Dream of David Wolfe this morning riding some big animal lol

I had a dream of David Wolfe this morning just before waking. I was in a tree top restaurant and he came out riding some big animal like an elephant but it was not an elephant and came around to me and said hi and I said hey mate I am Scott from youtube.com/thankyouwhiteknights lol and he said kewl I am davidavocadowolfe and I said yes I know bro lol.

I spoke with the mate I was sitting with in the Tree top restaurant that was all natural 1 story or more up amongst the trees and said what would you do if you where the richest hippy lol, then woke up.

What is it now with all these famous people in my dreams lol. Messages telling me I am on the right path or what? lol. Is it my higher self, God or the GFL? I had a feeling during the 1st famous persons dream with David Wilcock it was not really him, but an alien from the GFL projecting him/her/itself as David Wilcock. When you watch this video from 6:30ish you might understand what might be going on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fy2ICjtcouY&list=PL6FD9808382351AD4&index=8&feature=plpp_video

I just had an interview with Druanna Johnston on her BlogTalkRadio (I will share if I can ever find it is archived) where Dru also shared she had a dream of David Wilcock about the time he went on Freedom Radio with Carry Kassidy and anonymous back a month or 2 or so ago.

I met David Wolfe at his seminar at Miami 11-17, took photos of me with him, after getting his book autographed Superfoods and then recorded the whole seminar on mp3. Video was not allowed. I had seen 2 UFO's the night before, my wife saw a different 1 as a diamond shape about 1/5th the size of the moon, I found out much later.

Another thing I met with my 1st raw food friend in Townsville, Queensland, Australia who had also said she had ET contact and they said they recommend that raw food for its life promoting qualities. That was 2008 and she did refer to David Wolfe too I am sure. So I will let you join the dots lol.

David Wilcock on The Pineal Gland & The Third Eye & Health Consequences of Pineal Gland Calcification

This is to go with my last blog post below where I went into Pineal Gland Decalcification and my experiences with my health protocols that you can do too with many health benefits.

I am starting to learn that the pineal gland may be the most important driver of our body as I share of David Wilcock's work below.

Pineal gland importance to spiritual evolution is shared in the 1st 2 videos on this playlist for more background on the pineal gland symbolism throughout history watch David Wilcocks videos on "The Source Field" and "2012 Enigma" in my David Wilcock Playlist here as the 1st 2 videos


Very important health information for each of us and our collective spiritual evolution. Remember Dr Wayne Dyer "There is a Spiritual Solution to Every Problem". This all means too me that if we can get a better spiritual connection with source which happens via our pineal gland then we can individually and collectively help solve our and the earths problems together.

I have just re-listened too David's mp3 on The Source Code Part One Chapter Three sourced from audible.com and wanted to share this as it fits perfectly with what we are focusing on now also on google books for free viewing here

My Dream of Dr Wayne Dyer author of "Spiritual Solution to Every Problem" links to Pineal Gland & Dreams & my last with David Wilcock & Dolores Canon

SUMMARY
I just had this dream this morning before waking. I think the messages are all about how we can help our spiritual development by looking after our pineal gland with MSM (biological Sulfur an essential nutrient we are so low in today), DMSO (biological Sulfur an essential nutrient we are so low in today), Iodine (98% people of 4000 Dr Brownstein tested in video below found deficient and why Iodized Salt does not cut it), Colloidal Gold, Ormus and staying away from Calcium Carbonate (aka Chalk found in food and toothpaste), Fluoride (in many tap waters and drugs now) and Bromine (found in breads and drugs). You will find within what I am doing and what you can do from the experts such as David Wolfe, Dr David Brownstein, on many free videos and audios.

MY DREAM OF DR WAYNE DYER
Just dreamt of Dr Wayne Dyer author of "Spiritual Solution to Every Problem" (which I just got on DVD from netflix.com and did get on mp3 on audible.com 6 odd months ago and 1st listened too back about 2005 for free on lauralee.com) I was part of his brain storm group of about 10 of us at a back room meeting during a seminar helping him with things to share with the audience. I saw he was outside the hotel by himself trying to get ideas for his talk just before the meeting. I said "we need to have faith that the right idea will come at the right time". Dr Wayne Dyer was very excited with my suggestion. I suppose it is time to watch the DVD lol.

