▼

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Part 1 - AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Pushback - People are waking up

Part 1
AGENDA 21 / SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT:
Pushback - People are waking up!

* Alert ! New Post - Obama Serves 14 State Governors with Warnings of Arrest (1st video posted below)


Part 1: Constitutional expert, the state governments, sheriffs

 Part 2: The oath keepers in the police - military - militia, and whistleblowers

Link here for Part 2
 

Link here to view related topics:

1. AGENDA 21/ Sustainable Development Explained: North America - US - Canada - Nova Scotia (It is recommended that you read this 1st)

2. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Population Cut/ Cull (kill) Part 1
(They want to kill us, You should question, Vaccines, Fluoride, Water, GMOs (Genetically Modified Foods) , Chemtrails, Morgellons - GMO/Chemtrail desease. * ALERT ! ! !* Russian leader Putin has threatened Obama with World War 3 over continued use of GMOs (Genetically Modified Foods)

3. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Population Cut/ Cull (kill) Part 2
(Morgellons, Meat, Aspartame, No home gardens, Planned vitamin, mineral and organic food ban, Smart meters, Cancer cures, Pollution free energy and cars, Abortion, After birth abortion, Denying medical care, Killing our own troops, Gun control)

4. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Pushback - People are waking up Part 1
(States, Governors, Sheriffs)

5. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Pushback - People are waking up Part 2
(Militia, Military, Whistleblowers)

6. Agenda 21/Sustainable Development: The Bigger picture

7. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Political Takeover

8. AGENDA 21/ SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Canada - New World Order (NWO)

9. American Policy Center


PUSHBACK:

PART 1 -This page
1. Constitutional Expert:

2. State Sovereignty: IMPORTANT NEW POST ! ! ! MAY 9, 2013
Alert ! New Aug 2013 - Obama Serves 14 State Governors with Warnings of Arrest

3. Sheriffs: New POSTS  JULY 12, 2013


PART 2 (link above)
4. OathKeepers (Military and Militia): NEW POST !!! May 9th 2013

5. Whistleblowers



Obama Serves 14 State Governors with Warnings of Arrest
- And Why is this Not Front Page News?
5:50 -When federal judge told prosecuting attorneys " I'm about to declare the Patriot Act unconstitutional.  Do you still want to go after these 2 ladies for discussing this warrant." Suddenly this case disappeared.
 
I am sorry this judge gave them a chance to back out - This judge should have gone forward with the action that he knew was right instead of giving them a way out!
 
http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2013/05/obama-serves-14-state-governors-with-warnings-of-arrest-and-why-is-this-not-front-page-news-2636456.html

May 7, 2013
by Ken Larive
 
Barack Hussein Obama had served 14-State Governors in the United States, National Security Letters (NSLs) warning that the Governor’s actions in attempting to form “State Defense Forces” needs to be halted “immediately” or they will face arrest for the crime of treason. The employment of NSLs was authorized by the Patriot Act introduced by George W. Bush. Contained within the section related to these letters, it is forbidden for anyone receiving a NSL warning to even acknowledge the existence of said communication !

Obama is angered by the several State Governors who have re-established “State Defense Forces.” These forces are described as: “State Defense Forces (also known as State Guards, State Military Reserves, State Militias) in the United States are military units that operate under the sole authority of a state government; they are not regulated by the National Guard Bureau nor are they part of the Army National Guard of the United States. State Defense Forces are authorized by state and federal law and are under the command of the governor of each state. State Defense Forces are distinct from their state’s National Guard in that they cannot become federal entities.”

Mr. Obama is fearful of these State Defense Forces, in that he does not have control of said forces, and with the U.S. Military stretched to near breaking from multiple deployments and theatre actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, these State military forces would be under the direct command and authority of the Governors in which states have said forces. In essence, the Governors would have “de facto control” of the United States.

The two Governors leading this move are: Tim Pawlenty, Governor of Minnesota; and Rick Perry, Governor of Texas. Both of these State Governors stated they have: “…deep fear the President is destroying their Nation.”

Governor Pawlenty’s fear of Obama is that since Obama took office he has appeased America’s enemies and has shunned some of America’s strongest allies, especially Israel. Governor Perry has declared that Obama is punishing his State of Texas by dumping tens-of-thousands of illegal Mexican immigrants into the cities and small towns of Texas. Governor Perry further recently stated: “If Barack Obama’s Washington doesn’t stop being so oppressive, Texans might feel compelled to renounce their American citizenry and secede from the union.”

