Heads Up

NIGHT STALKERS

It sounded like a second rate spy movie, or maybe something the BATF or FBI "hostage rescue" group would do. That is, a squad of seven masked men (recently changed to five), dressed in black, broke into an occupied Phoenix home last week and killed two of the residents.

For what? No reason. The well armed intruders were bounty hunters, and simply got the wrong house.

OK, so they were looking for someone. Who cares! The person they were looking for was a male. Yet, most of the people they were holding at gunpoint were mothers and children.

They say that they were looking for a bail jumper they thought was in the house. Obviously, they were wrong. What they found instead was an armed citizen willing to defend his home. The 23 year old man shot two of the intruders before they killed him and his 20-year- old girlfriend. And, incidentally, local police say that neither of the victims were wanted for any crime.

The big bad bounty hunters committed terrorism on American citizens; citizens wanting nothing more than to get a good nights sleep so they would be ready for work in the morning. Seven (or five) big punks, well armed, wearing black military-style clothing, ski masks and body armor, broke into a home at 4 a.m., smacked around women while they were still in bed sleeping, and then tied them to the bed. These were mean punks, some of whom rounded up the children and held them at gunpoint while others searched the house.

It was when they kicked in the bedroom door where the young man was sleeping with his girlfriend that they were greeted with gunfire. And, because two of these bounty hunter punks were hit in the arm, they all ran. Eye witnesses report that, after the burst of

gunfire, the gunmen ran out the door and got into two cars. One of the cars took the two injured bounty hunters to the hospital. Newspapers say that police are looking for the other vehicle, a 1988 Dodge Dakota with Arizona license plate 6284-AP.

Phoenix Police say that their preliminary investigation shows the bail jumper did not live at the home and did not even know any of the residents.

Police have three of the bounty hunters in custody, charged with second-degree murder. The others need to be found quickly -- and hopefully treated much the same way they treated the residents of the home they terrorized.

"It created an image that this is the Wild West," said Maricopa County Attorney Rick Romley. "People should not be dying because of mistakes such as this."

Yeah. No kidding. And if the County Attorney needs a hint, the charges should be breaking and entering of an occupied dwelling, assault, assault with a deadly weapon, battery, kidnapping, terroristic activities, and murder.

All of those charges must be filed. Else, other bounty hunters will feel free to break into anyone's home at any time. Or, maybe they'll just do a house to house search till they find who they are looking for.

The point is, Americans are to be free from this type of worry; free from invasions by these street punks with dubious arrest authority. Therefore, the courts must make that clear to all: Police as well as bounty hunters.

And another thing: Had the man of the house had something bigger than a 9mm pistol, he may be alive today. That type of sidearm is fine for lugging along on the street. But today, many intruders wear body armor. So at home, where the size of the weapon is not a factor, a shell that will pierce body armor is advised. And/or, as G. Gorden Liddy says, "Shoot for the head."

The mask seems to be a recent trait of night raiders. Many SWAT teams now wear ski masks too. Could it perhaps be because they are so ashamed of what they are doing?

THE REGULATORY MORASS

The next major federal government scandal is just starting to get legs in the press, thanks to the Dallas Morning News. That is, under a law known as the Intergovernmental Personnel Act, the federal government "lends out" 1,200 to 1,500 well paid federal bureaucrats to left-wing non-profit organizations each year.

If anyone wonders how the United Nations Non- Governmental Organizations (NGO) fit in with the federal government's regulatory agencies, here is part of the story: They regularly trade employees back and forth.

A while back, we reported that the relationship between United Nations NGO's and federal agencies, like the EPA, was so tight it appeared there was a revolving door between them. Now we learn that many of these people are kept on the federal payroll, even while working for the NGOs.

Many federal agencies give grants to nonprofit groups. Often, federal regulatory agencies even offer grants to nonprofit organizations that use the money to sue the agency. It's all a big game, with a well orchestrated game plan. Their plan is to grab power, and the game plan is working well.

The idea is for nonprofit NGOs to use taxpayer funds to force federal agencies to regulate the American public in ways the NGO desires. Many of the laws and regulations these NGOs want promulgated would be much too harsh to get passed through normal means. So, they trump up some "need" or "violation," whether environmental or health, and the NGO sues the regulatory agency in court. The courts then "force" the federal regulatory agency to regulate whatever. Hence, it's a synergistic relationship. The federal regulatory agency ends up with more power and churns out even more regulations, forcing American citizens to act according to the wish of the NGO.