Yesterday I just added him and many others to my info page here on my facebook under the inspirational listings. 12-4 I had and shared a dream of David Wilcock. So this is all getting very interesting lol.

PINEAL GLAND DECALCIFICATION FOR EVEN BETTER DREAMS WITH IODINE, MSM & DMSO
I can not wait to make our 1st batch of lugols Iodine and take it, which has the benefit of decalcifying the pineal gland ie pushing toxic fluoride and bromine out of the body says Dr Brownstein whos books are coming and video i shared below. I have been taking DMSO and MSM we sell to help decalcify my body including my pineal gland and must say it is helping. Next I want to take and make colloidal gold/ormus to help as-well (see my playlist linked below the embeded video below for more on ormus and decalcification). I have been off the iodine and mono-atomic gold for 2 years. I have taken small doses of potassium iodide and iodine since, but the cost is so high and doses so low. Far below what Dr Brownstein recommends ie 50mg/day.

I use to take 150mg/day as I shared in MY HEALTH PROTOCOLS labelled blogs. If I were to try and get that from 1 bottle I bought I would have to take the whole 2oz bottle for $7, which is absolutely CRAZY. I hope to share this cost comparative analysis soon. I do a lot of this as you will see below in order to stay competitive in the market with our business Exlcusive Wellness Club. So that is why I now believe you can only get enough from lugols iodine at a great price from very few suppliers. I have only found 2 others supplying at the value I am looking for. We will be coming out with a great quality, strong as legally possible 2% for a competitive price ie competitive with the cheapest on the market, because we want to help as many as possible. Dr Brownstein shares a very thorough broad analysis on iodine and how 98% of people tested were deficient here

or below the above video in my playlist "Health Your True Wealth"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDLrBl1nva8&list=PL110E6EC0A894874F&index=79&feature=plpp_video
Iodine is now my #1 supplement with MSM & DMSO #2.

MSM & DMSO SAVED ME MONEY $24/MO NET WITH LESS CHIROPRACTIC ADJUSTMENTS
Since about 1998ish I have been seeing all sorts of therapists with Chiropractors since 2003. Since being here in Florida I have been seeing a Chiropractor here about once every month, but since taking MSM have stretched that out too 4 months saving me 3 visits at about $50 equaling $150 over 4 months. That is $37.50 per month saved. While If I had have bought our products at retail like you can it would have cost $13.67/mo to give me a net savings of $23.83/mo, not to mention all the other benefits down the road from taking these products.

COST CALCULATIONS OF MY MSM & DMSO INTAKE/MONTH
Just so you know I can calculate lol.

I did the calcs 2 different ways to be sure.

1.5 grams of MSM Powder 8oz @$7.99 [8 ozs x 29.57grams/oz = 236.56gms so $7.99/236.56 gms = 3.38 cents/gm x 1.5gms/dose = 5.07cents/dose x 3 doses/day = 15.1cents/day x 30days/month = $4.56/month in MSM or 236.56gms/(1.5gms x 3doses/day=4.5gms/day) = 52.57 days/30 days/mo = 1.75mo so $7.99/1.57mo = $4.56/mo] AND 30 drops of DMSO 99.99% Pharmasolvent Grade 4oz Dropper @ $6.99 [4 US fl ozs=4 x 29.57ml/US fl oz = 118.28ml x 20 drops/ml = 2365.6 drops/4 US fl ozs $6.99/2365.6 drops = 0.295cents per drop x 30 drops = 8.86cents/30 drops x 3 doses per day = 26.6c/day x 30 days/month = $7.97/mo or 2365.6 drops/(90 drops/day x 30 days/mo=2700 drops/mo) = $7.99/0.876months dosages = ($ 9.11/mo in DMSO + $4.56/mo in MSM = $13.67/mo in MSM & DMSO.

AVOIDING CALCIFICATION BY AVOIDING CALCIUM CARBONATE
Another thing I have done is avoid Calcium Carbonate aka chalk and Calcium supplements, per David Wolfes videos above. They have Calcium forming organisms in them that David believes lead to arthritis and oxidation in the body. I found Calcium Carbonate in my Tom's Fluoride Free toothpaste lol. What a freeking joke so stopped taking that and found an alternative a few days ago.

