by Jane Gaffin
InfoWars Nightly News video/podcast broadcast of April 16, 2014 is well-worth taking a half hour out of anybody’s time to listen to in its entirety.
In the final five minutes, David Knight, the host with the golden voice, presents an impressive summary of a troublesome subject in which a malfeasant federal government is overthrowing constitutional rights in rapid-fire succession.
This problem is not just happening in America. It is being rolled out in every free society in the world as United Nations Agenda 21 proponents and their Marxist puppets illegally barge into people’s lives to usurp constitutional rights and freedoms for a one-size-fits-all government.
Mr. Knight’s succinct message to his worldwide audience was sparked by a classic Cliven Bundy cattle-grazing saga that came to a head in Nevada in April of this year. The feud culminated over the Bureau of Land Management’s control of land that the federal government has seemingly stolen.
“We have scores of alphabet agencies that write regulations that can shut down your small businesses or even entire industries,” Mr. Knight said.
“They can seize your property without compensation, not using eminent domain, not even giving you a jury trial,” he noted. “They judge the laws to see if you’re guilty of their own laws, then enforce them with their own police forces.”
Interjected into the InfoWars broadcast was a video clip of a ditzy UK talking head, conversing with her supportive male mate on a British network, who believes going to the polls salves all wounds. “That’s why we have elections,” the ditzy dame chirped.
Mr. Knight’s rebuttal to that idiotic statement was that the Bureau of Land Management isn’t on his ballot nor on anybody else’s ballot to be voted for or against.
“It’s not just taxation without representation, it’s regulation without representation,” Mr. Knight said.
What he is leading up to at this point is that the inalienable rights laid out in the Constitution needs to be back where the founders intended for those fundamental principles to be divided rightfully and lawfully among the federal, state and “we the people”.
“The founders were concerned that the power would be consolidated into one place,” continued Mr. Knight.
“That’s why they created a system of checks and balances. Dividing power–not just between the three branches of government [executive, legislative, judicial] but between the federal government, the state governments and the people,” he stated, emphasizing that “The 10th Amendment matters. Enclave clause matters. The Constitution matters.”
Basically, the founders tagged the first nine amendments of the Bill of Rights to reiterate that if they had inadvertently overlooked something, then the 10th Amendment is a final command for the federal government to “forget it; you can’t do that either”!
“We need officials at the state and local levels who will obey the Constitution,” Mr. Knight asserted.
“(Officials) who understand how important it is to have a balance between federal and state governments; who have the backbone to stand up and to do their constitutional duty. That’s the only way we’re going to get control and balance back in our government.”
What Mr. Knight is addressing in his Nightly News broadcast are the real issues surrounding the Bundy case. The situation has nothing to do with any endangered desert tortoise nor whether or not he defaulted on a bogus cattle-grazing fee of a million dollars, which, when examined closer, $200,000 was the more realistic sum, anyway.
Regardless of amount, the BLM never sent an invoice for outstanding fees which he is adamant he will not pay to the federal agency. He doesn’t recognize the feds as the legitimate “stewards” of the lands, as Agenda 21 would call the agency.
The 65-year-old rancher, whose forefathers predate the BLM in that valley back to about 1877, would gladly submit payment to Clark County, Nevada, where he resides and runs his cattle.
“The vilification of the Bundy family is in full force now by the main stream media who are trying to paint Bundy as a lawbreaker, tax evader and label him as part of a Sovereign Citizen Movement, a hot button label that effectively puts a bounty on his head as a ‘terrorist’, as far as law enforcement is concerned,” Mr. Knight concluded his evening broadcast.
The noun “sovereign” he mentions, as in Sovereign Citizen Movement, is another perfectly-good word highjacked under provisions of Agenda 21.
The warm and cozy-sounding Sovereign Citizen Movement has come to denote a bunch of lawless ragtag believers who reject statutes at federal, state or municipal levels while recognizing only common law on which many of free societies’ statutes are based.