"To seek out that which was lost..."

We present the following article as a Service to our readers... Its inclusion should not be construed as the Authors' or the Relays' endorsement of Our Beliefs.

Date sent: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 10:46:39 -0400 (EDT) To: pnpj@db1.cc.rochester.edu From: jwhitley@Inforamp.net (John K. Whitley) Subject: RE: MONTANA UPDATE - 15th April Copies to: act@efn.org Send reply to: act@efn.org

Here is today's Freeman update from the BILLINGS GAZETTE, now apparently the only print media still on the scene at Jordan...


The Billings Gazette Monday, April 15, 1996


Reuters News Service

<illustration> Emergency personnel tend to an injured FBI agent, at right, after he was ejected from the vehicle northwest of Jordan

By MATT BENDER Of The Gazette Staff

JORDAN - A yellow spray-painted spot in the middle of the sparse landscape west of Jordan marked the place where an FBI agent died Sunday, the first fatality in the federal standoff with Freemen.

But Sunday's death did not come from gunfire. It was a traffic accident on the main road leading to the farm where the Freemen have isolated themselves that killed FBI Special Agent Kevin J. Kramer, 34, at about 7:25 a.m. Sunday.

Kramer was alone and headed out of town on the dirt road when he lost control of his Ford Bronco and rolled the vehicle into the ditch. According to a Montana Highway Patrol dispatcher, a report on the accident said Kramer was driving too fast when he hit a "washboard" section of road. The Bronco skidded and Kramer overcorrected. He went off the side of the road and the vehicle rolled several times after sliding sideways off the embankment.

The agent was thrown from the vehicle. The Montana Highway Patrol office in Billings didn't have any information on whether he was wearing a seat belt.

Kramer was taken to the hospital in Jordan, where he was pronounced dead Sunday morning. He is survived by a wife, Heidi, and two children.

An FBI press release said Kramer, a five-year FBI veteran, was on temporary duty in Jordan and was from Sioux City, Iowa. He was a member of the FBI's Omaha, Neb., Swat team. Kramer was one of the fresh agents who had been moved into Jordan over the weekend. He was relatively new to the well-traveled road that has been worn down by daily trips to and from Jordan made by the media and FBI officers.

Along the same stretch of road, an NBC News crew rolled its Ford Explorer during the first week of the standoff with the anti-government Freemen. But both men in that accident were wearing seat belts and were not seriously hurt. The road, which was lightly traveled before the FBI moved in March 25, is tricky in some spots and its surface changes daily depending on the weather.

Today marks the third week of the standoff at a foreclosed wheat farm about 30 miles northwest of Jordan. The FBI is negotiating with the 15 to 20 armed Freemen who have entrenched themselves on the property, which they call "Justus Township."

Since two of the people in the complex surrendered on Thursday, little has been happening out at the farm. When reporters arrived on the hill overlooking the compound Sunday morning, they noticed a new sign the Freemen had put up outside the main house in Justus Township.

In black lettering on a large white board, the message was, "Grand Jury. It's The Law. Why Not? Who Fears The Evidence?" The sign makes reference to one of the main requests the Freemen have made in regard to ending the stalemate. They have requested that a common-law grand jury be formed to determine the validity of the numerous state and federal charges they face, which include such things as threatening public officials, armed robbery and mail and bank fraud.

Also on Sunday, rancher Tom Stanton defied the Freemen's threat and moved cattle onto leased state land that the barricaded anti-government group claims as its own.

The Freemen published newspaper notices in March claiming ownership of thousands of acres of state and federal land in the area. The Freemen contend government ownership of land is illegal.

They told Stanton and 10 other ranchers who lease the land that if they "trespass" on it this spring they will be tried in a Freeman court and punished. Stanton apparently was the first to ignore the warning.

Stanton said he does not expect any reprisals from the Freemen, whose enclave is about two miles from the section of state school trust land where he moved 36 cow-calf pairs. Stanton owns the land between the school land and the property where the Freemen are holed up.

"I'm not doing it to `defy' them," Stanton Sunday. "I'm doing it because I have to earn a living."

The 36 cow-calf pairs, a small part of Stanton's herd, had been grazing on 150 nearby acres that he owns, but it could no longer sustain them, he said.