MMS & DMSO EXPERIENCES WITH A FEW CUSTOMERS LATELY
A very close by person with back disc problems I sprayed 15 drops of activated MMS on using our glass spray bottle and MMS kit and within 5 minutes his back pain he has had for a long time went down from 8/10 with 10/10 being maximum pain to 2/10. He was absolutely amazed and it lasted all that afternoon and possibly longer. He and his wife are now reading up on MSM and DMSO trying to help themselves and loved ones. They are very excited about our products now and will stay in touch.

Another Truck driver had a herpes outbreak on his mouth and tried our MMS kit with DMSO 99.99% Pharmasolvent Grade 4oz and after doing Jim Humbles protocol for a few days to a week had it under control and now swears by our products.

Our biggest customer used our MMS kit for her dog that had a serious kidney disease and was on deaths door but after 1 drop of activate MMS per day got better and better and is still with her now. She has agreed to share her experiences on my Blog Talk Radio or Talkshoe, which I plan on having soon.

David Wilcocks Part 3 I will youtube ASAP

FINANCIAL TYRANNY: Defeating the Greatest Cover-Up of All Time - Section Two: The History

Written by David Wilcock Friday, 13 January 2012 13:13
http://divinecosmos.com/start-here/davids-blog/1023-financial-tyranny

I will share on youtube sometime after midnight tonight so Monday as David asked us to do in the article. But it is going to be huge ie 23 x 14 minute parts so please have patience.

MY SUMMARY
PAGE 1 OF 3
I find does have some interesting info on science done on who is running the world, and a little on the history of the Rothchilds, but the rest just goes into much of what I found in Politics of Cancer Therapy by Edward G Griffin back in 1998 all tied in too current events.

SPC AND UCC DOCS & Accepting for Value ASSISTANCE

I get questions about becoming a Secured Party Creditor and the UCC docs constantly and many people assume I can help answer their questions directly to save them time. Well unfortunately I do not know everything even though I have shared a lot of the information and I do not have the time to assist in answering all these questions, however I can point you in the right direction.

Sorry I can not answer you directly.

SHORT ON TIME THIS IS A VERY VALUABLE SERVICE
If you have time and do now want to spend money then see more below this paragraph. For only $20 a month the below link will give you nearly all you need QUICKLY, so please use it even if it is only for just under 1 month and then cancel before the anniversary ie your 2nd charge.
http://www.youhavetheright.com/members/intro/landingpage/?affiliate=a132b124afc17f44a864b108b4b05a91

FREE INFO
KEY INFO at the top (where I got the above link from) especially anything on Tim Turner, because I have been through a lot of others you can find in my site http://butt-onz.com.au (in this blogs LINKS again) at the bottom of the home page and the video page. So I recommend Tim Turners videos, talkshoes Alumni and America Can Be Free, you will also get more from the Republic for the united States links as Tim Turner is the President of the Republic since late 2010 and the whole organization is all about remedy to the same end and can be valuable no matter what country you are in. If you have a question about does the UCC apply to you all I can say is check all of my resources I am offering here and my BLOGS LINKS on the right side ie Illuminating Minds, Sovereign Warriors actual sites to ask others or see forums where it might have been answered. I also share their all I have found on Accepting for Value in zip files in my 4shared.com or Debt Elimination links. I also did share a little in my talkshoe (in this blogs LINKS again) about my results and how to, but most of my published info I shared in the old Sovereign Warriors site no longer up all saved in my precise 4shared.com link under this blogs LINKS lower right side. Some of those links will be in my http://youtube.com/thankyouwhiteknights channel (in this blogs LINKS again) left of my channel comments too.

I am sure you will find a lot of valuable info. Just take your time and check all of my blogs KEY INFO and LINKS on the right side. I have provided all this for your benefit. Happy researching.
In Joy
Scott

My Dream of my purpose here

I had a profound dream a few mornings ago where I could see the whole earth/Gai from space and the feeling that I was here to help bring in the light. I have thought that for quite a while ie since 2008 maybe back to 2000 but never had a dream like this before.

I have been following up on my previous profound dream (I shared in a previous post) on 12-4 with David Wilcock were I shared I was reading Dolores Canons Convoluted Universe and read about 120 odd pages. WOW. That book is so kewl. I took notes and scribbled in it everywhere I had a big hit that is something come to me that matched up with what I was reading.

Is anyone else willing too share in comments below. Please do.

