by Greg Farber

As can be be seen in the photo modern day Babylonian whore Hilary Clinton is throwing the Serpent Fangs hand sign, just another psychopathic Luciferian political witch.

Well, here is yet another outrage by the Jesuit Order?s CFR-directed Obama administration. According to several sources posted here, http://therothshow.com/2010/08/us-state-department-builds-mosques-in-27-countries/
Hillary?s State Department is responsible for Congressional funding intended for the renovating of Sunni Mosques in 27 different countries. So much for the separation of an organized religious institution from the government of the United States as intended by the Baptist Calvinist First Amendment! Yet, this is par for the course. CIA ?Manchurian Candidate? Barry Davis Obama?s pro-Socialist-Communist, pro-Sunni Islamic, anti-White Middle Class (excise/privilege tax the Whites and give to the Blacks), anti- ?Christian? (Catholic and Protestant) scenario continues unabated, secretly overseen and directed by Jesuit-honored Vice President Joseph Biden.
Further, there apparently will be a new Mosque built on the 911 ?Ground Zero? site in New York City. Never mind the fact that 911 was a false flag event carried out by the greatest terrorizing brotherhood in world history, the Society of Jesus. Never mind the fact that DCI Knight of Malta George J. Tenet oversaw the entire demolition of the WTC for the benefit of his master, New York Archbishop Edward Cardinal Egan. Never mind the fact that 911 has been used to justify a massive, American-led crusade into Shia Iraq resulting in an unjust war that has taken the lives of over one million Iraqis and over 10,000 Americans. No, let?s just continue to foment unrest among the White American (Catholic, Protestant, etc.) population. Yes, let?s continue to shove pro-Islamic, pro-Black, pro-Mexican Roman Catholic Alien Invader polices down the throats of the Whites in order to unite all Whites against three common enemies listed above now totaling one third of the US population.

But to what end? That is the $64,000 question. The answer lay in the massive growth of the White Tea Party Movement, now over 70 million strong. The answer lay in fact that New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, while promoting the building of the ?Ground Zero Mosque,? is a notorious ?CFR/Court Jew? attending to the interests of his master, Archbishop of New York City Timothy Dolan. The answer lay in the fact that the Order sought to implement a Fascist Military Dictatorship back in 1934, but failed thanks to the patriotism of General Smedley Butler?the intended dictator hand-picked by Roman Catholic papal knights, millionaires John J. Raskob and Al Smith?abetted by Masonic Army General Douglas MacArthur! Yes, the endgame for White America (now at least 35 percent White Roman Catholic)?provoked by over 50 years of anti-White/pro-Black, ?left-wing? socialist-communist policies?is ?right wing? Jesuit Socialist-Fascism directed by a military dictator, someone like Jesuit-trained General David Petraeous. And that dictatorship will, in the end, blame not only Rome?s AIPAC as well as her ADL, but will blame all North American Jews in general for the utter destruction of the White American Middle Class.
Heed the warning of Roman Catholic author Martin A. Lee: The Beast Reawakens!

Obama Bans More than 100,000 American-Made Rifles

by Greg Farber

Opinion by The Volokh Conspiracy
By David Kopel

According to The Korea Times, the Obama administration has blocked efforts by the South Korean government to sell over a hundred thousand surplus M1 Garand and Carbine rifles into the United States market. These self-loading were rifles introduced in 1926 and 1941.

As rifles, they are especially well-suited to community defense in an emergency, as in the cases of community defense following Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and Hurricane Andrew in 1992. Along with AR-15 type rifles, the M1 rifles are the quintessential firearms of responsible citizenship, precisely the type of firearms which civic responsibility organizations such as the Appleseed Project teach people how to use.

According to a South Korean official, “The U.S. insisted that imports of the aging rifles could cause problems such as firearm accidents. It was also worried the weapons could be smuggled to terrorists, gangs or other people with bad intentions.”

Regarding the second objection, any firearm lawfully imported into the United States would eventually be sold by a Federal Firearm Licensee who, pursuant to the background check system imposed by Congress (and endorsed by the NRA) would have to contact federal or state law enforcement to verify that the gun buyer is not prohibited from possessing firearms.

Accordingly, the risk that the South Korean surplus guns might fall into the hands of gangsters or other bad people is exactly the same as with the sale of any other retail firearm in the United States. Notably, neither the M1 Garand nor the M1 carbine are concealable, and the M1 Garand is long, heavy, and bulky. Accordingly, the criminal utility of such guns is relatively low.

The second Obama administration objection is accidents. But in fact, increasing gun density in the United States has been associated with steeply declining rates of gun accidents. In 1948 there were .36 guns per person. (That is, about one gun for every three Americans.) By 2004, there was nearly one gun for every American. In 1948, there were 1.6 fatal gun accidents per 100,000 persons. By 2004, the rate had fallen by 86%, so that there were .22 fatal accidents per 100,000 persons. (For underlying data, see Appendix B of my amicus brief in Heller.)

Legally, it is indisputable that the guns are importable. Being over 50 years old, the rifles are automatically “Curios and Relics” according to federal law. 27 CFR section 478.11. Accordingly, they are by statutory definition importable. 18 USC section 925 (e)(1). Notwithstanding the law, the Obama administration has the ability to pressure the South Korean government to block the sale of the guns.

President Obama was elected on the promise that he supported individual Second Amendment rights. His administration’s thwarting of the import of these American-made rifles is not consistent with that promise.

