Ban the Drones!

This episode is made possible in part by the new Nullification Movie. Now available for order at


According to – Activists are pushing that city to be first in this U.S. to ban use of drones.

While the city has not been approached by the federal government or any other entity about purchasing drones, about 20 people showed up for a recent public hearing to encourage lawmakers to support a proactive ban.

Earlier this month, Occupy Buffalo and the WNY Peace Center proposed legislation to the Council prohibiting the use and purchase of unmanned aerial vehicles in Buffalo, arguing that they violate constitutional rights and pose imminent danger to the public.

Excerpts from the proposal state that “drones present an unreasonable and unacceptable threat to public safety in the air and to persons and property on the ground … due to limitations in drone vision, capability to avoid other aircraft and adequate control.”

Another part of the proposed legislation reads “armed drones and surveillance drones present an unreasonable and unacceptable threat to the rights of individual privacy, freedom of association and assembly, equal protection and judicial due process …”

Victoria Ross of the Peace Education Project noted that the drones in Buffalo most likely would be used primarily for surveillance, “which means warrants won’t be needed.”

The proposed legislation submitted to the Common Council asks that drones not be purchased, leased, borrowed, tested or used by any agency of the City of Buffalo.

From Bill Greene – author of the Constitutional Tender Act – Peter Schiff has opened a hard-money bank.

In other words, you can open accounts in any denomination you want, whether fiat currency OR gold bullion – whatever you’d like. You can even get a “gold debit card” that you can use anywhere in the world. It’s backed by actual gold, which converts to whatever currency you’re needing at the time you hit that ATM.


Don’t go down shooting. Nullify!

I hear it all the time, especially from my conservative friends.

The bluster.

The defiance.

The tough-guy edicts.

“They’ll never take my guns!” they declare. “Not unless they pry them out of my cold dead hands.”

But I think Jim Karger got it right in a July 31 column published over at Lew Rockwell.

“And, when I hear this crazy talk, I agree with them openly. ‘You are right. They will pry your gun from your cold dead hands,’ which I often follow with the question, ‘And where will that leave you except face down in a pool of your own blood in the middle of the street, just another dead fool resisting the State?’”

Let’s be brutally honest. If a SWAT team comes rolling down your street demanding your guns, you will either meekly give them up, or you will end up a bloody corpse. Even the well-armed civilian will not win a gun battle with police armed with military style weapons, top-grade body armor and riding in virtual tanks.


TrapWire: The Federal Gov’t is Literally Watching Every Move You Make

The U.S. government exercises control over a massive and technologically advanced surveillance system that has the capacity to keep nearly the entire population of this country under the watchful eye of government 24 hours a day.

TrapWire is the name of this newly revealed network of cameras and other surveillance tools being utilized by a federal government that is rapidly constructing an impenetrable, inescapable theater of surveillance, most of which is going unnoticed by Americans and unreported by the mainstream media.

Unlike other elements of the central government’s cybersurveillance program, word about TrapWire was not leaked by Obama administration insiders. The details of this nearly unbelievable surveillance scheme were made public by WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy group founded by Julian Assange.

The TrapWire story percolated from the millions of emails from the Austin, Texas-based private intelligence-gathering firm Stratfor, published this year by WikiLeaks.

Covering correspondence from mid-2004 to 2011, these documents expose Stratfor’s “web of informers, pay-off structure, payment-laundering techniques and psychological methods.”

This coterie of Stratfor co-conspirators are apparently angry about the leaks, considering that the WikiLeaks servers have been under near-constant Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks since the TrapWire revelations began attracting notice of alternative journalists. Some outlets report that the cyberattacks are being carried out by agents of the American intelligence community determined to prevent the full depth of this scandal from being explored by reporters.


Nullify Now! Pennsylvania Needs Action Today

CLICK HERE – to sign on to our NULLIFY OBAMACARE campaign!

Dear Friends,

The June Supreme Court decision on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was disappointing, but not surprising.  After all, the Supreme Court is a branch of the Federal Government.  It can surely not be a surprise that nine employees of the Federal Government found in favor of the Federal Government in its dispute with more than half of the American States.

We have good news, though. 


Where is the Civil Liberties Party?

Recently, I posted an article that was leveled against the 2-party system.  My wife was kind enough to point out that I was much harder on the Republican party than the Democrat party, so with this in mind I decided to attack the question from the other side as well.

For years, the American voter has been sold into the idea that the 2-party system is a method of limiting government. For instance, most people assume (by believing the WORDS that come out of politicians’ mouths, rather than observing their ACTIONS – Perhaps they only pay attention during election time?) that the ‘left’ strengthens civil liberties, and the ‘right’ strengthens property rights. This battle is sold as if respective liberties will steadily advance via this battle! But one has only to look back over the last 30 years to realize of the fallacy of that sale!