1-9 Ben Fulford Weekly Geopolitical News and Analysis The Feds have sued for peace and detailed settlement negotiations have begun

01/09/2012

In a very major development, the Federal Reserve Board faction that is in de-facto control of the Obama regime and Israel has approached the White Dragon Society to negotiate a way to unfreeze their funds. They have promised to use any released funds for humanitarian projects and to develop hitherto forbidden technology.The 130-nation group that announced a new financial system through the Conscious Media Network on January 1^st also contacted the White Dragon Society and said they will prove with action, and not words, that they represent extremely powerful interests. This writer initially, and apparently incorrectly, denounced the announcement as a psy-ops because this group was not identical to the 117 nation Monaco group previously reported about in this newsletter. All of these major factions will now have to reach an agreement. There will some serious horse-trading over the coming weeks before any sort of agreement is reached or public announcement is made but it appears a solution to the financial crisis is now on the horizon.

Weekly Geopolitical News and Analys

Posted at 23:22 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

My Recent Find

The attached documents were sent by a source linked to Ferdinand Marcos and have been confirmed as genuine secret government documents.
このしたにあるファイルはフィリピンのマルコス元大統領関係者のよって送られた。本物の秘密政府文章だそう

。

Posted at 23:15 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

http://benjaminfulford.typepad.com/benjaminfulford/

My Facebook a better way to follow the news and make friends

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1451821724
I am coming out of the facebook closet finally lol after being closed off to my bloggers and youtube friends for sooo long since 1998ish. I only got onto facebook so the CIA could follow me lol, no to follow the newest members of my family.

I tried to friend some big boys ie Ben Fulford, David Wilcock, Richard C Hoagland, David Sereda and they can not accept any more ie they are maxed out which must be above 6000 or so.

We are planning a trip around the US possibly Canada so would love to meet some friends on the way.

Wyoming Sheriffs Told Federal BATF & IRS Agents To Abide By The Constitution Or Face Immediate Arrest

Posted by Real News Reporter on September 27th, 2011

Political Vel Craft

Here’s one the mainstream media isn’t going to tell you: County sheriffs in Wyoming are demanding that federal agents actually abide by the Constitution, or face arrest. Even better, a U.S. Federal District Court agreed.

The court decision was the result of a suit against both the BATF and the IRS by Mattis and other members of the Wyoming Sheriff’s Association. The suit in the Wyoming federal court district sought restoration of the protections enshrined in the United States Constitution and the Wyoming Constitution.

Guess what? The District Court ruled in favor of the sheriffs. In fact, they stated, Wyoming is a sovereign state and the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers exceeding that of any other state or federal official.” Go back and re-read this quote.

The court confirms and asserts that “the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR federal official.” And you thought the 10th Amendment was dead and buried — not in Wyoming, not yet.

Here’s one the mainstream media isn’t going to tell you: County sheriffs in Wyoming are demanding that federal agents actually abide by the Constitution, or face arrest. Even better, a U.S. Federal District Courtagreed.

The court decision was the result of a suit against both the BATF and the IRS by Mattis and other members of the Wyoming Sheriff’s Association. The suit in the Wyoming federal court district sought restoration of the protections enshrined in the United States Constitution and the Wyoming Constitution.

Guess what? The District Court ruled in favor of the sheriffs. In fact, they stated, Wyoming is a sovereign state and the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers exceeding that of any other state or federal official.” Go back and re-read this quote.

The court confirms and asserts that “the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR federal official.” And you thought the 10th Amendment was dead and buried — not in Wyoming, not yet.

Sheriff Dave Mattis

Bighorn County Sheriff Dave Mattis spoke at a press conference following a recent U.S. District Court decision (Case No. 2:96-cv-099-J (2006)) and announced that all federal officials are forbidden to enter his county without his prior approval …… “If a sheriff doesn’t want the Feds in his county he has the constitutional right and power to keep them out, or ask them to leave, or retain them in custody.”

Bighorn County Sheriff Dave Mattis comments:

“If a sheriff doesn’t want the Feds in his county he has the constitutional right and power to keep them out, or ask them to leave, or retain them in custody.”

“I am reacting in response to the actions of federal employees who have attempted to deprive citizens of my county of their privacy, their liberty, and their property without regard to constitutional safeguards.

