telling us what they are? How is this consistent with our principles of freedom established by our forefathers?

This healthcare issue should not be about how many people are without healthcare or how many people support this monstrosity because we are not a democracy, this should be about whether the Feds or the supreme court are within their jurisdiction and within their delegated powers to force states and the people to mandates when it is not only out of the jurisdiction of both but contrary to free sovereign and independent states and people!

If we are still a constitutional republic, which apparently we are not, and governments job is to preserve and not restrict the rights of the people and the states, how is this healthcare exchange consistent with these principles, when we are forced allow every branch of government and political subdivision to operate outside of their limitations by imposing mandates and unknowns on the people they swore to serve and protect?

The simple fact that our state would even consider a monster like this scares me because it leaves me questioning not only the integrity and knowledge of our state government but the backbone when it comes to protecting the people they represent.

If the people truly prefer a form of government foreign to our constitution then they do so at their ignorance, but if we still honor this document and the freedoms it secures, the only way this system of healthcare should even be adopted is by a proper constitutional amendment process where the people are fully aware of its ramifications not by a blind legislative enactment that will enslave them subject to random ever changing and hidden variables.

In case you can’t tell, I not only oppose this state exchange but oppose it with all of my being, not because I am insensitive to the needs of others but because it is purely unlawful!

Letter to idaho sheriffs association

To Idaho sheriffs assiciation
Regarding the article: http://www.idahostatesman.com/2013/01/25/2425376/i-uphold-all-of-the-constitution.html

I will say that it has been a pleasure having the opportunity to chat with you over the last few years. One great thing about Idaho is that if we have a concern, we can get to the top if we need to. I am grateful for the time you have taken to speak with me.

The purpose for this post is not as much to disrespect your position but to get people to consider the alternate perspective that was not covered in your article; that should be important to everyone that loves freedom, I hope my post is received this way.

First of all, the oath taken for office should have been with a proper understanding of history, for without it, the oath is worthless.

Second, the oath was taken with an understanding of where man’s rights come from

Third, the oath was taken with the understanding that government was created to protect those rights of the people, not to protect people from themselves or to protect the government.

Third, in this oath it was taken as a solemn promise to the people that you understood the limitations of government on the people so that freedom and liberty were preserved and protected not dictated or restricted by a government.

Fourth, the oath was to acknowledge that in our constitutional republic, we were a system of “self-government” and that the created government could exercise “few and specific powers” not to have the government interpret what our rights are because it is contrary to its creation.

Fifth, your oath was to honor the constitution as the Supreme law of the land, not to uphold all laws and administrative policies created by every and any political subdivision. Your oath was to render all laws repugnant to the constitution, null and void. In order for to see the repugnancy, one must understand what I have stated above.

In your article you mention the foundation of checks and balances and the separation of powers but your article is in complete contradiction to your statement. In it you state that such disregard would result in anarchy which is pure prejudicial conjecture and contrary to the entire creation of the constitution in that it was a document promoting self-government, that limits government NOT ITS PEOPLE!

In your article you state that we are the federal government, the state and local government, but you fail to mention that the states and the people are also free, sovereign and independent from the union as well. You fail to mention the phrase or any indication of the Declaration of Independence to fact that “when a government becomes corrupt to these ends it is the duty of the people to alter or abolish it” clarifying the sovereign capacity of the people and the states.

You state that our constitution says we have a right to bear arms but that was the Bill of Rights, but fail to separate the two documents because they were created for different purposes. One expressly declared what the government could and could not do, restraining itself, and the Bill of Rights was a Declaration by the people to the government stating what rights specifically were retained and not to be subject to some government entity or Supreme Court interpreting the rights of the people.

You state that there is also a “supremacy clause” and that your oath requires you to uphold all laws passed by state and federal representatives which is false. The supremacy clause was written with the understanding that the constitution was supreme and that no state could write laws that were repugnant to the constitution and could not write laws unless it was not expressly written in the constitution. In the formation of the union, it was the one way that the states would be guaranteed that the rights of the people and the states would not be violated by the federal government. Remember the purpose of the creation of government was to protect and preserve the rights of the people not restrict our rights at our expense, telling us what is good for us or to protect us from ourselves!