Obama fearing a revolution against him by the states, has moved swiftly by nationalizing nearly all National Guard Forces in multiple states; Georgia, Alabama, Kansas, Minnesota, Tennessee, Virginia, Louisiana, South Carolina – to name a few. The Governors of the Great States of Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia still have under their Command-and-Control the State Defense Forces to go against U.S. Federal forces should the need arise. Also important to note: There are NO U.S. laws prohibiting National Guard troops from also joining their State’s Defense Forces. This dilemma occurred during the Civil War with many “citizen soldiers” choosing to serve their states instead of the Federal Government.

This is a fluid and still developing situation that warrants close attention.



Sovereignty Lost:
It Is a Privilege Merely To Stand On This Soil Of Freedom,
While It Is Still Free

1. Constitutional Expert:

Dr. Edwin Vieira Explains
States Rights and Personal Liberties 1/4


Dr. Edwin Vieira Explains
States Rights and Personal Liberties 2/4


Dr. Edwin Vieira Explains
States Rights and Personal Liberties 3/4


Dr. Edwin Vieira Explains
States Rights and Personal Liberties 4/4



4-OCCUPY THE RABBIT HOLE...change begins with truth

Gubernare = Control = Govern
Mente = Mind = ment
Therefore government = Control of the mind or Mind control


2. State Sovereignty:

Important 2 NEW POST ! ! ! ! !
Obama Serves 14-State Governors With Warnings of Arrest: And why is this not front page news?
Tuesday, May 7, 2013
http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2013/05/obama-serves-14-state-governors-with-warnings-of-arrest-and-why-is-this-not-front-page-news-2636456.html

Barack Hussein Obama had served 14-State Governors in the United States, National Security Letters (NSLs) warning that the Governor’s actions in attempting to form “State Defense Forces” needs to be halted “immediately” or they will face arrest for the crime of treason. The employment of NSLs was authorized by the Patriot Act introduced by George W. Bush. Contained within the section related to these letters, it is forbidden for anyone receiving a NSL warning to even acknowledge the existence of said communication.

Obama is angered by the several State Governors who have re-established “State Defense Forces.” These forces are described as: “State Defense Forces (also known as State Guards, State Military Reserves, State Militias) in the United States are military units that operate under the sole authority of a state government; they are not regulated by the National Guard Bureau nor are they part of the Army National Guard of the United States.

State Defense Forces are authorized by state and federal law and are under the command of the governor of each state. State Defense Forces are distinct from their state’s National Guard in that they cannot become federal entities.”

Mr. Obama is fearful of these State Defense Forces, in that he does not have control of said forces, and with the U.S. Military stretched to near breaking from multiple deployments and theatre actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, these State military forces would be under the direct command and authority of the Governors in which states have said forces. In essence, the Governors would have “de facto control” of the United States. [According to the US Constitution, this is the way it is suppose to be ]

The two Governors leading this move are: Tim Pawlenty, Governor of Minnesota; and Rick Perry, Governor of Texas. Both of these State Governors stated they have: “…deep fear the President is destroying their Nation.” Governor Pawlenty’s fear of Obama is that since Obama took office he has appeased America’s enemies and has shunned some of America’s strongest allies, especially Israel. Governor Perry has declared that Obama is punishing his State of Texas by dumping tens-of-thousands of illegal Mexican immigrants into the cities and small towns of Texas. Governor Perry further recently stated: “If Barack Obama’s Washington doesn’t stop being so oppressive, Texans might feel compelled to renounce their American citizenry and secede from the union.”

Obama fearing a revolution against him by the states, [They have a legal right to do so.] has moved swiftly by nationalizing nearly all National Guard Forces in multiple states; Georgia, Alabama, Kansas, Minnesota, Tennessee, Virginia, Louisiana, South Carolina – to name a few. The Governors of the Great States of Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia still have under their Command-and-Control the State Defense Forces to go against U.S. Federal forces should the need arise.

Also important to note: There are NO U.S. laws prohibiting National Guard troops from also joining their State’s Defense Forces. This dilemma occurred during the Civil War with many “citizen soldiers” choosing to serve their states instead of the Federal Government.

This is a fluid and still developing situation that warrants close attention.