Firearms and the Constitution Versus Treaties

by Greg Farber

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under that Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” – Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution

By Leslie Swann

Recently I attended a gun show, where I handed out information material and answered questions on the Tenth Amendment Center. Several people were concerned about the U.S. making a treaty that would gut the U.S. Constitution and potentially take away firearms from law abiding citizens here in the U.S. They argued that the paragraph above from the Constitution places treaty law above the Constitution as the supreme law of the land.

Our Founders very clearly stated the conditions under which the U.S. Constitution could be amended, or changed, in Article 5. It is quite illogical to conceive that our Founders would write such a brilliant document to be the foundation of our union, only to create a giant backdoor for foreign governments to come in and destroy the liberty we had worked so hard to achieve. In fact, our Founders themselves said otherwise.

“The only constitutional exception to the power of making treaties is that it shall not change the Constitution…” – Alexander Hamilton

“I do not conceive that power is given to the President or the Senate to dismember the empire, or alienate any great, essential right. I do not think the whole legislative authority to have this power.” – James Madison

“I say the same as to the opinion of those who consider the grant of treaty-making power to be boundless. If it is, then we have no Constitution.” – Thomas Jefferson

So, when I began re-reading this section of the Constitution I realized that they didn’t leave a backdoor, but in fact were expressly forbidding this type of maneuver in Article VI. The answer to the riddle that confuses many people isn’t to be found in an indecipherable tome on constitutional law, but instead in simple English grammar and a little attention to detail.

In reading through the entire Constitution, you will notice that whenever the Constitution refers to itself the verbiage “this Constitution” is used. The only exceptions to this are the President’s Oath of Office, where the phrase “the Constitution of the United States” is used, and here in the latter part of Article VI. In every other place where you find the word Constitution written in the Constitution itself, it is preceded by the word “this” making it clear that the Constitution is referring to itself. In the President’s Oath of Office the phrase “Constitution of the United States” makes it perfectly clear that the phrase is referring to this Constitution as well.

The Founders were very clear and precise with their use of language in the Constitution, so why do we have “the Constitution” in this case (“any Thing in THE Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding”), and “this Constitution” in all other cases where the word is written. The simple answer is that in this case, they were not referring to the United States Constitution at all.

The humble preposition is the key to solving the intent of the Founders in this statement. A prepositional phrase – such as of, to, or in – is a word that can modify and indicate relationships. Prepositional phrases can also modify more than one object. In this case, the prepositional phrase “of any State” refers to both the words “Constitution” and “Laws” that precede the phrase. This means that the final phrase of this clause could rightly be read to mean “any Thing in the Constitution of any State or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” The Founders weren’t saying that treaties were to be supreme over the U.S. Constitution, but that they could and would take precedence over the state constitutions and laws.

It is clear with a little analysis of the details of the language and grammar used to construct this clause that our Founders were placing treaty law in its rightful place – beneath the supreme law of the land in the form of our U.S. Constitution, but above the laws and constitutions of the states. There is no loophole that can allow international interests to trump the U.S. Constitution, but the treaty must be made in pursuance of our Constitution, just as all laws that Congress makes must be in pursuance of the Constitution.

While some well-meaning (and not-so-well-meaning) politicians may claim that they can legislate via treaty, this clearly was not the intent of our Founders. Will this knowledge stop those who would seek to take our freedoms from shredding the Constitution by attempting to pass such treaties? Probably not. But we can rest firm in the knowledge that our Founders did not give the Federal government the power to usurp the Constitution by treaty, and that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, not treaty law. More importantly, we can use this knowledge as intellectual firepower to stop the enemies of liberty and the Second Amendment from doing so. —Leslie Swann.

Dear CongressAsshole

by Greg Farber

Dear Congressman,

I’ve been keeping tabs on you Congressman, your last speech even made me smile, how touching. But not on the side of the face you think. You want to get this in your head young fellow, You’re not in there to make the House and or Senate laugh at us but to make it laugh with us. We’ve retained you for something more than your after-outdoors experience fiscal speech’s. $500,000 a year is higher than we have gone for your “Congressional” services for some time, and we want returns on our money. You know what we expect. We want more tax exemptions, and we want more control over public lands ! You’ve been fiddling around for a long time and drawing pretty pictures, but now we want to hear from you in the headlines. We want you to chuck the funny business and work up a little public sympathy for the corporation. We want you to make the people feel that we’re done for and we will have to get out of business unless we are given a bailout here and now. The country needs us more than we need the country. That’s your line ! As we of the board of directors laid it all out for you months ago.

Now then Congressman, come to life and wake up that House and or Senate ! We’ve made enough alliances for you, all you need to do is start pulling a few strings that we’ve placed in your hands, and the thing will go through. Besides if you father a really big Bill like that, and it passes, you’ll garner more public sympathy and gain more votes. Don’t make any mistake. Keep in our saddle and we’ll ride you a long way, we’ll keep you in that position you enjoy. But only if you play our game. A few other corporate board members met this week and they are not satisfied with you. This is a friendly tip. Get back into harness and help us pull our load and we’ll not forget when we get to the top of the hill. You’ve been paid what you’re worth in advance, but if the Bill goes through there’ll be a bonus. Anyway. We don’t know just what, perhaps another $500,000 more. At least Put that in your pipe and smoke it, and I think you’ll enjoy the flavor.

Now Congressman, this is straight from the shoulder. Personally, I believe in you ! I’m with you and behind you every minute that you play our game with us. But when you chuck us and start going for yourself or devil forbid for those ” people ” out yonder, we’re going to plow the ground from under your feet as sure as God made little red apples..

