| HOME | Police - Military | True News | What is a Patriot? | New World Order | Links | Mind Control |
 
 

Huerfano County Straight Talk
 

By Bruce Kettler           February 23, 2013 update

TOP NEWS STORY 2-22-13 Veterans given notice to turn in guns

Is the above story a local, Huerfano County, story? Or, is it only a national issue? Should the newspapers of Huerfano County be concerned with it?
If there are veterans in Huerfano County receiving this notice, then it is a Huerfano County issue, and the newspapers should cover it. The Brady anti-gun law is included in the notice, and that very issue was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court  It was ruled that the Sheriff has authority, not the federal government. So, the newspapers should be asking this question, publicly. Are there any veterans in Huerfano County who have received such a notice? If so, they should be interviewed by reporters, and the full story should be written in the local newspapers. Then, the Sheriff should make a public statement regarding the Veterans who have received such notices.The Huerfano World Journal
For 7 years, I have been putting out the word, in Huerfano County, that U.S. Federal Government problems are local problems that can be solved on the local level. That is, Cities, Counties, and States can legally nullify the problem of unconstitutional laws, and be free of them.  In 2006 I, and others, went to the Huerfano County Commissioners regarding the Patriot Act, which had been nullified in other States, Counties, and Cities, including the State of Colorado. To the commissioners, and others, this seemed strange. How can a small entity like a county nullify a federal law? I wrote letters to editors, which were printed, about this. The fact that the Sheriff is the ultimate authority in the county, for certain issues, has been on my web site for years.

I tried to become a writer for the Huerfano World Journal, and I asked that newspaper to tell the people that a local jurisdiction can nullify unconstitutional laws. I told of a Sheriff in Illinois who would not foreclose on properties, because so many had been taken illegally by banks. I asked them to investigate to see if any local people had their properties taken illegally, and if so to see what we could do, locally, to correct it. All this landed on “deaf ears.”Now, we have articles coming from the Huerfano World Journal that say the County Sheriff can nullify unconstitutional gun “laws.” It’s true. Debi Sporleder wrote The Sheriff - the ultimate authority, in the February 7 Huerfano World Journal. Why was truth mixed with inaccuracies?

Shortly before Debi Sporleder wrote her January 17 first gun related article, I had been exchanging information with her on the internet. I learned, from experience, that she is not one of those people who just wants to collect a paycheck, workiing for a newspaper. She’s not like so many newspaper owners who are just interested in the bottom line, the profit. She is a concerned citizen, and she wants to help the people of her country, and her community. She and I put together a mass e-mailing to send to people, alerting them of the gun control potential problem, and the solution of informing local political entities, the sheriff, and the police chief. This was on her own time, and of course was not part of her duties as a reporter.National gun debate gets local The above is the title of the January 17 article, on the first page. Written in the article was...