You state that our checks and balances point us toward a proper remedy to be challenged by the judicial branch is if it were legitimate. Case in point, our court has “RULED” that it should be legal to kill the innocent which is not only contrary to the constitution’s first tenant to protect life but violates the creation of government because it can no longer protect the innocent.

In your article you state that the determination of executive orders is to be left by the Supreme Court, not by 44 county sheriffs and you are incorrect again in that I would challenge you then to explain what the difference is between King George and his edicts and the edicts of an emerging dictator or nine in black robes? Explain how the people that created government to protect their rights would subject them to any one government entity that the founders knew could always have the power to oppress them?

The Sheriff is Americas last hope, it is the last line of defense to protect the people against the tyranny of a federal government and the sheriffs lack of knowledge of both the power he possesses and the understanding of his oath and our history, makes him unqualified and unable to protect the people, rendering the sheep to be tended by the wolves.

Sheriff, with all due respect, you possess the power to protect those in your county, all you need to do is stand and acknowledge it, we know you can, I know you can!!

Thomas A. Munds

Monday, February 4, 2013

Why i hate public schools- walk in your shoes?

Why I hate public schools
Walk in your shoes?

My apologies for such a lengthy post but due to my activism and sensitivity to this issue and ad often as it comes up, i felt it was important to lay the issue out as completely as i could so that i would not be misunderstood. i hope that my point was made clearly especially due to its length.

I see posts from time to time that ask why people that oppose public school are so angry, why they seem not to have any feelings and why those that oppose, don't put themselves in the shoes of the teachers, almost suggesting that those that opposition feel and think like they do because they are ignorant or because they dislike teachers. These beliefs on all counts are completely inaccurate at least for me and I’ll tell you several reasons why.

First of all, I do not look at anything as if something is bad or good to begin with. The first test is lawfulness, is it lawful or is it unlawful overall.

The next test is looking a bit more closely at the creation of something like education and how invasive it is, again, not looking at how good or bad it is but how this creation and invasiveness fits within the law.

If the creation of something like education is lawful and it meets specific criteria, there should be no problem with its acceptance, if it does not; it is prima facia unlawful or unlawful on its face.

According to the federal constitution, the establishment of school is nowhere to be found because our founders felt not only should it be left to the states to decide, because closest was best, but believed that everything with regards to education should be left as the parents responsibility, not left to a government because it was not a delegated power. If it was within or became within their authority, it would take the power from the parents and give it to the state which could be viewed as an abandonment of personal responsibility and if not kept in check could be detrimental to a society because this created a system that could begin to teach anything it wanted without any way for the parents to control it.

When the founders considered education, they considered it based on only a few things in mind, that the children that passed through school would be taught uniformly, not only the principles of freedom through an intense learning of our history and civics regarding our present form of government but that they would all share the same faith that undergirded those principles of freedom by limiting government, not promoting a multicultural morally relative view of God like we have today. Our children were to be taught not only an acknowledgment of Christ, but to further the knowledge and understanding of scriptures.

If what I have stated has any validity then the truth and reality of why people are angry should already become quite clear.

If the US constitution has no mention of public school it was to be left to the states and the people.

If the state constitution mentions public school, does it make it lawful and constitutional? It depends. How it is written, how much control it was given, how much it has taken as it expands its powers, how transparent it is and how it spends and raises money. It also depends on who and how that money is received and what is actually taught.

Going back to the beginning of our history, if public school was set up to teach intense history to understand why our government is so important, does this school teach civics to perpetuate the understanding of this importance? It does not.

Does this system teach not only the faith of Christ and the relevance of Christianity to the principles of freedom and the perpetual unity of a nation? The answer is absolutely not! If this created entity teaches principles contrary to what it was intended, is it not easy to see why people are angry? If this system teaches generations of students principles contrary to what was intended, is it not clear to see the chaos in our society today and where the problems may be coming from?

Here are the facts:

We have allowed the federal government without the delegated authority or the right, to take control of a system that was meant for the states.

We have allowed the part that the state can control, also without the authority or the right, to control the people that fund it.