It's all very simple and very effective. And, our elected representatives in Congress are kept completely out of the loop.

The American taxpayer pays for some or most of the operation of many NGOs through grants and the loan of paid federal employees. With these grants, and other donations, the NGOs sue federal agencies, and hence force the desired behavior of American citizens. As is part of the plan, the federal agencies intentionally lose in court. Because, by losing in court, the regulatory agencies gain more power over the American people.

Add the fact that many of these regulatory agency people regularly bounce back and forth between the agencies and the United Nations NGOs, and a very interesting problem becomes obvious: Who is actually running our government?

As nonprofit organizations, these NGOs may receive donations from any source, including United Nations organizations and multi-national corporations. So it is no surprise that these nonprofit groups sometimes receive donations from businesses and business organizations wanting to force specific actions by the federal government. In these instances, the nonprofit NGO may then act as a "backdoor" lobbyist, appearing as a nonprofit citizen's group while actually doing the work of a professional lobbyist organization. And, because these nonprofit groups have such close ties with regulatory agency personnel, their lobbying efforts are usually very fruitful.

So it should be no surprise to anyone that many United Nations and UNESCO programs are being implemented in the United States even though, officially, the federal government has approved no formal agreement. Congress abdicated its duty to make law to the regulatory agencies years ago. Over the years, these federal regulatory agencies have become infested with personnel who have very close ties to United Nations Non-Governmental Organizations. Therefore, treaties and agreements are not always necessary for the United Nations and UNESCO to work their will on the American people.

Congress, as mentioned above, is completely out of the loop. There is no longer anything they can do about any of this except to watch. Unless, that is, they again begin to honor each and every word of our Constitution, as written.

BENEFITING FROM SEPARATE JURISDICTIONS

Last week we wrote about "Using Separate Jurisdictions," and how that concept could and should be implemented for the protection of citizens in all States. And, as often happens, readers responded positively.

In fact, the State of Montana, we were notified, has just such a bill in the House right now! We understand that it has a good chance of passing, too.

The introduction of Montana House Bill 415 states the purpose concisely:

"An act regulating arrests, searches, and seizures by Federal employees; providing that Federal employees shall obtain the County Sheriff's permission to arrest, search, and seize; providing for prosecution of Federal employees violating this act; rejecting Federal laws purporting to give Federal employees the authority of a County Sheriff in this State; and providing an immediate effective date."

The bill recoups many Tenth Amendment policing rights of the State and "declares that any federal law purporting to give federal employees the authority of a county sheriff in this state is not recognized by and is specifically rejected by this state. . . ."

Section 1 sets the purpose of the bill to "prevent misadventure affecting Montana citizens and their rights" by federal employees. Section 2 declares that in most cases federal employees must first seek the "permission" of the Sheriff, or the sheriff's "designee" before attempting to make an arrest, search, or seizure. And Section 3 makes it mandatory that County Prosecutors prosecute federal employees violating this law.

The words "federal employees" is a very interesting term as used in this bill. That would include all federal police and regulatory agents -- the IRS, FBI, EPA, BATF, and the rest of them. And by extension, it would also include all federal telephone wiretaps and snooping through e-mail files on the Internet.

The Montana Proposal is an excellent beginning in protecting the rights of citizens against an out of control federal bureaucracy. The only change we would propose is that the sheriff's office be required to attend and supervise all actions by federal employees -- not necessarily to participate as a law officer, but primarily as an official representative of the local people. The function then, would be to insure that all Constitutional rights of local citizens within that jurisdiction were respected.

All public officials take an oath of office in which they swear to support the United States Constitution. And the Bill of Rights is part of our Constitution. Therefore, any public official violating the rights and liberties of a citizen should be immediately arrested by the closest available law officer. The Montana Proposal would make that possible, and tend to keep all concerned honest.

This concept is under study in other states too. In fact, as the Knoxville Journal reported last month: 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 how 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.

According to the report, the sheriff grants permission on a case-by-case basis only. When asked what, if any, repercussions he had gotten from the Feds, the sheriff 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 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.

It is time that safeguards for the rights of American citizens were written into law and strictly enforced in every State in the nation. Montana House Bill 415 goes far in getting that started.

We suggest that all Americans demand that a similar bill be passed in their own respective States. Towards that end, we include the full text of the Montana bill below.