Yours truly

The Society of Jesus and the Jesuit Order – The Knights of Malta – The Shriner Free Masons – The Popery Witches ruling this political world – The United Nations, And any other cretin land, power, money grubbing asshole anyone can think of..

The Corporation.

THE ROOTS OF THE GLOBAL GREEN CLIMATE WORSHIP AGENDA

by Greg Farber

The populace of the Globe are being brought together as one under the false reincarnated Mother Gaia religion. This is guised in a more modern times veil in order to fool the populaces. The whole idea of this is to destroy national sovereignty, cultures and tongues whilst allowing for a one World system to be put in its place. A false system needs to be put in place to replace the old system of war. This is all so Roman elite families of the Holy Roman Empire can continue to control the World even without the old war systems always used in the past. The populaces are to be dumbed down and entertained to sleep whilst the plot thickens and continues until the Luciferian ‘Great Work’ is completed. A depopulation agenda during all this continues as sixty plus percent of the Global populace is to be removed from the planet as wished for by the ‘Global 2000′ report from the Club of Rome. What we are left with is a life of no jobs or hope during the Post Industrial Zero Growth Society as in the past when the British East India Company destroyed civilisations of the past.

WISDOM BECOMES KNOWLEDGE WHEN IT BECOMES YOUR PERSONAL EXPERIENCE

Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society
~Aristotle 178BC

There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.”
~ Søren Kierkegaard

THE DEATH OF AMERICA AND THE CONSPIRACY BEHIND IT

by Greg Farber

The united states of America has been taken over. The covert coup d’état to destroy the states and bring about a Global dictatorship took place right under everyones noses since the 19th Century. One of the final attacks to finish off America once and for all is the engineered economic collapse to come between December 2010-July 2011 onwards.

Albert Pike, Mason and Jesuit

by Greg Farber

The big lie; federal ownership of public lands

by Greg Farber

I’m heading into the Idaho Mountain back country for three months, blogging is boring the holy piss outta me, and I am convinced it is a waste of time. I’m taking my bow, quiver is full, knife, rod and reel and along comes the nice rifle as well.. I intend to get me some satisfaction. One day you might read about it. Enjoy a little more truth below.. See you all Around, G.F.

With a series of unconstitutional takings, beginning almost a century ago, the federal government now claims to own almost two-thirds of Idaho. Most of that “ownership” is claimed as lands “administered” by the Forest Service.

This is one of the lies that, having been told often enough, is now believed to be true. We want to believe in the sanctity of our national parks, wilderness areas and forest lands. They are a wonderful public resource. However, the truth is, the federal government is constitutionally prohibited from owning this type of property within a state.

Political power often leads to corruption, and in Idaho, like everywhere else, the federal government has become the very definition of corruption. Just like the native peoples, whose treaties with the federal government have been broken, much of Idaho’s public lands have been stolen by the Great White Father in Washington, D.C.

Any comparison between constitutionally formed government and the usurpers in the administrative regimes which now rule us becomes a study in deceit and deception. Pick any subject that is “governed” and look into the legitimate constitutional authority and limitations to govern that subject. Compare these constitutional facts of life with how government is operated today.

This is also a wonderful study in how the Hegelian opportunists in the administrative realms find or manufacture a problem, proclaim themselves to be the solution, and secure a job for life at public expense. Once a small problem is discovered and they have secured their position as the solution, these opportunists become well positioned to multiply the problems they claim to be solving, until an unfathomable depth of bureaucracy is formed. Today’s Forest Service provides just such an example.

In the words of Gifford Pinchot, who championed his cause and became the first chief of the Forest Service, “the fundamental idea of forestry is the perpetuation of forests by use.” He said the federal forest reserves were needed, “rather to help the small man making a living than to help the big man to make a profit.”

What began as a solution to the fraudulent schemes of the timber barons of a century ago now prevents many a small man from making a living, while disease and insects devour accessible timber. No longer helping the small man, the forest service now requires a “permit” to travel on many “wild” rivers and wilderness areas, or to park a vehicle near a cross country ski trail. By administrative edict, they have recently made it a crime for the public to drive on a majority of the forest road system.

Through a “test program” called the “Recreation Fee Demonstration Project” they are applying the thin edge of the wedge to turn public lands into a private business for bureaucrats. “Four federal public land agencies have been empowered to test various ways to provide increased benefits to visitors of public lands through recreation-use fees,” says the Forest Service brochure, “Our National Forests.”

Whose national forests? How have we become subjected to these convoluted schemes? Or more importantly, does the federal government have any business administering public lands within a state? Let’s look at the facts and the history behind the BIG Lie.

The constitutional facts of life

The founders of America drafted the United States Constitution to form a limited federal government. It was designed to take care of only those things which were truly our national business. The state governments or the people were to keep all other powers. Article One, Section 8, Clause 17, offers the only provision in the Federal Constitution for federal ownership of land. It provides for the creation of Washington, D.C. as the seat of the federal government and allows the federal government to purchase lands in a state with “…the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings.”

This is the only kind of property that the federal government is empowered to own in a state. The federal government cannot own forest lands. Why? Because no such power has ever been delegated to it and the Tenth Amendment prohibits the federal government from assuming any power which has not been delegated to it by the Constitution: “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.” This is the first constitutional fact of life preventing federal public land ownership within a state.

The state of Idaho began as the Idaho Territory. This federal territory was acquired by a treaty with Great Britain, popularly known as the Oregon Treaty and from treaties with the Indian tribes. Most of Idaho was to become Indian reservations until gold and other valuable interests were discovered. Then the federal government wouldn’t keep its word with the Indians. This caused wars when the federal government imposed new treaties taking away more native lands. However right or wrong the treatment of the Indians and their treaties were, the Idaho Territory was formed and became a federally-held property.