Surely the Democrat party is true to their word when it comes to the size of government? For instance, they seem to be almost monolithic in their calls for pro-choice policies. Whenever they’re in power, they consistently advance higher taxes on the “rich.” They also support increasing dependency of the poor on state-sponsored welfare entitlements and are opposed to any policy that will require any responsibility for the individual! In general, they err on the side of addressing every problem of society with more and more government largess. All of these policies are in keeping with their rhetoric. It’s always baffling to me how they can ever be elected after carefully considering these policies, but I guess some people still need a Mommy even after they’ve moved out of the house.



InfoWars Nightly News interviews Jason Rink, producer and director of Nullification: The Rightful Remedy.

What do we do when the Federal Government steps outside of it’s constitutional boundaries? Do we ask federal bureaucrats in black robes to enforce the limits of it’s own power? Thomas Jefferson and James Madison didn’t think so, and neither do we. The rightful remedy to federal tyranny rests in the hands of the people and the several States. It’s called “nullification” or “interposition.” It’s an idea whose time has come.


Should Pres. Obama be Detained for Violating the NDAA?

Originally published at The New American Magazine

If President Obama is supporting al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces, should he be subject to indefinite detention under the terms of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)?

As The New American has chronicled since it was first proposed, the NDAA purportedly authorizes the president of the United States to deploy the armed forces to apprehend and indefinitely detain anyone suspected of providing support to terrorists. Section 1021 of the NDAA reads in relevant part:

Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C.1541 note) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.

A covered person under this section is any person as follows:

A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

And, finally:

Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

A plain reading of Section 1021 reveals, then, that anyone who is found to have “substantially supported” al-Qaeda or associated forces can be detained by the military until the end of the War on Terror. Now, the relevant question becomes: Has President Obama substantially supported al-Qaeda and if so, how? 


On Governors and Liberty

State governors are the battered wives of the Federal system.

Given a hefty annual allowance from Washington, D.C., they are content to suffer blow after blow to the  State sovereignty guaranteed by the Constitution. This is true of Democrats and Republicans alike. Living more or less happily for four- and eight-year stints in their various state-owned mansions, they could just as well be administering colonies for a distant British Crown.

And why not? Over $600 billion in direct Federal aid flows annually for medical, education, transportation, agricultural, housing and other miscellaneous outlays that now comprise the largest source of State revenues. Two states – Louisiana and Oklahoma – lean on Uncle Sam for half of their budget revenue. Thus, we end up with governors who would rather occupy their workdays choosing new license plate colors than objecting to unconstitutional Federal spending on colonoscopies, preschools, highways, sugar subsidies and free townhouses.

In case you were absent that day, the whole point of the Constitution was to keep us a free people, not to give free things to people.  The national government was given a few specific chores: maintain a navy, deliver the mail, keep states from engaging in trade wars, and a few others listed in Article I, Section 8.


False choices

I hate liver and onions.

My mom made me eat liver as a child, and as an adult, I’ve vowed never to eat it again.

I detest Brussels sprouts almost as much as I loathe liver and onions. Those mini-cabbages literally trigger my gag reflex. Nope, won’t eat those either.

Now imagine for a moment I walk into a restaurant. I sit down, and the waitress hands me a menu. It doesn’t take  long to peruse the offerings because the menu  lists only two dishes.

-Liver and onions

-Brussels sprout casserole

That’s it.

I must choose between liver and Brussels sprouts.

Now, do you think for one minute I would eat either entrée?

Heck no! I would walk right out of the restaurant. After all, I can find plenty of other ways to satisfy my hunger. I’m not going to eat something I detest simply because those dishes make up the only available options. If this house of culinary horrors wants to serve Brussels sprout casserole, and liver and onions, it will have to stay in business without my help!


Phase Out the Fed With State Sound Money Laws

Although it is very encouraging that the House voted 327 to 98 to audit the Fed last month, it is virtually certain that the Senate will not concur this year. Moreover, it is virtually certain that Congress will not act to end or phase out the Fed any time soon.

So, what’s to be done about the impending destruction of our currency by the Federal Reserve’s ongoing expansion of the money supply. Since 2010 there has been a continuation of this rapid expansion of the money supply.

The preeminent expert on Constitutional money, Edwin Vieira, has a strategy for phasing out the use of Federal Reserve Notes through new state laws providing alternative currencies, which he has been promoting via interviews and videos for the past several years.

Basically, Vieira advocates that states start taking advantage of their sovereignty as guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment and their constitutional mandate under Article I, Section 10 not to “make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts,” by passing laws providing alternative currencies in their states based on gold and silver.