Stanton said the school land has been leased by his family since 1914. School trust land was given the state at statehood for public school use. Most of the scattered tracts are leased for grazing, with income dedicated to support Montana's public schools.

"I'-snot worried about them," Stanton said of the Freemen response. "I could probably walk into their house right now without any trouble. At least with the locals, the ones I know. I don't know about those outsiders."

Several of the approximately 20 people holed up on the foreclosed farm northwest of Stanton's place are from other states, but others are longtime neighbors.

K.L. Bliss, another of the 11 the Freemen warned, said he also doubts they will retaliate, but believes they would have before the FBI moved in. Bliss said he had cattle on his leased land when the Freemen letter came, and still does. He said he plans no change because of their threat.

"When I got the letter, I went and told (a neighbor who communicates with the Freemen) to be sure to let them know that I was taking the challenge," Bliss said.

Bliss said the FBI has asked Tim Phipps, who bought some of the foreclosed land near the enclave, not to try to farm it yet because of reports that the Freemen have high-powered, military-style weapons, including a .50-caliber machine gun. Bliss doubts Phipps or other farmers and ranchers can wait much longer, however.

"People are getting impatient. They have to make a living," he said. "We weren't going to hold off before the FBI came, and we darned sure aren't going to hold off now."

The Associated Press contributed to this story.


The following item was sent to me as private e-mail, but raises a vital and valid point. Is Dr. Eugene Schroeder's claim that the US is under the provisions of the WAR AND EMERGENCY POWERS ACT *still* correct or not.

I'm still reading through the fascinating COLORADO COMMON LAW GRAND JURY's fascinating and detailed PETITION DU DROIT, which deals with this issue; but here, for your consideration, is the question...

Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 12:58:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: [deleted to preserve sender's privacy]
To: "John K. Whitley" <jwhitley@inforamp.net>
Subject: Re: MONTANA UPDATE - 14th April

On Sun, 14 Apr 1996, John K. Whitley wrote:

> The truth, according to Karen Taylor, is that the United States is under the thumb of the United Nations under terms of the Emergency and War Powers Act of 1933 and the Trading with the Enemy Act. The acts allow the government to abuse its power by declaring martial law rule and setting aside provisions> of the Constitution during declared wars and national emergencies, she and others who hold similar beliefs argue.


Patriots should be careful when they make the above statement. In Gene Schroders "War and Emergency Powers," the report, (I have not seen the book), he based his proof on section 5 (b) of the Trading With the Enemy Act to claim that US citizens are under the above provision in times of national emergency. Public Law 95-223 removed the "or during any other period of national emergency declared by the President." Schroder also cites that the National Emergencies Act of 1976 excluded Section 5 (b) of the Act of October 6, 1917, as proof that National Emergencies are not under the National Emergencies Act. Public Law 95-223 repealed Paragraph 1 of Sec. 502 (a). Section 5 (b) of the Act of October 6, 1917, no longer escapes the scrutiny of the NEA of 76. This is not to say that national emergencies do not have considerable power over us. Tell me what you think.

Here is the text of Public Law 95 - 223:

PUBLIC LAW 95-223 [H.R. 7738]; Dec. 28, 1977


For Legislative History of Act, see p. 4540

An Act with respect to the powers of the President in time of war or national emergency.

Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress Assembled,



Sec. 101, (a) Section 5 (b) (1) of the Trading With the Enemy Act is amended by striking out "or during any other period of national emergency declared by the President" in the text preceding subparagraph (A). (b) Notwithstanding the amendment made by subsection (a), the authorities conferred upon the President by section 5 (b) of the Trading With the Enemy Act, which were being exercised with respect to a country on July 1, 1977, as a result of a national emergency declared by the President before such date, may continue to be exercised with respect to such country, except that, unless extended, the exercise of such authorities shall terminate (subject to the savings provisions of the second sentence of section 101 (a) of the National Emergencies Act) at the end of the two-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of the National Emergencies Act. The President may extend the exercise of such authorities for one-year periods upon such authorities with respect to such country for another year is in the national interest of the United States. (c) The termination and extension provisions of subsection (b) of this section supercede the provisions of section (101) a and of title II of the National Emergencies Act to the extent that the provisions of subsection (b) of this section are inconsistent with those provision. (d) Paragraph (1) of Section 502 (a) of the National Emergencies Act is repealed.