 
Governor Rick Perry
Gov. Perry: Texas wants its gold back from the Federal Reserve
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/27/gov-perry-texas-wants-its-gold-back-federal-reserv/
March 27, 2013

Texas Gov Rick Perry told Glenn Beck on his radio show last week that he wants the state’s $1 billion in gold reserves back from the Federal Reserve.

State Rep Giovanni Capriglione is sponsoring a bill that would establish the Texas Bullion Depository, a state-based bank to house the gold bars owned by the University of Texas Investment Management Company, the Texas Tribune  reports.

Mr Capriglione told the Texas Tribune that the measure is “not about putting Texas on its own gold standard, [but instead will] give the state a reputation as being more financially secure in the event of a national or international financial crisis.”

Mr. Perry said his state was “in the [legislative] process” of “bringing gold that belongs to the state of Texas back into the state.”

“If we own it,” the governor said, “I will suggest to you that that’s not someone else’s determination whether we can take possession of it back or not.”

 
Alabama Adopts First Official State Ban on UN Agenda 21
Monday, 04 June 2012
http://thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/11592-alabama-adopts-first-official-state-ban-on-un-agenda-21
Alabama became the first state to adopt a tough law protecting private property and due process by prohibiting any government involvement with or participation in a controversial United Nations scheme known as Agenda 21. Activists from across the political spectrum celebrated the measure’s approval as a significant victory against the UN “sustainability” plot, expressing hope that similar sovereignty-preserving measures would be adopted in other states as the nationwide battle heats up.

The Alabama Senate Bill (SB) 477 legislation, known unofficially among some supporters as the “Due Process for Property Rights” Act, was approved unanimously by both the state House and Senate. After hesitating for a few days, late last month Republican Governor Robert Bentley finally signed into law the wildly popular measure — but only after heavy pressure from activists forced his hand.

Virtually no mention of the law was made in the establishment press. But analysts said the measure was likely the strongest protection against the UN scheme passed anywhere in America so far. The law, aimed at protecting private property rights, specifically prevents all state agencies and local governments in Alabama from participating in the global scheme in any way.

"The State of Alabama and all political subdivisions may not adopt or implement policy recommendations that deliberately or inadvertently infringe or restrict private property rights without due process, as may be required by policy recommendations originating in, or traceable to 'Agenda 21,' " the law states, adding a brief background on the UN plan hatched at the 1992 “Earth Summit” in Rio de Janeiro.

The people of Alabama acting through their elected representatives — not UN bureaucrats — have the authority to develop the state’s environmental and development policies, the official synopsis of the law explains. Therefore, infringements on the property rights of citizens linked to “any other international law or ancillary plan of action that contravenes the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of the State of Alabama” are also prohibited under the new measure.

Of course, as the law points out, the UN has enlisted a broad array of non-governmental and inter-governmental organizations in its effort to foist Agenda 21 on the world — most notably a Germany-based group called ICLEI, formerly known as the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives. But the new measure takes direct aim at that problem, too: “the State of Alabama and all political subdivisions may not enter into any agreement, expend any sum of money, or receive funds contracting services, or giving financial aid to or from” any such entities, as defined in Agenda 21 documents.

“This bill, that would bar the state from taking over private property without due process, is intended to shelter Alabamians from the United Nations Agenda 21, a sustainable development initiative that some conservatives see as a precursor for the creation of a world government,” explained Alabama GOP Executive Director T.J. Maloney when announcing that it had been signed into law.

The Republican National Committee (RNC) adopted a resolution earlier this year blasting the global scheme and urging policy makers to oppose it, and state parties have followed suit.

Public support for the Alabama law was overwhelming and bipartisan as citizens who had been terrorized by Agenda 21-linked schemes targeting their private property spoke out. But according to analysts and state Republican Party officials cited in press reports, Gov. Bentley was originally hesitant to sign the bill — almost certainly due to concerns over the potential loss of some federal funding.

The U.S. Senate, of course, has never formally ratified Agenda 21. But the executive branch — in conjunction with accomplices at the international, state, and local levels — has for two decades been quietly attempting to impose the plan on Americans by stealth, mostly using deceptive terms like “Smart Growth” and “Green.” And proponents of the global scheme consistently threaten that states seeking to protect citizens from the UN plot could end up losing some federal funds.