President Obama has outlined 23 executive orders on gun control he can take free from Congressional blockade, intended to strengthen existing gun laws, augment mental health measures and promote federal research on gun crime through the Centers for Disease Control.
In the article, a very good point about handgun use at Sandy Hook was made. The article was well written, but I had one problem with it.The words “...free from Congressional blockade,” are inaccurate. Though it is extremely unlikely that there will be a revocation of the executive orders, I believe in strictly fact based reporting. If there’s opinon in the writing, that is fine with me, but it must be clear that it is an opinion.So, on the internet, with Debi, I told her of the above mistake. She wrote the following to me:
DEBI: my article was put through an editoral group.
DEBI: some things I didn't personally write at the beginning.  What mistakes
At 12:14 PM on the 19th of January, I wrote a quote to Debi:
BRUCE: Congress can also revoke a presidential executive order by passing a bill by a veto-proof (2/3 vote) majority...
DEBI: Dang - the problem is I didn't catch the changes they made.  Well, I'll make sure things are changed appropriately in the next couple of articles..
I believe Debi is a competent reporter. The problem, here, is obviously her editorial staff. So, in the next January 24 article, in my opinion it was her staff who wrote the following:
President Obama knows he cannot pass his executive orders without public support and ultimately Congressional support. Congress can revoke his executive orders, so it would be vitally important to have the public support the bans he wishes to invoke. That makes it even more important for Americans to be educated so they can know how and where to direct their support.
The above is correct in the manner that the U.S. Federal Government is SUPPOSED to work, and did work decades ago. It is naive in regard to how it actually works. The odds are “slim to none” that there will be a revocation of the executive orders, even if the American People shout, scream, write, and call “till they are blue in the face.” And, they can vote any way they wish for a president, or congressmen, but often enough the votes are not likely to be counted properly. That is the reason the founders of this country built in additional checks and balances, the tenth amendment, the States, Counties, and Cities.
Outside of the above stated innacuracy, What is an assault weapon? is well written, and informative. I wouldn’t write through some editorial group, of any kind. If I’m to write, it will be my writing, and no-one else. So, my advice to Debi Sporleder is to insist upon writing your own artilces.
On January 31, in Federal laws regarding firearms...
What happens, then, when government doesn’t obey its own rules - its own constitution? Is punishment doled out to politicians who draw up, vote for and pass unconstitutional laws? If these politicians appoint bureaucrats who are unlawful and their agents violate our rights as Americans is there any way to fight back? Unfortunately, *the answer is NO.
On February 7, in The Sheriff - the ultimate authority... the legal solution is presented, and the article is fact based. In that article, the solution to the above, *“...the answer is NO” is shown. The supreme court is not the solution to gun control. There is a slow process going on about the NDAA in the courts, right now. However it comes out, right now the federal government can (against the constitution) pick innocent people up, give them no trial, and do whatever they want to them while waiting on the courts. But, State and County NDAA nullification has been swift, and effective. It is obvious that for such outrageous so-called ‘laws” nullification is the solution.
On January 24, I called the Huerfano World Journal. I asked Gretchen Orr if Debi Sporleder could be present at the Huerfano County Commissioners meeting, to support the resolution. She said that she could not spare her for that period of time. It would have been 15 minutes, just across the street from the newspaper office.
I sent a fax to the Sheriff and the County Commissioners February 2, informing them that an attorney would be availalble to debate the Colorado Attorney General, about statements he allegedly made that were written in The Signature Newspaper. I suggested that the Huerfano World Journal be involved in reporting the debate.Gretchen sent me the following e-mail:
Bruce,You faxed a letter to our office today with regard to trying to schedule a public debate  with John Suther or Richard Fry, and asked that our reporter Debi Sporleder cover it.Bruce, in a telephone call you made to our office recently, I thought I had made it clear to you that we are not going to assign Debi to cover your issues.Do not fax or email us with any more of these types of solicitations. I am ccing the commissioners and John Galusha on this as well so that they are aware of our position. Gretchen Orr
That was not a solicitation. It was an offer for the benefit of the newspaper, and it was stated as a “suggestion.” The issues are shared by many people all over the U.S., and within the county. There are very many of us involved in nullification. A reporter from the Denver Post can cover the debate, in the State Attorney General’s office. The people of Huerfano County have no need for The Huerfano World Journal for that purpose. The Signature NewspaperAugust 3, 2006 I wrote the following letter to the editor, regarding reporter Cathy Mullins:
The writer says the proposed resolution (which she evidently looked at) "claims" federal government abuses in handling the Katrina hurricane disaster, and writes that I "say [s]" firearms were taken from law abiding citizens. How does a person call themselves a "reporter" while saying statements I'd made, were"claims" and merely what I did say. Where is the confirmation from the reporter of whether they were true or false? The facts, as stated, are a matter of public record.  Firearms were taken from law abiding citizens.
There were FEMA abuses, cutting down communication lines, to the point that Sheriffs were required to confront FEMA and demand that they cease that, and any other interference with the relief efforts.So, today, I ask you people reading this, is that competent journalism? Should a competent journalist, in the information age, take the few minutes required and check ot see if it actually happened? I also wrote in the proposed resolution, which the reporter looked at:what is this "posse comitatus members believe"? What is a "posse comitatus" member? We are not members of anything.  If you read the proposed resolution, you will find that...
"Posse Comitatus" is a term that means “power of the county.” The law was passed in 1878 in response to some of the abuses committed by federal troops.So, in more recent times, with the January 31 issue Cathy Mullins writes:
He told the commission El Paso County has already passed such a resolution... Sheriffs in El Paso, Larimer and Garfield Counties are reportedly in agreement.“Reportedly” by whom? She goes on to write: State Attorney General John Suthers says these acts are typically symbolic gestures intended to show support for an issue. Suthers said counties and other government entitites can have opinions on federal issues, but that’s about as far as it goes.“They don’t get to decide,” the Republican AG said, “the supreme Court decides the parameters of Second Amendment Rights.”
When you read, carefully, the article written February 7 by Debi Sporleder The Sheriff - the ultimate authority and check the references, you will see that Suthers is incorrect with, “They don’t get to decide.”A competent journalist looks for more than one side of an issue. Cathy Mullins did not attempt to reach me, and ask any questions. So, where do we go from here? We continue to appeal to the Huerfano County Commissioners, and ask them to base their decision upon facts, and law, not what the State Attorney General says.  If you have already written to them, write again and ask them to get involved with debate and discussion, like any good representative should. Tell them there is an attorney who wants to debate State Attorney General John Suthers. Write to the Sheriff, and tell him you will support his endeavor to preserve the Second Amendment rights of the people in Huerfano County.