We have school board members, as well intentioned as they are, with no understanding of the proper application and limitations on their powers and as prior graduates from the system they support. These teachers apparently have no concept of the original intent of the constitution and its creation to preserve the rights of the people not to encroach upon them, which they do constantly either because they do not understand or they are forced to teach these principles against their will.

The local school boards act outside of their authority because they continue to spend beyond their budget and annually use coercion tactics to get bond levies past.

The state and the school districts rely on the federal government for funding, which the federal government lacks the power to do, because the establishment of the schools was to be a creation of the state and that the federal government is not a bank.

Many teachers support unions, without any knowledge of where the dues for the union go, in many instances to support an agenda that is completely contradictory to their beliefs but they submit by force to ensure their benefits. This is not freedom and is force against the will of the teachers that know better than to teach something they know is damaging to the children’s future and the prosperity of a nation.

This education system that was created violates the state constitution in Art. 9, section 1, “a free common school” because it not only charges for registration for school but for just about everything else. This is unlawful!

When the opposition challenges the authority of the revenue generators, it seems as if they are immune from having to answer to the tax payer that funds their salaries.

The administrations benefits are not only are guaranteed by the taxpayer but guaranteed for life and any shortfalls that may occur for non-productive investments fall on the taxpayer for those shortfalls.

Shall only a small percentage of the population carry the tax burden for those that do not pay? Shall teachers and government workers receive benefits for life at the expense of the savings and retirements of the tax payers? This is a violation of our republican form of government in that it supports a socialized equal government forced re-distribution of wealth from one individual to another.

Understanding the intent if the constitution and law in general, they were created with equality as the primary concern, that all laws, when properly applied, had to apply equally to all people and when taxes were necessary, the taxation was to apply equally as well and if benefits are allotted, if they were constitutional, which they are not, should also apply to ALL people equally.

Perhaps the most important issue regarding my frustration with public school is the fact that, whether by force or preference, our children have been propagandized to believe in such brainwashing dogma like the separation of church and state, in the God should be separated from government, not even realizing this is a Marxist principle not one consistent with America’s constitutional republic.

Why is this concept so important to our country, our freedom and the future prosperity? Because it is the one strike at our foundation that destroys the root of our republic, and the entire creation and understanding of our history, the fact that Rights come from a Creator, that these Rights are Unalienable, that no man can take them away and that governments were created to preserve these rights for future generations not to destroy, restrict , manipulate or interpret them…To preserve Our Unalienable Rights, that were given to us by God and that any other belief makes our rights subject to what government says they are, which has always ended in tyranny and oppression.

Quite simply, If you do not acknowledge the Creator as the giver of all rights, you are not only unlawful but support a form of government foreign to America, where your freedom is only subject to what some tyrant or oppressive government says it is.

This country is built on the rule of the written law, not subject to random opinions. We are a constitutional republic, not a democracy, where even the minority is protected and we were created as an experiment in “SELF- government” not reliance on it. Schools teach none of these principles.

If your children attend public school or you happen to be a teacher or school supporter, are you even aware of the detriments of this type of system on society?

If many of the supporters claim to be Christians and they openly deny Christ to our children in school, is that something you think God will forgive you for, for misleading them not by educating them but brainwashing them with principles that are contrary to our “free” country and the Biblical scriptures we claim so dear?

It was asked, “Put those that oppose public school in the shoes of supporters of such a system?” How about putting those that support public school in the shoes of those that understand the creation, funding and indoctrination of a monster, here to destroy our future!

I hope you can see by this post that my frustration is not meant to be a personal attack on teachers; it’s an attack on the system that is destroying the future of our kids enslaving our teachers!

Can you see why we are angry?

Tom Munds:

Sunday, February 3, 2013

Idaho state exchange critical elements

Idaho state healthcare exchange video.

I was asked to compile the critical elements of the state healthcare exchange debate on 1/23/13 in an effort to briefly and efficiently educate others on a few of the critical elements of healthcare in idaho.

Heres the short compilation of the full length video available www.tommunds.com.