In 1890, Idaho was admitted as a state in the union and its government was formed by the state Constitution. Article Ten, Section 4, of the Idaho Constitution says “All property and institutions of the territory, shall, upon the adoption of the Constitution, become the property and institutions of the state of Idaho.”

This second constitutional fact of life conveyed the territorially held lands to the new state.

“The people,” at least the 64 people who signed the Idaho Constitution, gave up their interest in the public lands in Article Twenty-one, Section 19, of the Idaho Constitution. That section states in part: “And the people of the state of Idaho do agree and declare that we forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within the boundaries thereof … and until the title thereto shall have been extinguished by the United States, the same shall be subject to the disposition of the United States…”

This is the third constitutional fact of life.

Those 64 people, acting as a constitutional convention for Idaho, essentially quit claimed “the people’s” interest in the public lands. It is important to remember that the Idaho Constitution was signed at the convention in August of 1889. Idaho was still a federal territory then. The title to the unappropriated lands remained with the federal government until Idaho became a state the following year.

Many things happened when Congress passed the Idaho Admission Act in 1890. Idaho was admitted into the union as a state on an equal footing basis with the other states. Congress also “accepted, ratified and confirmed” the Idaho Constitution in the Idaho Admission Act. Some public lands were specifically appropriated in the Admission Act, as state endowment lands for schools and other state purposes.

The other remaining public lands were not specifically granted to the state for particular purposes.

As a state, Idaho’s relationship with the federal government also changed. Once Idaho was no longer a federally-held territory, the Federal Constitution imposed new limitations on the federal government. They were now prohibited from owning non-military property in the new state, initiating the first constitutional fact of life.

When Congress accepted, ratified and confirmed the Idaho Constitution, they both conveyed any unappropriated lands held as property of the Idaho Territory to the new state of Idaho and released any interest “the people” may have had in those lands to the state, giving the state clear title to the unappropriated lands. This “extinguished” the United States title to those lands since the federal government was now prohibited from owning them and “forever disclaimed” the people’s interest in the unappropriated public lands, bringing the second and third constitutional facts of life into force and effect.

The beginnings of the Big Lie

So how did we get federal forest lands in Idaho? Constitutionally, after obtaining the consent of Idaho’s legislature, the federal government can own a fort or a building, but not public forest lands. Did those in the seat of federal power pay attention to the truth and abide by the limitations imposed by the Constitution which gave them the power in the first place? Even though statehood was achieved, the federal government continued to treat Idaho as if were still a federal territory.

Just as they did to the Indians, the federal government would eventually take back much of the lands which became state property. Using both the hammer of the law and a seemingly benevolent administration, the Big Lie was forged.

Idaho became a state during the industrial revolution. While the wheels of industry were rolling in the east, Idaho was still a relative frontier, with largely untapped natural resources. Timber and minerals were the main items of industrial interest. Many industrialists were already capitalizing on the new state’s abundance.

As is often the case when greed is a prime motivator, many of those involved engaged in less than honorable conduct. A great land grab was underway. Beginning in the Great Lakes region, timber Barons and speculators had spread their schemes to the Northwest.

Taking advantage of federal programs to sell land to settlers and homesteaders, the unsavory schemers would use dummy settlers to file false claims or they would “sponsor” settlers who would sell the lands back to them soon after they were acquired from the government.

The Timber and Stone Act of 1878 permitted individuals to buy up to 160 acres of timber or stone at $2.50 an acre provided the land was solely for their own use and they had made no prior agreement to convey the title to another person. These near give-away programs, intended to benefit the common man, ended up benefitting the industrialists who picked up properties at a fraction of their value.

The “solution” to the “problem” had a two-pronged approach. Prosecutions for land fraud began while a federal scheme to “reserve” and “administer” these lands and their resources emerged. Good intentions have paved many a dark highway.

Timber fraud in high places

Oregon was one of the first places where prosecutions for timber fraud were initiated. An Oregon land ring had been gobbling up public land in Oregon and California. Former Oregon congressman Binger Hermann, was then head of the General Land Office, which sold lands to settlers. Agents discovered a major scandal that led to his resignation.

He was indicted for burning his files but was never convicted. Oregon’s senior senator John Mitchell was convicted for taking a bribe. Eventually, a congressman, a U. S. Attorney, a U. S. Commissioner and three state senators were caught in the scam. Oregon’s other U. S. Senator Charles Fulton was also suspected of being involved in the land frauds.

In 1907, evidence emerged that created much suspicion of similar land frauds in Idaho. The Barber Lumber Company of Wisconsin had obtained 40,000 acres of timberlands in the Boise Basin through fraudulent schemes that involved well-connected Idaho political figures.

Among those suspected was Idaho’s Senator William Borah, who had been the attorney for the Barber Lumber Company. Borah and ten others were eventually indicted. This all occurred during very “interesting times” in Idaho history. Borah was under indictment for the land frauds while he was also appointed as a special prosecutor for the murder case against the miners who allegedly had blown up and killed Idaho’s Governor after the mining wars in the Silver Valley.

The unrest from the mining confrontations was still a hot issue as Pinchot and Roosevelt doubled the size of the National Forests, many of them in Idaho.

Good Intentions and the Great Theft

The timber resources of the country were being cut at a rate that alarmed many people. “America had but twenty years of timber left,” said Gifford Pinchot. Pinchot said Theodore Roosevelt’s timber policy was to provide “the greatest possible good to the greatest possible number.”