“Every time you take a dollar of federal money, there’s strings attached,” explained Ken Freeman, chairman of the Alabama-based group Alliance for Citizens Rights (ACR), an organization that fought hard to ensure that the Governor signed the bill into law. “We were originally walking soft on this issue, to tell you the truth, because when things were going our way, why change anything?”

But when Gov. Bentley did not immediately approve the bill, Freeman told a reporter, ACR turned the activism up a notch, urging citizens to contact the Governor’s office and express their support for the measure. The grassroots pressure paid off: Alabama became the first state to be officially shielded by law from UN-linked anti-property rights scheming.

“It seems that Agenda 21 does actually bring people together in communities — just not in the way the U.N. had hoped for,” remarked Justice Gilpin-Green in a column for the conservative site Townhall, citing Freeman and other instrumental supporters of the effort. “Hopefully other states can mirror Alabama’s determined nature in passing their anti-Agenda 21 legislation. It was citizen awareness and direct action that finally brought about the needed changes last week and that same awareness and action will be needed for the future of every other state.”

Legislative analysts said the bill, sponsored by GOP state Sen. Gerald Dial, was extremely well crafted: protecting citizens and individual rights from UN decrees in a simple, straightforward manner that Agenda 21 advocates would have a hard time criticizing. Liberty-minded organizations and lawmakers are already examining the measure for potential use as a model in other states currently struggling to expel the global scheme and its myriad tentacles.

“Alabama House Bill 618 [SB 477] is a large step towards protecting Alabamians against UN meddling. It protects the due process rights of Alabamians. It keeps Constitutional Law above International Law,” noted Jason Baker, a Montgomery-based conservative pundit with the Examiner. “Now state after state awakens to the threat it poses to freedom and sovereignty.”

Across America, Tea Party groups, liberty-minded Democrats, libertarians, and a broad coalition of activists
have been turning up the heat on Agenda 21.

Tennessee, for example, adopted a bipartisan state resolution slamming the UN scheme as an “insidious” and “socialist” plot that is completely at odds with American traditions of limited government, individual freedom, private property, and self-governance under the Constitution. Numerous other states are pursuing similar measures.

A bill similar to Alabama’s seeking a complete ban on Agenda 21 and unconstitutional UN “sustainability” efforts in Arizona was approved overwhelmingly in the state Senate. The legislation died in the state House even after clearing several hurdles, however, when the legislative session ended before a final vote could be taken. New Hampshire is reportedly working on a bill to ban Agenda 21 that sailed through the state House last month.

Meanwhile, local governments across America — under intense pressure from citizens and activist groups — are slowly awakening to what critics call the “dangers” of the UN scheme. Dozens of cities and counties have withdrawn from ICLEI in recent years, and as awareness continues to grow, that trend is expected to accelerate.

The UN, however, is doubling down on its controversial plan. In June, governments from all over the world will be meeting in Rio de Janeiro for the so-called “Conference on Sustainable Development” — known as Rio+20 for short. According to official documents released by the global body, the summit, headed by Chinese Communist Sha Zukang, will be seeking to dramatically transform human civilization under the guise of environmentalism.

Production, education, consumption, individual rights, and even people’s thoughts will all be targeted under the global plan to create a so-called “green economy,” the UN admitted. But with the tidal wave of opposition in America growing stronger every single day, analysts expect fierce U.S. opposition — if not from the Obama administration, at least from the increasingly outraged citizenry.



Sovereignty Under 10th Amendment



over half of the U.S States declare sovereignty



"We The People"s' Declaration Of Revolution 2009

To encourage everyone who is fed up with the way our government is being run, to stand up and fight for the rights and liberties our founding fathers wrote into law.



Declaring Individual Sovereignty Part I of II



Declaring Individual Sovereignty Part II of II



20 + States Declaring Sovereignty Under the 10th Amendment!!!
Pennsylvania State Rep Sam Rohrer

The 10th Amendment. It ensures that any powers not granted to the federal government through the Constitution are reserved to the states and the people. However, through various expansions of federal authority, the government in Washington, D.C., has impeded on the powers reserved to the states and the people. This significant transfer of powers from the individual states to the national government came not through revolution, but through ongoing and unchecked encroachments. Now, this federal intrusion on state sovereignty has reached a breaking point.
The Answer: Put Federal Authorities on Notice. In an attempt to proclaim and reassert Pennsylvania state government's independence and sovereignty from the federal government, I plan to introduce a House resolution reminding federal authorities about the constitutional limitations on their powers and calling on them to cease and desist with all activities that infringe on the powers reserved to the state of Pennsylvania and its citizens. This is an issue that is currently being addressed by more than 20 other states across our nation. Like our sister states, Pennsylvania must draw a line in the sand and reassert its sovereignty.
To read a copy of the resolution click the following link: http://samrohrer.com/uploads/10thAmendment-HR.pdf


Texas Declares Sovereignty!