I hope that more sheriffs all across America will join us in protecting their citizens from the illegal activities of the IRS, EPA, BATF, FBI, or any other federal agency that is operating outside the confines of constitutional law. Employees of the IRS and the EPA are no longer welcome in Bighorn County unless they intend to operate in conformance to constitutional law.”

The implications are huge:

But it gets even better. Since the judge stated that the sheriff “has law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR federal official,” the Wyoming sheriffs are flexing their muscles.

They are demanding access to all BATF files. Why? So as to verify that the agency is not violating provisions of Wyoming law that prohibits the registration of firearms or the keeping of a registry of firearm owners.

It appears to me that one office where the Libertarian Party should focus it’s limited resources is County Sheriff. The change that could be made is nothing to laugh at. Meanwhile, there are still a bunch of nuts wasting valuable resources supporting those that seek offices that will never be won.

by disinter

How It Really Went Down!

UPDATE FEDERAL JUDGE WILLIAM F. DOWNES

United States District Court District of Wyoming

Our office has been receiving inquiries regarding the case of Castaneda v. United States, No. 96-CV-099.

This was a civil case arising out of an alleged entry into an apartment by law enforcement officials in June of 1993. The Plaintiffs, who were staying in the apartment, alleged that the officials violated their civil rights. They filed an action against the United States, unnamed INS agents, Big Horn County, the County Sheriff, and unnamed Sheriff’s deputies.

The complaint was filed in the Federal District Court for the District of Wyoming in May, 1996. The federal defendants were primarily represented by attorneys with the Constitutional Torts Branch of the Civil Division of the Department of Justice. The County defendants were represented by non-federal attorneys.

The case was settled following a settlement conference in 1997. The court did not rule on Plaintiffs’ claims or any other legal issues in the case.

After the settlement conference, Big Horn County Sheriff, David M. Mattis, issued a “Policy.” In the “Policy,” the Sheriff purports to impose conditions upon federal law enforcement operations in the County.

We have learned that it has been reported, erroneously, that the court made a legal ruling in the Castaneda case regarding the authority of federal law enforcement officials to conduct operations in the County. There was no such ruling or decision.

Instead, the court simply granted a motion, submitted jointly by all the parties, to dismiss the case because the parties had settled.

This Court has never issued an order which would serve to limit the lawful activities and duties of federal law enforcement officers and other federal employees in the District of Wyoming.

Furthermore, this Court has never made the comments attributed to it which purports to advise state officers they can prohibit federal law enforcement officers or agents from entering a Wyoming County. Those alleged quotations are utterly false.

Any person who interferes with federal officers in performance of their duties subjects themselves to the risk of criminal prosecution.

William F. Downes
Chief Judge, District of Wyoming

So as I see it, This case was settled out of court and there was no ruling for or against the matter at hand. Further, if federal officers are in the performance of ‘legitimate duties’ then so be it. However, it is also clear that they must have the Sheriffs permission U.S. Supreme Court Ruling Printz v. U.S. (521 U.S. 898) June 27th, 1997. Volubrjotr

UPDATE SHERIFF MATTIS

The SPOTLIGHT February 7, 2000 Gutsy Wyoming Sheriff Bucks Federal Government

A sherif in Wyoming has initiated new guidelines for federal officials visiting his county which put power back in the hands of the people.

By James P. Tucker

For more than two years, all federal agents entering Bighorn County, Wyo., have been required to check in with sheriff Dave Mattis and state their intentions.

So far, the few who have ventured into the sparsely populated county have been “cleared” for non-invasive chores.

The requirement that federal bureaucrats need to explain their mission stems from the settlement of a federal lawsuit involving Wyoming citizens and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS).

INS officials had entered Bighorn County and started a “round up” of what they believed were illegal aliens, the sheriff said. But all those caught in the roundup were American citizens.

After the settlement, “I issued a written policy – that if hey have actions in Bighorn County they must tell me what they are doing,” Mattis told The SPOTLIGHT.

So far, the few who have entered have “not asked to take real actions,” Mattis said.

When asked if he would object to any federal missions, Mattis responded: “I would take it on a case-by-case basis and discuss it.”

While this is a significant precedent for local governments protecting their citizens from heavy-handed bureaucrats, Internet reports calling it a “court decision” and quoting the sheriff saying he can detain federal officials in custody are wrong, Mattis said. While an Internet report was being read to him for confirmation Mattis interrupted, saying: “I’ve seen that.”