Such was the cry of the eastern socialist offering his “solution.” As an aristocrat with a passion for public service, Pinchot was the architect of Roosevelt’s conservation policy and the force behind its implementation.

Pinchot was educated in Europe and later at three of America’s best private schools. At Yale, he was inducted into Skull and Bones, the colleges most prestigious secret society. Yale offered no forestry courses and the profession didn’t exist in the United States, so he enrolled in the French Forest School at Nancy. There he learned that “forestry is the art of using a forest without destroying it.”

He returned in 1890 to an America that was obsessed by a “fury of development.” He wrote that America “was fiercely intent on appropriating and exploiting the riches of the richest of all continents — grasping with both hands, reaping what he had not sown, wasting what he thought would last forever.”

Beginning with almost a billion acres of forests when the first Europeans arrived, the government had already given away much of the public lands. Over 150 million acres went to encourage railroad construction; 4.5 million to promote canal building; 3.5 million to build wagon roads; 2.25 million as an incentive for river improvement. Almost 100 million acres had gone to settlers under the Homestead Act and millions more under the Timber and Stone Act.

By 1900, roughly half of those billion acres had been cut and four-fifths of the remaining timberlands were in private hands.

There was a genuine problem of industrial exploitation. Over zealous harvesting to feed the wheels of growth and expansion left a legacy and a scar upon America’s forests. Pinchot had many sound forest management ideas, which he had demonstrated as the forester for the 3,500-acre woodland on George Vanderbuilt’s Biltmore Estate. Among his beliefs was “the fundamental idea that forestry is the perpetuation of forests by use.”

Pinchot’s work at the Biltmore Estate led to his design of a forestry course at Columbia University and a contract to study the New Jersey forests. He also became involved in New York politics, campaigning with the Citizens Union for Social Reforms.

The beginnings of our national forests

In 1876 Franklin B. Hough was appointed as the first national forestry agent under the Department of Agriculture. Hough reported to Congress on the condition of American forests. By 1881 a Division of Forestry was established where Hough continued the study of America’s timber. In 1886 the Division of Forestry was given formal recognition with Dr. Bernhard Fernow at the helm.

On March 3, 1891, the Forest Reserve Act authorized the creation of “forest reserves.” In 1896 the National Academy of Sciences appointed a seven-man National Forest Commission. Presidents Harrison and Clevelend had already proclaimed almost 20 million acres as forest reserves but there was no plan or rules to govern their use.

Charles Sargent chaired the commission and Pinchot became it’s secretary. 1897 began the management of the forest reserves under the Organic Act.

In July 1898, Gifford Pinchot replaced Fernow as the forester at the Division of Forestry which had grown to 60 employees.

As President Cleveland was about to leave office he issued proclamations creating 13 new forest reserves, stirring outrage and protest in the west. During the McKinley administration Pinchot was appointed to chief forester and traveled throughout the west to appease the fears of westerners and spread his views of enlightened forest policy.

Enlightened as it may have been there was no constitutional basis for this federal policy. Pinchot also consulted with the then New York Governor Theodore Roosevelt on the future of the state’s forests. This began a relationship which developed further when Roosevelt became president.

Pinchot became very influential with President Roosevelt and drafted the forestry section of his first state of the union address in 1901. The Roosevelt-Pinchot forest policy was formulated as “the fundamental idea of forestry is the perpetuation of forests by use” and “the forest reserves should be enlarged and set apart forever, for the use and benefit of our people as a whole, and not sacrificed to the shortsighted greed of a few.”

Pinchot began to dedicate himself to a problem. The Interior Department controlled the forest reserves, but had no foresters, while the Bureau of Forestry in the Agriculture Department had foresters, but no forests. A bill calling for such a transfer was defeated in Congress in 1902, so Pinchot conceived the American Forest Congress, a consorttium of various special interests.

He later admitted that it was “planned, organized and conducted” by his bureau to transfer power and forests to his agency.

In 1905 the Transfer Act passed into law, converting the Bureau of Forestry into the Forest Service and the forest reserves into national forests administered by the new Forest Service. Foresters and 86 million acres of national forests were combined in the new agency with Pinchot at the helm.

The new federal timber barons: Theft by proclamation

Pinchot became a target of western politicians who accused him of “Pinchotism.” One Colorado legislator said this enormous territory of forest reserves is an empire within a republic, ruled by a despot with as much power as the Czar of Russia.”

The Roosevelt-Pinchot forest program met fierce opposition in Idaho. 20,336,000 of Idaho’s 53,945,000 acres had been designated as 17 national forests by 1907. Pinchot’s plan was taken as a grievous affront to state sovereignty. Oregon’s Senator Fulton introduced an amendment to the 1907 Agricultural Appropriations Bill which would deprive the president of any authority to create more national forests in many of the western states.

The bill passed and needed the president’s signature by March 4 to become law. Without his signature, the Agriculture Department and the Forest Service would have no funds to operate. Roosevelt and Pinchot responded by preparing and issuing 32 more proclamations creating and expanding national forests by March 2. These doubled the area of the Forest Service to approximately 150 million acres.

The president then signed the Agriculture Bill which funded the Forest Service and ended, at least temporarily, the presidential power to proclaim new national forests.

The forest reserves were created by issuing “Presidential Proclamations.” These executive edicts were not legislated or approved by the Congress. The Legislature of Idaho gave no consent for the federal government to purchase these forest lands and federal government did not actually purchase these “forest reserves.” The Forest Service only “administers” the forest reserves. This pretended ownership by administration continues to this day.