Texas governor affirms sovereignty under the 10th amendment - tells the Federal Government to stick it where the sun don't shine.


Judge Andrew Napolitano on Texas Secession



States Fight Back: Rep. Leo Berman (Texas)
on Alex Jones (2-20-09) 1/2



States Fight Back: Rep. Leo Berman (Texas)
on Alex Jones (2-20-09) 2/2



States Fight Back: Sen. Dan Patrick (Texas)
on Alex Jones (2-24-09) 1/2


States Fight Back: Sen. Dan Patrick (Texas)
on Alex Jones (2-24-09) 2/2



Oklahoma Declares Sovereignty

STATE OF OKLAHOMA 2nd Session of the 51st Legislature (2008) HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 1089

By: Key AS INTRODUCED

A Joint Resolution claiming sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over certain powers; serving notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates; and directing distribution.

WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:

"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."; and

WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the United States and no more; and

WHEREAS, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means that the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states; and

WHEREAS, today, in 2008, the states are demonstrably treated as agents of the federal government; and

WHEREAS, many federal mandates are directly in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and

WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the states; and

WHEREAS, a number of proposals from previous administrations and some now pending from the present administration and from Congress may further violate the Constitution of the United States.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE SENATE OF THE 2ND SESSION OF THE 51ST OKLAHOMA LEGISLATURE:

THAT the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.

THAT this serves as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.

THAT a copy of this resolution be distributed to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate of each state's legislature of the United States of America, and each member of the Oklahoma Congressional Delegation.

Charles Key (Oklahoma)  1/2 http://youtu.be/jFrpv9J4hMA 
Charles Key (Oklahoma)  2/2 http://youtu.be/OWBTd9l8fnw


States Fight Back: Rep. Charles Key (Oklahoma)
on Alex Jones (2-10-09) 1/3
http://charleskey.com/wp/



States Fight Back: Rep. Charles Key (Oklahoma)
on Alex Jones (2-10-09) 2/3


States Fight Back: Rep. Charles Key (Oklahoma)
on Alex Jones (2-10-09) 3/3



NH (New Hampshire) to Secede over Obama NWO Agenda



States Fight Back: Reps. Itse and Ingbretson (New Hampshire)
on Alex Jones (2-13-09) 1/4


States Fight Back: Reps. Itse and Ingbretson (New Hampshire)
on Alex Jones (2-13-09) 2/4


States Fight Back: Reps. Itse and Ingbretson (New Hampshire)
on Alex Jones (2-13-09) 3/4


States Fight Back: Reps. Itse and Ingbretson (New Hampshire)
on Alex Jones (2-13-09) 4/4



States Fight Back: Rep. Joel Boniek (Montana)
on Alex Jones (2-20-09) 1/2


States Fight Back: Rep. Joel Boniek (Montana)
on Alex Jones (2-20-09) 2/2



States Fight Back: Rep. Matt Shea (Spokane) on Alex Jones (2-9-09) 1/3



States Fight Back: Rep. Matt Shea (Spokane)
on Alex Jones (2-9-09) 2/3



States Fight Back: Rep. Matt Shea (Spokane)
on Alex Jones (2-9-09) 3/3



States Fight Back: Rep. Jim Guest (Missouri)
on Alex Jones (2-11-09) 1/2
http://jimguest.com/


States Fight Back: Rep. Jim Guest (Missouri)
on Alex Jones (2-11-09) 1/2


States Fight Back: Rep. Cynthia Davis (Missouri)
on Alex Jones (2-12-09) 1/2
http://www.cynthiadavis.net/


States Fight Back: Rep. Cynthia Davis (Missouri)
on Alex Jones (2-12-09) 2/2



States Fight Back: Rep. Susan Lynn (Tennessee)
on Alex Jones (3-7-09) 1/2


States Fight Back: Rep. Susan Lynn (Tennessee)
on Alex Jones (3-7-09) 2/2



THE STATES WANT TO SECEDE FROM THE UNION
FREE VT (Vermont)!