NO IDEA

A similar report emerged from Tennessee, Mattis said, and keeps surfacing, from people who “Write it the way they want it to be.” Mattis said he has “no idea where it came from” but it originated in Nashville in 1997.

The Wyoming Sheriff’s Association, contrary to Internet reports, is not involved, Mattis said, but “probably some sheriffs are sympathetic.”

But even without Internet embellishments, the Bighorn County action is an encouraging sign that states are reclaiming their traditional roles in our government. Cities, towns and counties are mere political subdivisions of States.

The Supreme Court recently handed down decisions reinforcing states’ rights, such as telling Congress that it has no role in deciding local schools’ “drug-free zones” or requiring state governments to bow to federal age-discrimination laws.

More such states’ rights cases are pending, including whether the federal government can restrict laws against abortions in which the court may reverse its own 1973 “Roe” ruling and the usage of medicinal marijuana.

Meanwhile, congress is talking about “returning power to the states” and passed “unfunded mandates” legislation prohibiting itself from imposing financial burdens and duties on states – such as requiring local governments to pay for federal gun “background checks” on gun owners.*

The Latest Sheriff vs Federal Agents Showdown

Sheriffs Put Feds In Their Place.

ONE THAT JUST HAPPENED IN NEW MEXICO!

Obama’s Federal Stooges Beginning To Understand The Power Of Sheriffs: Sheriff Warns Federal Agents They Will Be Arrested If They Interfere!

ANOTHER!

The Sheriff Has More Power In His County Than The President Of The United States: U.S. Constitution U.S. Supreme Court ~ Quashes Obama’s Claim To “Supremacy Clause”

Obama’s High Noon: Sheriff’s Eligibility ‘Posse’ Sparks Media Whirlwind.

YET STILL ANOTHER!

A new bill has been introduced in the Montana State Legislature which require the County Sheriff be notified before any federal agents are allowed to enter the state with the intention of carrying out law enforcement actions. The bill provides not only for pre-notification, but the Sheriff must also give consent before federal agents may proceed.

HERE’S ANOTHER ONE!

Freedom County, Texas, USA UPDATE

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Scalia

THE U.S. SUPREME COURT HAS RULED.

The “supremacy clause” is dealt with in Mack/Printz, in which the U.S. Supreme Court stated once and for all, that the only thing “supreme” is the Constitution itself. Where by the powers, the Sheriff reigns supreme above the president.

On June 27th, 1997, the sheriffs won; in Printz v. U.S. (521 U.S. 898) the U.S. Supreme Court struck Brady down. Associate Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the ruling for the Court, in which he explained our system of government at length. The justly revered system of checks and balances is the key:

“. . . The great innovation of this design was that ‘our citizens would have two political capacities, one state and one federal, each protected from incursion by the other’” – “a legal system unprecedented in form and design, establishing two orders of government, each with its own direct relationship, its own privity, its own set of mutual rights and obligations to the people who sustain it and are governed by it.” (P. 920)

Scalia quotes President James Madison, “father” of the Constitution: “[T]he local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.” The Federalist, No. 39 at 245.

THROW THE FEDS OUT OF YOUR STATE NOW!

Date: Monday, 4 July 2005, 10:38 p.m.

THE COURTS HAVE SPOKEN! “Any legislation including the Patriot Acts which attempts to compel State Officers to execute Federal Law is unconstitutional. Further, any federal investigational liberties can be forbidden by the States’ highest law enforcement officer. Finally, any attempts by a federal agency to coerce compliance to such liberties can be grounds for arrest of any of their agents who do not comply with the directions of that officer.”

THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION (COURT CASES) WAS REQUESTED BY A STATE CONGRESSMAN FROM A NORTHERN STATE. IT IS THE SAME BASIC INFORMATION SENT TO THE GROUP FIGHTING THE FEDS OVER THE WATER IN THE KLAMATH RESERVOIR SEVERAL YEARS AGO. IT WAS USED TO TELL THE FEDS TO LEAVE. THEY APPARENTLY WEREN’T HAPPY ABOUT IT, BUT THEY LEFT NONETHELESS.

THIS WOULD SEEM TO APPLY TO THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PATRIOT ACTS, MEDICAL MARIJUANA AND ALL OTHER FEDERAL PROGRAMS/LAWS/ENACTMENTS. EVEN CODEX! STAND UP AND TELL THE FEDS TO GET OUT!