Saturday, February 2, 2013

Video to all government officials in the country

Dear all,

My intention is never to abuse ones email but out of urgency an attempt to wake up our representatives that are to represent its people.

Our freedom is in danger, our safety is in danger and no one seems to care!

I have made it my personal mission to send his video out to every government official in this state with the understanding that today apparently fighting for and preserving liberty is no longer the job of our "elected" representatives, or to be protected by law enforcement but seemingly to leave it up to the people themselves.

Quite simply, government has two choices, historically, it can honor its oath and protect the rights of its people or by inaction choose not to.

I, personally am tired of the inaction and the silence of my reps and due to exhausting all of my efforts to hold them accountable, i feel trapped, cornered and After tireless attempts find absolutely no remedy.

This country, this state is in trouble, don't you think its time to do something about it before people get angry enough to do something they really would choose not to?

As a man of honor, integrity, love of God, family and my fellow man, i have chosen to stand.

I hope that you will join me and stand, spreading the message enough is enough!

Enjoy! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nF098HtY-s&feature=youtube_gdata_player

You cannot both be for liberty and against it!

Tom Munds
God given,Constitutionally protected,Citizens Rights advocate
Twitter: @mundsTom
208 861-6405

Friday, February 1, 2013

Another letter to Ada sheriff Raney

I recieved this letter from a fellow Patriot and thought it was well worth posting, again not to assassinate his character but to question his knowledge and motives if his position of power as our counties last line of defense from federal tyranny! Nice job, Gerald, it is my honor to post this!


Sheriff Raney - Void of common sense
by Gerald Harbel
Star, Idaho

I was utterly dismayed and appalled by Sheriff Raney's complete lack of logic and common sense pertaining to our government and Constitution. He will "uphold all of the Constitution, not just a part of it" based upon the "supremacy clause". Let's use a simple analogy of his logic - The school bully declares all inferior, smaller children will give up their lunch whenever he demands. Using Raney's logic, he would enforce the bully's decree in complete disregard for the smaller children. I may just be old and confused, but according to my recollection, our government was not established to just provide life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for the bureaucrats in the Federal Government. This right was given to all of "We the people".

Rainey threw common sense out the window in his comment that if we disagree with congressional law, there is a "proper remedy: changing the laws or challenging them in the judicial branch." Considering the unethical, corrupt, bickering bunch of 535 elected congressmen currently holding office, what chance would we have in changing a tyrannical law once power has been granted to the Federal Government? Based upon history, we would have just about as much chance as a snowball in hell. Challenging an unconstitutional law in the judicial branch is absolutely laughable - just look at the recent ruling from our United States Supreme Court on "Obamacare". Federal tyranny imposed once again upon "We the people".

Our judicial branch is no longer a part of the check and balance system as originally established by the Constitution for protection of "We the people". This small number of appointed and elected judges has now become a "legislative branch" in itself. The majority of our judges no longer rule by the Constitution, but they "make" law based upon their personal, political, Democrat or Republican ideology. Common sense tells us that the Judicial Branch is a total joke for protecting the life and liberty of "We the people". How long does it take to enslave an entire nation when the citizens of that nation have lost their right to keep and bear arms? Lets ask the Jewish citizens of Germany. Oh I forgot, we can't ask them because they lost their right to defend themselves and consequently, six million were slaughtered. Common sense tells us that it takes a lot less time to impose complete tyranny than it does for legal litigation to pass from a small county to the United States Supreme Court.

Last, but not least, is Raney's lack of common sense for whom he works. He works for the citizens of Ada County and the great state of Idaho - not the Federal government. We pay his salary. Does it make good sense to bite the hand that feeds you? It appears as if our Sheriff needs to study history and read some very pertinent documents beginning with: (1) the United States Constitution: Amendment II "... the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." (2) The Constitution of the State of Idaho, Article I, Declaration of Rights emphasizes that right by "SECTION 11. RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS. The people have the right to keep and bear arms, which right shall not be abridged; ... Nor shall any law permit the confiscation of firearms, except those actually used in the commission of a felony." and (3) the United States Constitution Amendment X "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution , nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Sheriff Raney - WE are THE PEOPLE!!