3. Sheriffs:

NEW POST JUNE 14th 2013 below

PLEASE - PLEASE - Link here http://revealingtruthinnovascotia.blogspot.ca/search/label/0.%20AGENDA%2021%2F%20SUSTAINABLE%20DEVELOPMENT%3A%20Population%20Cut%2F%20Cull%20-%20Part%202 and scroll down to
20. Gun Control to find out why gun control is dangerous for the life of you and your family and the real reason they government is trying to take your guns away and the stats from history that show what happens when your own government takes your guns away.


Sheriffs Across U.S. Rise Up Against Obama Regime

Sheriffs Across U.S. Rise Up Against Obama Regime. Sheriffs have risen up all over our great nation to stand up against the unconstitutional gun control measures being taken.

I call on sheriffs all over this nation to add their voices to the growing numbers of faithful protectors of our freedom. -Richard Mack

Sheriffs and associations who have made public statements committing to protect their citizens' 2nd Amendment rights from Obama's gun control efforts will be added. Some of these sheriffs are members of the CSPOA, but inclusion in this list does not necessarily mean they are a member.

Now 340 sheriffs refuse to enforce gun control

Laws are 'feel-good, knee-jerk reactions that are unenforceable'

 
By Garth Kant
A Colorado sheriff has joined the list of at least 340 sheriffs who have vowed to uphold the Constitution against gun-control measures that violate Americans’ Second Amendment rights.
Weld County Sheriff John Cooke said he and many other county sheriffs “won’t bother enforcing” laws poised to go into effect in Colorado because it would be impossible to keep track of whether gun owners are meeting the new requirements.
 
He says the laws are “feel-good, knee-jerk reactions that are unenforceable” and would “give a false sense of security.”
 
Cooke said he and other sheriffs are considering filing a lawsuit to block the laws.
 
As WND reported, similar sentiments have been expressed by Maricopa County Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio and sheriffs in Missouri, California, Kansas, Montana and in dozens of counties in several states across the country. A growing list of now more than 340 sheriffs who have reportedly vowed to uphold the Constitution against efforts to undermine Americans’ gun rights is being accumulated by the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association.
 
The Colorado Legislature passed a bill expanding requirements for background checks and another putting a 15-round limit on ammunition magazines. Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper is expected to sign both bills into law.
 
Sheriff Cooke said requiring a $10 background check to legally transfer a gun won’t stop gun violence.
 
“Criminals are still going to get their guns,” he said.
 
Cooke pointed out the other law would technically ban all magazines due to a provision outlawing magazines that can be altered. He noted that any magazine can be altered to hold more ammunition.
As WND reported just four days ago, Cooke said he is getting political pressure to support the laws.
He received an email chain pointing out that Senate Majority Leader John Morse, a Democrat, said if a salary bill were introduced, it would not be until late in the session, after the gun-control bills had been voted on.
 
Cooke said while he’s not willing to conclude the emails meet the legal definition of extortion, it was apparent that was the intention.
 
“When you look at the email, I don’t see how you could look at it any other way,” Cooke said. “It definitely implied the reason a pay raise bill was being held up was to punish us for our stance against these gun bills. Then they had another email suggesting if we were to support this bill, it would look better for us and maybe we can get a bill introduced for a raise.
 
“To me, that didn’t sit well at all. I’m not willing to say its extortion yet, but it just looked bad. We were not willing to compromise on our principles. We felt the bill was bad, and we were not going to support it.”
 
The sheriff’s pushback against the gun measures is significant because Democratic lawmakers are crafting similar bills in other states.
“Colorado is a pawn for the Obama-Biden plan,” he added.
 
And, in fact, Vice-President Joe Biden called undecided Democrats and pushed for passage of the bills.
 
“He’s watching us, and if we had a chance to move these bills forward, what an important signal it would send to the rest of the country if a Western conservative state passes such legislation,” said Democratic state Rep. Tony Exum Sr. of Colorado Springs.
 
The bills are in response to the shootings last year at Aurora, Colo., and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.
 
While some see these measures as models for other states, laws that preserve gun rights are gaining momentum.
 
 
 
Two senators in Ohio have introduced a bill which would prohibit firearms seizures, registration and bans in their state.