Have it both ways?

On the one hand, the federal government only claims to “administer” these lands, not own them, until, on the other hand, they want to prosecute people “criminally” for violating Forest Service regulations. As a matter of established law, “federal criminal jurisdiction” only exists on property owned by the federal government when the state has ceded its jurisdiction to the federal government, as the following courts have ruled:

”A state retains complete and exclusive political jurisdiction over land purchased by the United States without the consent of the state or where political jurisdiction has not been otherwise ceded to the United States by the state.” (US v. San Francisco Bridge Co., D.C.Cal. 1898, 88 F. 891).

”When United States acquires property by purchase, consent of state must be secured before United States has complete jurisdiction over property.” (Hayes v. US, C.A.Kan. 1966, 367 F.2d 216).

”Constitution prescribes the only mode by which the United States can acquire land as a sovereign power, and, therefore, they hold only as an individual when they obtain it in any other manner.” (US v. Penn, C.C.Va. 1880, 48 F. 669).

”When land or other property is acquired by United States by purchase or condemnation without consent of state legislature, it would not be entitled to exercise exclusive jurisdiction over property, as state has retained right to exercise its general police powers.” (McEachin v. US, D.C.App. 1981, 432 A.2d 1212).

Those who have been unfortunate enough to receive a citation for violating some federal forest regulation will find the federal government claims an authority to prosecute them under the “Property Clause” of the federal Constitution (Article Four, Section 3, Clause 2). The federal government must own the property to invoke the Property Clause, but when a defendant tries to challenge the federal court’s criminal jurisdiction by demanding proof of federal ownership of the property and cession of jurisdiction by the state, the federal prosecutor cannot prove either.

This, however, does not stop the prosecution of the defendant, as my own experience has shown.

The Big Lie of the federal ownership of forest lands within a state must be protected. Anyone who attempts to challenge federal criminal jurisdiction based on the constitutionally impossible nature of federal forest land ownership will find out what power is all about. Federal prosecutors will hide the constitutional facts of life while federal judges ignore them. Truth and justice will be buried to protect the Big Lie. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Federal forest lands exist because the federal powers that be maintain their control by preventing the exposure of the constitutional facts of life. The truth is there cannot be any National Forest lands in Idaho. Truth was one of the casualties in the so-called Civil War. That war was more about states’ rights than slavery, and the federal government has treated the states as mere territories ever since.

Imagine a solution

No, I am not a hegelian opportunist seeking a job for life as the administrator of yet another “solution,” but imagine, for a moment, some possibilities. If the constitutional facts of life were to be recognized we could begin an orderly transfer of the federally held lands back to the state. By also recognizing the other constitutional facts of life that limit the size and scope of state government we could shrink down state government to an honest size. Once state government became affordable again we could eliminate property taxes. And maybe the sales tax. Perhaps even income taxes. How? By the proceeds from the vast resources which properly belong to Idaho.

Two and a half million acres of state endowment lands fund much of our state schools. The over 34 million acres of the now federally-held public lands might also fund the rest of the state and county governments. Instead of property taxes, a portion of the proceeds from timber, minerals, grazing, recreation and other fruits of the land could go into a general fund which would be returned to the counties on a per capita basis. Another portion could fund our state government. Right now the Forest Service pays 25 percent of the stumpage from timber sales to the counties as payment in lieu of taxes. What kind of prosperity would result if all of the stumpage went to an Idaho Public Lands Fund instead?

Many Idahoans are frustrated by the dysfunctional mandates of current Forest Service management policies. The Forest Service is congressionally constipated with contradictory mandates which have given the agency’s holdings the less than affectionate title, “the land of no use.” The original battle cry of the Roosevelt-Pinchot forest policy was “the fundamental idea of forestry is the perpetuation of forests by use.” Why not adopt such a policy under state management? This wouldn’t mean and end to our valued wilderness areas. Under an orderly transfer of ownership, the remote and pristine wonders of our state’s natural heritage could become state wilderness areas. The state could adopt wilderness policies promoting recreational use and management by nature, while allowing scientific, common sense, active management of the more accessible and productive public resources.

Through the inaction of the current Forest Service, much of the already roaded public lands are being ravaged by disease and insect infestations. A tinderbox condition has developed from a century of fire suppression preventing nature’s method of thinning the forest. In the absence of fire, failure to mechanically thin nature’s abundance leaves our forests ripe for catastrophic fires, as forest diseases and insects generate the fuel.

Many private landowners and loggers who care about the forest have demonstrated what can be done by working with nature to “perpetuate the forests by use.” Trees killed by insects and disease can be turned into valuable timber if they are harvested timely. Often this results in better forest health, while directing man’s consumptive interests to the bounty of nature’s gifts.

The state could develop a stewardship program where Idahoans could lease or otherwise contract for long term, low impact, resource management of these state public lands. More than just a timber sale, stewardship could involve developing an environmentally sound road system; protection of sensitive areas; wild life habitat enhancement; active management of the forest for long term productivity, as well as developing recreational opportunities for the public on each “steward’s” project area. Our many skilled foresters could be employed, working with the resource stewards as they manage the public lands. This could finally achieve Gifford Pinchot’s original idea for the forest reserves: “to help the small man making a living, rather than to help the big man to make a profit.”

Time for Action?

Idaho has lost more than the 52,712 square miles of the Big Lie. How much has this great timber fraud taken from our state by the failure to “use the forest without destroying it.” Mill closures have plagued the timber industry while disease and insects have a feast. Many of those in the business of making our natural resources productive have a dim future while our public lands are being closed to the public, and their potential is idled.

