Cliven Bundy is NOT a racist.

Yesterday April 24 – the headlines were ablaze with ‘racist’ accusations and allegations because words spoken by Bundy were taken out of context and meaning twisted. The source of his words were a candid video he made following the Saturday Celebration picnic at the Bundy Ranch April 19

More of what Bundy said that expresses his thoughts:
“We've progressed quite a bit from that day until now, and we sure don't want to go back. We sure don't want the colored people to go back to that point. We sure don't want these Mexican people to go back to that point. And we can make a difference right now by taking care of some of these bureaucracies, and do it in a peaceful way.”

http://www.dailypaul.com/317583/hoax-exposed-cliven-bundy-s-non-racist-pro-black-pro-mexican-anti-government-remarks-vs-nytimes-deceptively-edited-versio


Cliven Bundy is the target of Government agencies and 'media-propagandists' and 'glib personalities' set to miss-represent him. Cliven has Heart and is Principled, he does not have 'savvy' speech writers or a teleprompter. His observation of the 'Negro' condition could be applied to all under the boot-print of Big Government today. Herded into Cities to be dependent and subservient after 'supposed abolition' - instead of being free and self-determining people. Cliven's 'wondering' about Negro's as slaves only goes so far as to appreciate the rewards of rural living and roots of agriculture that the Bundy family has enjoyed for 100drds of years.

Reclaiming Our Land- Utah Representative, Ken Ivory

Published on Dec 16, 2013

One of the people out front in the fight to reclaim the land belonging to the states is Representative Ken Ivory of Utah. Ken came to Kalispell, Montana last week to enlighten us on what he is doing, and what we need to do, to wres back control of our own land.

Kirk MacKenzie-Defend Rural America

Published on Dec 21, 2013

By now, most everyone who is reading this is well aware of the insidious nature of the UN directed Agenda 21. If you need a refresher, click here. Much of the United States natural resources are contained in areas that would be considered rural. Is it for this reason that one of the prescriptions of Agenda 21 is to herd us into compact cities? The elite couldn't possibly want us out of Rural America so that they can have all of the resources to themselves... could they? You can make up your own mind on that one. The good news is that we have people like Kirk MacKenzie from Defend Rural America out there fighting to educate and motivate the masses. Kirk filled up a local hotel ballroom recently here in Kalispell, Montana.

Article V Con Con, by Gary Marbut

Gary Marbut writes:
"I have less enthusiasm than some of my friends for an Article V Constitutional Convention (or “convention of the states”; here “ConCon”) (yes, I've read Mark Levin's Liberty Amendments).

I agree in spades with all ConCon proponents that our Nation is in very dire straits, and that we must do something soon to tame the runaway federal monster or give up on the idea of individual liberty. However, the Article V ConCon idea seems to me to be grasping at the ...wrong straw, for two primary reasons:

1) I don't imagine that a federal government which ignores the current Constitution would pay much more attention to an improved Constitution – at least it would quickly create workarounds for restrictions that block or reverse expansion of federal power, and

2) for the process to be ultimately successful depends on five, serial, political successes, political successes in a Nation which elected Obama as President.

These essential political successes would include:

a) The threshold number of states enacting exactly the same call;

b) A hostile Congress scheduling the ConCon in a timely manner and without monkeying up the process;

c) The people of the states electing the right type of ConCon delegates to enable success at the ConCon;

d) The ConCon's assembled delegates approving the right stuff (from our perspective); and

e) The threshold number of states approving the work of the ConCon.

I see each one of these necessarily serial steps as being unlikely to succeed. Linked in series, as they necessarily must be, I see the odds of ultimate success for the whole series as being effectively zero.

For example, even suppose we assign a 50% chance of success at each step (I wouldn't rate the odds that high). Arithmetically, that gives the entire effort a .015% chance of success. That's less than 2/100ths of 1% chance of success. Because of that, I hate to see the people of the US invest any effort or hope into this effort, as that might sidetrack or forestall other efforts with greater likelihood of success.