A bill in Kentucky would prohibit the state from enforcing new federal gun-control laws, if enacted.
Idaho’s House passed a bill that would criminalize enforcing any new federal laws than ban, restrict, confiscate or require registration of firearms or ammunition in violation of the state’s constitution.
A bill in Louisiana would prohibit the enforcement of federal restrictions regarding the ownership or possession of semi-automatic firearms.


A bill that would prohibit the enforcement of federal gun laws passed in the House Public Safety Committee in Oklahoma.


The Texas House is considering a measure to prevent state and local police from enforcing new federal gun-control measures.


The House in Kansas approved a bill prohibiting the federal government from enforcing gun laws or bans on firearms and accessories manufactured, sold or kept in the state.


A bill in Arizona would make it a felony for the federal government to enforce new laws or regulations on guns, accessories and ammunition owned or manufactured in the state.
And a bill in Michigan would exempt firearms and firearms accessories made and sold exclusively in Michigan from federal gun restrictions.


As WND recently reported, Sheriff Joe Arpaio recently said he would refuse to enforce federal government orders if it expected him to confiscate guns from private citizens.


“I took [multiple] oaths of office, and they all say I will defend the Constitution of the United States,” Arpaio told Mike Broomhead of KFYI Radio in Phoenix, Ariz. “Now if they’re going to tell the sheriff that he’s going to go around picking up guns from everybody, they’re going to have a problem. I may not enforce that federal law.”


Broomhead pushed the man sometimes called “America’s toughest sheriff” even further, asking Arpaio if the feds passed a law banning ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, would his deputies confiscate such magazines?


“No,” Arpaio said. “My deputies, I said before, I’m going to arm all my deputies – a month ago I said before this – with automatic weapons and semi-automatic weapons. We’re going to be able to fight back. … I don’t care what they say from Washington.”


Arpaio expressed a certain camaraderie with many other sheriffs around the country who have similarly warned they will not enforce what they believe to be infringements on the citizens’ 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.


Some of the strongest language to that effect has come from Utah, where 28 of the state’s 29 elected sheriffs signed a letter to President Obama warning him not to send federal agents to start confiscating guns.


Similarly, in New Mexico in January, 30 of the state’s 33 county sheriffs paid a visit to the state house, reminding the governor and state congressmen that a sheriff’s job is to defend the Constitution, including the Second Amendment.



NEW POST JUNE 14th 2013

Sheriff Warns of Second American Revolution



California Sheriffs Threaten Feds For Usurping the Constitution!



First Signs of Civil War begin in the US: Sheriff Tony DeMeo Threatens Force Against Federal Agents


Sheriff Tony DeMeo - One



Sheriff Tony DeMeo - Two



Sheriff Tony DeMeo - Three

It began with one Sheriff speaking with other Sheriffs about their oaths to uphold the constitution. A new movement is growing in this country in support of limited government, constitutional principles, states rights and a stronger role for sheriffs to play against federal abuse of power. In this 3-part video interview with Tony DeMeo, Sheriff of Nye County, Nevada, he explains that he is a Constitutional Sheriff and that authority for public office holders is derived from the people: http://www.infowars.com/constitutional%C2%A0sheriff-tony-demeo/

In his own words Sheriff Tony DeMeo describes an incident where federal agents of the BLM threaten him with arrest while the Sheriff issues his own threats of an armed response if illegal seizures of private property in his county continue. Imagine if BLM authorities went ahead with their "normal" operations of seizing cattle found on public property in direct opposition to Sheriff Tony DeMeo warnings? We would witness a standoff with dire consequences.



SHERIFF MACK Forced Vaccine Prevention

Richard Mack, former Sheriff of Graham County, Arizona, explains how county sheriffs across the country can stop forced or mandatory vaccinations.
Sheriffs' power supercedes federal regulatory programs, as Sheriffs are NOT agents of the federal government.



The Greatest Threat to Us is Not Terrorism,
It's Our Government - Sheriff Mack 3.27.2012
http://sheriffmack.com/


SHERIFF RICHARD MACK's Presentation
at the SVARW Liberty Celebration, May 12, 2012
http://sheriffmack.com/

Sheriff Mack describes how he and six other sheriffs challenged the constitutionality of the controversial Brady Bill and won in a 5-4 US Supreme Court decision. The video also highlights Sheriff Mack's ongoing quest for defending and restoring liberty.

at