Sec. 102. Section 5 (b) (1) of the Trading With the Enemy Act is amended-- (1) in the text preceding subparagraph (A), by striking out "or otherwise." the first time it appears; and (2) by striking out "; and the President may, in the manner herinabove provided, take other and further measures not inconsistent herwith for the enforcement of this subdivision. Sec. 103. (a) Section 16 of the Trading With the Enemy Act is amended by striking out "$10,000" and inserting in lieu thereof "$50,000." (b) Section 5 (b) (3) of such act is amended by striking our the second sentence.

I've reproduced this query here for more informed response and comment. I find it interesting and significant, personally, that attorney Walker F. Todd of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland in his Working Paper 9405 appears to have confirmed Gene Shroeder's findings and interpretation of the law; but this questioner has raised a sincere and relevant point, and I'd be interested in hearing and re-posting any expert viewpoints...as briefly expressed as possible :)


Thanks to Jon for the comments below....

From: USAFeature@aol.com Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 16:28:35 -0400 To: jwhitley@inforamp.net Subject: Re: MONTANA UPDATE - 14th April

In a message dated 96-04-14 12:19:03 EDT, you write:

> >> This is invalid; the FBI has been lawfully granted the authority to be there, especially since this involves a case over monetary policy, something the federal government has always had the right to intervene in. While I DO agree

> >Really? I wasn't aware that the legislature had invited them in, per article 4 section 4 of the Constitution.
> >If the feds have jurisdiction to hear the case, the proper thing to do is ask the State of Montana to EXTRADICT the freemen.

Art. 4, section 4?? Try Art. IV, section 3, para. 2: "The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States, and NOTHING in this Constitution shall be so construed as to prejudice any claims of the United States, or of any particular State."

You know, you blame the feds for something the States and the people have allowed to happen. The states, along with a willing electorate, have been ceding power and responsibility to the federal government for decades--especially in the area of law enforcement. Couple this with the fact that the Freemen are doing something with monetary policy that they criticize the FED for doing (which is hypocrisy and just as illegal), and the fact that it is illegal now (by language in the 14th Amendment) to secede from the Union--which is basically what the Freemen have attempted to do, and what you have is a perfectly legal modem for federal government resolution. You may not like this, but that doesn't change the facts. I don't like it, but bucking the system the people allowed to be created isn't the way in this case, to change it.

Let's quit being so eager to get into a shooting match with the feds. If this ever happens, the results will be as they were in the 1860s--total, COMPLETE devestation.

Jon@ USA Journal



From: USAFeature@aol.com Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 16:28:36 -0400 Apparently-To: jwhitley@inforamp.net

age dated 96-04-14 12:19:03 EDT, you write:

> >He's entirely right. The feds have no more business on Montana's soil then then Kentucky does. And considering there is even a specific Constitutional passage that prevents it, maybe we'd better ask if article 4 section 4 is still part of our constitution? > >

Well, Mr. Kennedy, they DO. And it IS still part of the Constitution; it just doesn't apply here. How can the US "invade" it's own territory?? Like it or not, Montana--and each of the other 49 states and all US possessions and territories--are part of the federal government's responsibility. Congress has the power, under Art. 1, Sect. 8, "to provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the >>securities<< and current coin of the US..." and "to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution to foregoing powers..."

I understand the frustration here, but criticizing the feds for doing things we the people have, by being disinterested in how the system is being maintained, given them the power to do. What are you going to do if the FBI has to forcibly remove the Freemen from their ranch, which--from what I can see--has been lawfully sold to another party due to nonpayment? Is that third party any less intoned to Constitutional principle and law than are the Freemen? Hell, they've *removed* themselves (figuratively) from constitutional protection by declaring to be "independent" of the United States.

Anyway, I've made my points. If you disagree, I'd be happy to discuss it further. Maybe there's some point you're willing to make that I don't see right now, and would agree with.