THINK ABOUT IT! IS IT TIME? MAYBE YOU NEED TO SEND THIS TO YOUR STATE LEGISLATORS AND GOVERNOR…?
[A quote from the Supreme Court Case below:
"‘[T]he 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.’”]

Case Numbers, links and important ‘snippets’ are all below. Thanks to Adam Selene for his research and for recreating this for us in this most important time:
*************************************************************​***

Attached as appendix “A” is a copy of one of the many newspaper reports citing the case law from the Federal District Court for Wyoming stating that the States top law enforcement officers (Sheriffs) there hold the authority to disallow Federal agents to operate in their counties. The Sovereign right and the top law enforcement officers of any of the other 49 Sovereign States, hold the same authority. This has never been challenged in any higher court, because no grounds will ever be found whereby a challenge by the Federal government can be made.

One issue should be taken into account when using this case as precedent. In this case the State of Wyoming had specific wording in their State Constitution about who was the supreme law enforcement officer of the districts known as “Counties”, that of course being the “Sheriff”. In some states their State Constitution may appoint a different person, and it is necessary to identify who it is. Such a shift of authority to that person does not alleviate the Federal government from the requirement to obey them, should they use their authority. It also does nothing to change or negate any State’s standing as Sovereign in any manner.

WYATT EARP

March 19, 1848 – January 13, 1929

Legal Links:

State Legal Materials

Expand Search

Oklahoma

Expand Search

Wyoming

Expand Search

Federal Legal Materials

Expand

Expand Search

Federal Cases

Expand Search

Also attached as appendix “B” are excerpts from Printz ruling of Printz/Mack vs. US (BRADY BILL) Supreme Court of the United States, Case numbers 95-1503 and 95-1478, June 27, 1997.

This case was filed by two Sheriffs, one from Wyoming and one from Montana, when Federal authorities tried to require Sovereign State employees (including County Sheriffs) to uphold federal legislation, under the Brady Bill.

Through this challenge the Supremes ruled it unlawful and reminded the Federal government that previous rulings by the high court had previously forbidden this practice.

The attached excerpts are most appropriate to this matter, because a concentrated program of awarding County Sheriffs either active or honorary U.S. Marshall positions is currently underway, in an attempt to make them subject to federal direction. This is clearly forbidden in the cited ruling excerpts.

What this all boils down to is this:

Any legislation including the Patriot Acts which attempts to compel State Officers to execute Federal Law is unconstitutional. Further, any federal investigational liberties can be forbidden by the States’ highest law enforcement officer. Finally, any attempts by a federal agency to coerce compliance to such liberties can be grounds for arrest of any of their agents who do not comply with the directions of that officer.

Respectfully submitted,

Adam Selene

Freelance Legislative Researcher

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

Appendix “A”

Sheriff boots Feds from his county

By Phil Hamby

[See note below.]

Sheriff Dave Mattis of Big Horn County, Wyoming said this week that as a result of Case # 96-CV099-J, U.S. District Court, District of Wyoming, he now has a written policy that forbids federal officials from entering his county and exercising authority over county residents unless he is notified first of their intentions.

After explaining their mission, Mattis said he grants them permission to proceed if he is convinced they are operating within the legal parameters and authority limitations set forth in the U.S. Constitution.

The sheriff grants permission on a case-by-case basis only. When asked what, if any, repercussions he had gotten from the Feds, he quickly and confidently replied, “None whatsoever.”

He explained by saying, “They know they do not have jurisdiction in my county unless I grant it to them.”

Mattis clarified his position by saying the federal court had ruled the state of Wyoming is a sovereign state and the state constitution plainly states that a county sheriff is the top law enforcement official in the county.

Additionally, Sheriff Mattis contends that the U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, clearly defines the geographic territories where the federal government has jurisdiction. Amendment X, he said, states that “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.”

Therefore, Mattis thoroughly believes the Feds have very limited powers in any state unless the local high-sheriff allows them to exercise power beyond that which the Constitution provides. “Put another way,” Mattis said, “if the sheriff doesn’t want the Feds in his county, he has the constitutional power and right to keep them out or ask them to leave.” Accompanied with other legal interpretations Mattis stands on the definition of the word “sovereign,” which is defined by Webster’s as “paramount, supreme. Having supreme rank or power. Independent: a sovereign State.”