A few years ago the Idaho legislature passed a Tenth Amendment Resolution, declaring that the federal government must live within the bounds of the Constitution.

Was this just more fuzzy wuzzy, feel good legislation, or did our legislators mean it? Will our state officials act now to end the Big Lie? Can we begin an orderly transfer of what properly is state public land? It may take a state Constitutional Amendment to give the mandate for the management of these lands. The State Department of Lands would have to be expanded, or another agency created, to fulfill the new mandate, but government usually doesn’t mind getting larger and attaching itself to another revenue stream.

Many Idahoans have the common sense, the science and generations of experience to intelligently manage our public resources. If we demand action, and an end to the Big Lie, perhaps our state leaders will follow.

***

Author Hari Heath is a writer and researcher who once thought he could find truth and justice in the federal court system. Having disproved that theory, he now seeks to avoid further contact with the feds.

Hari got into trouble for asking a Forest Service officer questions about his authority and jurisdiction. That resulted in some trumped up charges about “obstruction.” He could have paid a $300 fine and been done with it, but since he still wanted answers to his questions he went to court.

Since peasants are not supposed to bother royalty with impertinent questions (like asking where the Emperor left his clothes) the federal judge tried to make an example of Hari with a sentence of jail time, probation and deprivation of fundamental rights such as his right to protect himself.

That was more than Hari was willing to sacrifice to the beast, and so he departed from his family and now lives the life of a fugitive.

You can read the details of his story here:

http://proliberty.com/observer/harisown.htm

Friends, freedom has a price. The only questions are who will pay and when. Winston Churchill put it this way:

If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. — Winston Churchill

Will you pay the price for freedom? Or would you rather let that debt accumulate and leave it for your children or grandchildren to contend with?

Hari has a rare gift — the ability to reduce a seemingly complex issue to its bare essentials and present it with crystal clarity. For the past several years Hari has shared that gift with readers of The Idaho Observer and other publications.

Now its time for you to share.

By Hari Heath… Thanks Hari.

666 hands Signals

by Greg Farber

INDUCTION AND EXTREME OATH OF THE JESUITS

by Greg Farber

The last Pope JPII throwing the 666 hands signals with both hands, telling you who his god be..

When a Jesuit novice is about to be inducted into the higher levels of the Order, he kneels on a red cross before the Superior of the Order. Before him are two flags, the familiar yellow and white flag of the papacy, and the black flag with a dagger and red cross above a skull and crossbones, the flag of the Jesuit Order. On the Jesuit flag is written the words, IUSTUM, NECAR, REGES, IMPIOS. (It is just to exterminate or annihilate impious or heretical kings, governments, or rulers.) The Superior of the Order hands the novice a small black crucifix which he presses to his heart, and the Superior then presents to the novice a dagger. The novice grasps the bare blade and presses the point to his heart. The Superior, still holding the hilt of the dagger then speaks to the novice.

Superior
My son, heretofore you have been taught to act the dissembler: among Roman Catholics to be a Roman Catholic, and to spy even among your own brethren; to believe no man, to trust no man. Among the Reformers, to be a Reformer; among the Huguenots, to be a Huguenot; among the Calvinists, to be a Calvinist; among the Protestants, generally to be a Protestant; and obtaining their confidence to seek even to preach from their pulpits and to denounce with all the vehemence in your nature our Holy Religion and the Pope; and to descend so low as to become a Jew among the Jews, that you might be enabled to gather together all information for your Order as a faithful soldier of the Pope.

You have been taught to insidiously plant the seeds of jealousy and hatred between communities, provinces and states that were at peace, and incite them to deeds of blood, involving them in war with each other, and to create revolutions and civil wars in countries that were independent and prosperous, cultivating the arts and sciences and enjoying the blessings of peace. To take sides with the combatants and to act secretly in concert with your brother Jesuit, who may be engaged on the other side, but openly opposed to that with which you might be connected; only that the Church might be the gainer in the end, in the conditions fixed in the treaties for peace and that the end justifies the means.

You have been taught your duty as a spy, to gather all statistics, facts and information in your power from every source; to ingratiate yourself into the confidence of the family circle of Protestants and heretics of every class and character, as well as that of the merchant, the banker, the lawyer, among the schools and universities, in parliaments and legislatures, and in the judiciaries councils of state, and to “be all things to all men,” for the Pope’s sake, whose servants we are unto death.

You have received all your instructions heretofore as a novice, a neophyte, and have served as a coadjutor, confessor and priest, but you have not been invested with all that is necessary to command in the Army of Loyola in the service of the Pope. You must serve the proper time as the instrument and executioner as directed by your superiors; for none can command here who has not consecrated his labors with the blood of the heretic; for “without the shedding of blood no man can be saved.” Therefore, to fit yourself for your work, and make your own salvation sure, you will, in addition to your former oath of obedience to your Order and your allegiance to the Pope, repeat after me.

I, M———- N———-, Now, in the presence of Almighty God, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the blessed Michael the Archangel, the blessed St. John the Baptist, the holy Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul and all the saints and the sacred hosts of heaven, and to you, my ghostly father, the Superior general of the Society of Jesus, founded by St. Ignatius of Loyola, in the Pontificate of Paul the Third, and continued to the present, do by the womb of the Virgin, the matrix of God, and the rod of Jesus Christ, declare and swear, that his holiness the Pope is Christ’s Viceregent and is the true and only Head of the Catholic or Universal Church throughout the earth; and that by virtue of the keys of binding and loosing, given to his Holiness by my Saviour, Jesus Christ, he hath power to depose heretical kings, princes, states, commonwealths and governments, all being illegal without his sacred confirmation and that they may safely be destroyed.