Jon@ USA Journal



From: USAFeature@aol.com Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 16:28:38 -0400 To: jwhitley@inforamp.net Subject: Re: MONTANA UPDATE - 14th April

In a message dated 96-04-14 12:19:03 EDT, you write:

> >What Constitution? You are 130 years behind the times.
> >A. Lincoln trashed the original Constitution and forced states
>>like Texas - at gunpoint- to "re-join" the Union.
> >There has never been a Constitutio since
> >Bob Knauer > >

Or at least federal legislators who are willing to recognize it. In many respects, I agree with this assessment, which is sad.

Jon@ USA Journal


For those interested in learning more about Common Law versus Admiralty Law, Texxe Marrs, the anti-NWO author, ex-US Air Force officer and ex-University faculty member, began the first of a series on this topic on his shortwave program WORLD OF PROPHECY last Saturday on WWCR, 5065 [band 49] between 8-10 p.m. The second in the series will follow this Saturday [although he may just be devoting the 9-10 p.m. slot to this timely topic]. Warm up those shortwave radios and tape recorders!


And, finally, with *APRIL 19th* fast approaching, this item from Helen Johnson by way of Linda Thompson....

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 14 Apr 96 22:58 EST From: Linda Thompson <lindat@iquest.net> To: news@aen.org Subject: Anyone Smell A Rat???

So here we have Dees and the ADL just "coincidentally" releasing yet another "the dangerous militias must be stopped, they're racists and nazis" national liars' contest report within the past two weeks, Levitas, Halpern, and Dees, ad nauseum on TV, with the media whores fawning all over them like they're the next best thing to chocolates, slobbering about how we must, must have an "anti-terrorist bill," as Congress promises to deliver it for the anniversary of the OKC Bombing, and now, THIS.

Thanks again to Helen Johnson, <eplurib@megalinx.net>


Topeka Capital Journal - Saturday, April 13, 1996 _________________________________________________

"Big truck carrying fertilizer stolen" By Tim Hrenchir - The Capital-Journal _________________________________________________

Three law enforcement agencies in Topeka on Friday told officers to be on the lookout for a large truck stolen in southwest Missouri that was laden with 11,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate.

An estimated 4,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate had been used in the bombing last April 19 of the federal building in Oklahoma City, which killed 168 people. Authorities believe that deadly fertilizer bomb was assembled at Geary State Fishing Lake, just off K-77 highway in northeast Kansas.

Speaking from Kansas City, Mo., FBI Special Agent Max Gelman said a "spreader-type truck" used to distribute fertilizer on farm fields was stolen Wednesday from the area of Reeds Spring, Mo., which is south of Springfield.

Law enforcement officers were told the truck contained about 11,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate, Gelman said.

The same day, Gelman said, some dynamite caps apparently were stolen from a truck in Cassville, Mo., about 45 miles southwest of Reeds Springs. Those caps also haven't been recovered.

Authorities know of no connection between the two thefts, Gelman said.

A bulletin issued by the U.S. Marshal's Service asking law enforcement agencies to be on the lookout for the stolen truck with the fertilizer was broadcast locally Friday evening by dispatchers for the Topeka Police Department, the Shawnee County Sheriff's Department and the Kansas Highway Patrol.

If local law officers spotted the truck, the marshal's service bulletin advised them not to stop it but instead to notify federal marshals.

The bulletin described the vehicle as a 1988 Chevrolet truck with Missouri tags.

Helen Johnson - E Pluribus Unum & The Ohio Unorganized Militia PO Box 44404; Columbus, Ohio 43204; 614-444-5840; Fax: 614-444-5865 E Pluribus Unum - http://www.lookup.com/homepages/65177/home.html ========================================

So what will they blow up this year twice as big as last year and claim it was a "truck full of 11,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate" and "the militia did it?"

Is there ANYBODY who is still SO STUPID and SO BRAIN DEAD out there that they just don't see what is going on or what?

Is there REALLY anybody out there that stupid, who still doesn't believe government agents killed the people in Waco and blew up the building in Oklahoma?

Is there REALLY??!!!

Kind regards,

**V********* DEATH TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER************

Linda Thompson American Justice Federation Home of AEN News & news videos, "Waco, the Big Lie," "America Under Siege" 3850 S. Emerson Ave. Indianapolis, IN 46203 Telephone: (317) 780-5200 Fax: (317) 780-5209 Internet: lindat@iquest.net

************Remember Waco. The Murderers are still Free.************

Back to...