I don't quarrel at all with the ConCon proponents that we are in dire straights, and that we must rise to the occasion to DO SOMETHING, but I believe it must be something with a greater likelihood of success that doesn't waste what may be the last opportunity of this critical historical crossroads.

Certainly, I would be glad to be proven wrong in this assessment.

I do have an alternate idea which I believe would have a greater chance of success at leashing the federal monster than an Article V ConCon.See: http://www.marbut.com/csc 

Make no mistake - NO Article V Con Con!

It seems there are those in support of Convention of the States and Article V Constitutional Convention  are reaching out to MT Legislators via telephone that have misrepresenting my position about an Article V Constitutional Convention.

If you have heard from anyone via telephone expressing that Lark is now in favor of such a foolish adventure as to call a Convention of the States to propose Amendments to our US Constitiution... be advised - they are Lying Liars.

Those who populate Government may be way off track of following and adhering to the Constitution, however additional amendment(s) may well give them MORE latitude not less, and of course the danger of its total dissolution.

Of course the John Birch Society has long advocated for the Constitution and our American Way of Life and strongly opposes any call for an Article V Constitutional Convention.

Articles at The New American -

http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/books/item/16578-levin-s-risky-proposal-a-constitutional-convention

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/17402-socialists-and-soros-fight-for-article-v-convention

Phyllis Schlafly Eagle Forum opposes - http://www.eagleforum.org/topics/concon/

http://patriotupdate.com/2014/01/anti-convention-hawks-repudiated/ 

Dr. Edward J. Vieira Phd JD Opposes

http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin262.htm

http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin261.htm

 

Publius Hulda Opposes

https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/

Who is supporting this misadventure is more important to know than who is opposed to it. Those supporting an Article V Con Con to uncertain ends may be thought of as opposites politically on the surface. My Alarm is raised when I see 'Council on Foreign Relations' and 'Trilateral Commission' and George Soros' 'Open Society' amongst them - all known to be FOR Ultimate Global Governance. I see that the new 'freedom movement' aka TEA Party, has been infiltrated and co-opted by progressive forces, [which by the way have been hovering since 2009] trying to misdirect, mislead, and make $hay$ as they may - of the increasing public dissatisfaction with corruption in government.

Here are two articles listing the proponents to this risky business:

http://securetherepublic.com/main/exposing-the-convention-of-the-states-cos-as-an-article-v-constitutional-convention/

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/17402-socialists-and-soros-fight-for-article-v-convention

 The Constitution is the Solution!

 

Our liberties are being slowly taken away - The Western News: Letters To The Editor

Our liberties are being slowly taken away - The Western News: Letters To The Editor

UN's Agenda 21 The Plan

For the past decade, William F. Jasper has served as a senior editor of The New American magazine, published by an affiliate of The John Birch Society. Mr. Jasper has covered firsthand many of the major UN conferences, including the 1992 "Earth Summit" in Rio de Janeiro, the 1998 Rome summit for an International Criminal Court, and the September 2000 UN Millennium Summit in new York. His previous book, Global Tyranny-Step by Step: The United Nations and the Emerging New World Order (1992), has been praised as the most authoritative and detailed expose of the UN ever written.

William Jasper, a United Nations expert and Senior Editor for The New American magazine (a publication of the John Birch Society), commented on the UN's Agenda 21—a plan he described as a "sweeping grab for power on a global level to micromanage and regiment every aspect of human life on the planet." The authors of the massive document are mostly from UN environmental organizations at the forefront of promoting global governance for the purposes of sustainable development, he revealed.

Those promoting 'sustainable development' are typically socialists, communists, Marxists, and fascists, who believe the state should own and control all assets, Jasper continued. They are antagonistic toward the United States, free enterprise, and the idea of constitutional limits on government, he said, adding that "you can depend on the United Nations to be overwhelmingly, viciously anti-American and anti-freedom." Ultimately, Agenda 21 provides a master plan that encompasses all aspects of life, demanding dictatorial power over the planet and everyone on it, Jasper warned.