MONTANA HOUSE BILL 415

"An act regulating arrests, searches, and seizures by Federal employees; providing that Federal employees shall obtain the County Sheriff's permission to arrest, search, and seize; providing for prosecution of Federal employees violating this act; rejecting Federal laws purporting to give Federal employees the authority of a County Sheriff in this State; and providing an immediate effective date."

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Montana:

Section 1. Purpose.

It is the intent of the legislature to ensure maximum cooperation between federal employees and local law enforcement authorities; to ensure that federal employees who carry out arrests, searches, and seizures in this state receive the best local knowledge and expertise available; and to prevent misadventure affecting Montana citizens and their rights that results from lack of cooperation or communication between federal employees operating in Montana and properly constituted local law enforcement authorities.

Section 2. County sheriff's permission for federal arrests, searches, and seizures -- exceptions.

(1) A federal employee who is not designated by Montana law as a Montana peace officer may not make an arrest, search, or seizure in this state without the written permission of the sheriff or designee of the sheriff of the county in which the arrest, search, or seizure will occur unless:

(a) the arrest, search, or seizure will take place on a federal enclave for which jurisdiction has been actively ceded to the United States of America by a Montana statute;

(b) the federal employee witnesses the commission of a crime the nature of which requires an immediate arrest;

(c) the arrest, search, or seizure is under the provisions of 46-6-411 or 46-6-412;

(d) the intended subject of the arrest, search, or seizure is an employee of the sheriff's office or is an elected county or state officer; or

(e) the federal employee has probable cause to believe that the subject of the arrest, search, or seizure has close connections with the sheriff, which connections are likely to result in the subject being informed of the impending arrest, search, or seizure.

(2) The county sheriff or designee of the sheriff may refuse permission for any reason that the sheriff or designee considers sufficient.

(3) A federal employee who desires to exercise a subsection (1)(d) exception shall obtain the written permission of the Montana attorney general for the arrest, search, or seizure unless the resulting delay in obtaining the permission would probably cause serious harm to one or more individuals or to a community or would probably cause flight of the subject of the arrest, search, or seizure in order to avoid prosecution. The attorney general may refuse the permission for any reason that the attorney general considers sufficient.

(4) A federal employee who desires to exercise a subsection (1)(e) exception shall obtain the written permission of the Montana attorney general. The request for permission must include a written statement, under oath, describing the federal employee's probable cause. The attorney general may refuse the request for any reason that the attorney general considers sufficient.

(5) (a) A permission request to the county sheriff or Montana attorney general must contain:

(i) the name of the subject of the arrest, search, or seizure;

(ii) a clear statement of probable cause for the arrest, search, or seizure and a federal arrest, search, or seizure warrant that contains a clear statement of probable cause;

(iii) a description of specific assets, if any, to be searched for or seized;

(iv) a statement of the date and time that the arrest, search, or seizure is to occur; and

(v) the address or location where the intended arrest, search, or seizure will be attempted.

(b) The request may be in letter form, either typed or handwritten, but must be countersigned with the original signature of the county sheriff or designee of the sheriff or by the Montana attorney general, to constitute valid permission. The permission is valid for 48 hours after it is signed. The sheriff or attorney general shall keep a copy of the permission request on file.

Section 3. Remedies.

(1) An arrest, search, or seizure or attempted arrest, search, or seizure in violation of [section 2] is unlawful, and individuals involved must be prosecuted by the county attorney for kidnapping if an arrest or attempted arrest occurred, for trespass if a search or attempted search occurred, for theft if a seizure or attempted seizure occurred, and for any applicable homicide offense if loss of life occurred. The individuals involved must also be charged with any other applicable criminal offenses in Title 45.

(2) To the extent possible, the victims' rights provisions of Title 46 must be extended to the victim or victims by the justice system persons and entities involved in the prosecution.

(3) The county attorney has no discretion not to prosecute once a claim of violation of [section 2] has been made by the county sheriff or designee of the sheriff, and failure to abide by this mandate subjects the county attorney to recall by the voters and to prosecution by the attorney general for official misconduct.

Section 4. Invalid federal laws.

Pursuant to the 10th amendment to the United States constitution and this state's compact with the other states, the legislature declares that any federal law purporting to give federal employees the authority of a county sheriff in this state is not recognized by and is specifically rejected by this state and is declared to be invalid in this state.

Section 5. Effective date.

[This act] is effective on passage and approval.

Section 6. Severability.

If a part of [this act] is invalid, all valid parts that are severable from the invalid part remain in effect. If a part of [this act] is invalid in one or more of its applications, the part remains in effect in all valid applications that are severable from the invalid applications.