Therefore, to the utmost of my power, I shall and will defend this doctrine and his Holiness’ right and custom against all usurpers of the heretical or Protestant authority, and all adherents in the regard that they be usurped and heretical, opposing the sacred Mother Church of Rome.

I do now renounce and disown any allegiance as due to any heretical king, prince or state named Protestants or Liberals or obedience to any of their laws, magistrates or officers. I do further declare that the doctrines of the churches of England and Scotland, of the Calvinists, Huguenots and others of the name Protestants or Liberals to be damnable, and they themselves damned and to be damned who will not forsake the same.

I do further declare that I will help, assist and advise all or any of his
Holiness’ agents in any place wherever I shall be, in any other kingdom or territory I shall come to, and do my uttermost to extirpate the heretical Protestants or Liberals’ doctrines and to destroy all their
pretended powers, regal or otherwise.

I do further promise and declare, that notwithstanding I am dispensed with, to assume any religion heretical, for the propagating of the Mother Church’s interest, to keep secret and private all her agents counsels’ from time to time, as they may entrust me, and not to divulge, directly or indirectly, by word, writing or circumstance whatever; but to execute all that shall be proposed, given in charge or discovered unto me, by you, my ghostly father, or any of this sacred convent.

I do further promise and declare, that I will have no opinion or will of my own, or any mental reservation whatever, even as a corpse or cadaver, (perinde ac cadaver,) but will unhesitatingly obey each and every command that I may receive from my superiors in the Militia of the Pope and Jesus Christ. That I will go to any part of the world whithersoever I may be sent, without murmuring or repining, and
will be submissive in all things commanded to me.

I furthermore promise and declare that I will, when opportunity presents, make and wage relentless war, secretly or openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Liberals, as I am directed to do, to extirpate and exterminate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, nor sex or condition; and that I will hang, burn, waste, spoil, flay, strangle, and bury alive these infamous heretics, rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women and crush their infants’ heads against the walls, in order to annihilate forever their execrable race.

That when the same cannot be done openly, I will secretly use the poisoned cup, the strangulating cord, the steel of the poinard or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honor, rank, dignity, or authority of the person or persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed to do so by any agent of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Faith, of the Society of Jesus.

In confirmation of which, I hereby dedicate my life, soul, and all of my
coporeal powers, and with this dagger which I now receive, I will subscribe my name written in my own blood, in testimony thereof; and should I prove false or weaken in my determination, may my brethren and fellow soldiers of the Militia of the Pope cut off my hands and feet, and my throat from ear to ear, my belly opened and sulphur burned therein, with all the punishment that can be inflicted upon me on earth, and my soul to be tortured by demons in an eternal hell forever.

All of which I, M—— N——, do swear by the blessed Trinity and blessed Sacrament, which I am about to receive, to perform and on my part to receive inviolably; and do call all of the heavenly and glorious host of heaven to witness these my real intentions to keep this my oath.

In testimony hereof I take this most holy and blessed sacrament of the
Eucharist, and witness the same further, with my name written with the point of this dagger dipped in my own blood and sealed in the face of this holy convent.

Superior

You will now rise to your feet and I will instruct you in the Catechism
necessary to make yourself known to any member of the Society of Jesus belonging to this rank.

In the first place, you, as a Brother Jesuit, will with another make the
ordinary sign of the cross as any Roman Catholic would; then one crosses his wrists, the palms of his hands open, the other crosses his feet, one above the other; the first points with forefinger of the right hand to the center of the palm of the left, the other with the forefinger of the left hand points to the center of the palm of the right; the first then with his right hand makes a circle around his head, touching it; the other then with the forefinger of his left hand touches the left side of his body just below his heart; then the first with his right hand draws it across the throat of the other, and the latter then with his right hand makes the motion of cutting with a dagger down the stomach and abdomen of the first.

The first then says Iustum; the other answers Necar; the first then says Reges. The other answers Impios. The first will then present a small piece of paper folded in a peculiar manner, four times, which the other will cut longitudinally and on opening the name JESU will be found written upon the head and arms of a cross three times. You will then give and receive with him the following questions and answers.

Q: From where do you come?
A: From the bends of the Jordan, from Calvary, from the Holy Sepulchre, and lastly from Rome.

Q: Whom do you serve?
A: The Holy Father at Rome, the Pope, and the Roman Catholic Church Universal throughout the world.

Q: Who commands you?
A: The successor of St. Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Society of Jesus or the Soldiers of Jesus Christ.

Q: Who received you?
A: A venerable man with white hair.

Q: How?
A: With a naked dagger, I kneeling on a cross beneath the banners of the Pope and of our sacred Order.

Q: Did you take an oath?
A: I did, to destroy heretics and their governments and rulers, and to spare neither age, sex or condition. To be as a corpse without any opinion or will of my own, but to implicitly obey my superiors in all things without hesitation or murmuring.

Q: Will you do that?
A: I will.

Q: How do you travel?
A: In the bark of Peter the fisherman.

Q: Whither do you travel?
A: To the four quarters of the globe.

Q: For what purpose?
A: To obey the orders of my General and Superiors and execute the will of the Pope and faithfully fulfill the conditions of my oath.

Go ye, then, into all the world and take possession of all lands in the name of the Pope. He who will not accept him as the Vicar of Jesus and his Viceregent on earth, let him be accursed and exterminated.

Next Page »