Mattis said he grew weary of the Feds coming into his county and running rough-shod over county residents: i.e., illegally searching, seizing property, confiscating bank accounts, restricting the free use of private lands and other abuses, without a valid warrant and without first following due process of law as guaranteed by the Constitution to every citizen.

As long as Mattis remains sheriff he says he will continue to see to it that the citizens of his county get their day in court.

Mattis went on to say that, to his knowledge, even the IRS has not attempted to seize any citizen’s real property, bank account or any other private-owned possessions since he ran the Feds out of his county.

Sheriff Mattis emphasized that he is not a radical man. He said he is only dedicated to protecting the constitutional rights of the citizens of his county. He added that ordinary citizens are not the only ones bound by and expected to obey laws. Elected officials and government employees at all levels of government are also bound by and should be expected to obey certain laws.

As long as Sheriff Mattis is the high-sheriff of Big Horn County, he seems determined to make sure private citizens and government officials alike act within the law and their designated powers.

Sheriff Mattis came across as a soft-spoken, polite man whose only interest is protecting the citizens he was elected to serve. That being the case, he might be the sheriff for as long as he wants to be.

Sheriff Mattis is hopeful that other sheriffs will assume the same stance.

Copyright 1997 The Knoxville Journal

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

Appendix “B”

Excerpts with emphasis added from:

U.S. Supreme Court

Syllabus

PRINTZ, SHERIFF/CORONER, RAVALLI COUNTY, MONTANA v. UNITED STATES

certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit

No. 95-1478.

Argued December 3, 1996

Decided June 27, 1997

“The petitioners here object to being pressed into federal service, and contend that congressional action compelling state officers to execute federal laws is unconstitutional…”

“We have held, however, that state leglislatures are not subject to federal direction. New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992). 5 “

“Although the States surrendered many of their powers to the new Federal Government, they retained “a residuary and inviolable sovereignty,” The Federalist No. 39, at 245 (J. Madison). This is reflected throughout the Constitution’s text, Lane County v. Oregon, 7 Wall. 71, 76 (1869); Texas v. White, 7 Wall. 700, 725 (1869)… Residual state sovereignty was also implicit, of course, in the Constitution’s conferral upon Congress of not all governmental powers,but only discrete, enumerated ones, Art. I, §8, which implication was rendered express by the Tenth Amendment’s assertion that ‘[T]he 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.’ “

“The Framers’ experience under the Articles of Confederation had persuaded them that using the States as the instruments of federal governance was both ineffectual and provocative of federal state conflict. See The Federalist No. 15.”

“Our citizens would have two political capacities, one state and one federal, each protected from incursion by the other…The Constitution thus contemplates that a State’s government will represent and remain accountable to its own citizens. See New York, supra, at 168-169; United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 576 -577 (1995) (Kennedy, J., concurring). Cf. Edgar v. MITE Corp., 457 U.S. 624, 644 (1982) (‘the State has no legitimate interest in protecting nonresident[s]’). “

“This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty…Just as the separation and independence of the coordinate branches of the Federal Government serve to prevent the accumulation of excessive power in any one branch, a healthy balance of power between the States and the Federal Government will reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front.” Gregory v. Ashcroft, 501 U.S. 452, 457 (1991)…”

“The dissent perceives a simple answer in that portion of Article VI which requires that ‘all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution,’ arguing that by virtue of the Supremacy Clause this makes ‘not only the Constitution, but every law enacted by Congress as well,’ binding on state officers, including laws requiring state officer enforcement…The Supremacy Clause, however, makes ‘Law of the Land’ only ‘Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance [of the Constitution’; so the Supremacy Clause merely brings us back to the question discussed earlier, whether laws conscripting state officers violate state sovereignty and are thus not in accord with the Constitution…”

“The Federal Government,” we held, “may not compel the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 188 (1992)… We held in New York that Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the State’s officers directly. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policymaking is involved, and no case by case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty. Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is reversed.

SOURCED FROM

http://www.realnewsreporter.com/?p=8194

Thanks too my mate Bart who had this on his Facebook page. I will share my facebook page above in a new blog post.

OBAMA'S MOTION TO DISMISS IS DENIED Court Doc

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Farrar-Motion-to-dismiss-by-Obama-is-denied.pdf