The Words of the 2nd Amendment and Various State Guarantees


In my essay Thoughts on Small Arms and Liberty, which was the 3rd essay of my March 2016 book Putnam Liberty Notes and also was reprinted as the 23rd essay of my August 2016 book As America Fades, I discussed the purpose of the 2nd Amendment from the Founder’s viewpoint. In my sequel essay More Thoughts on Small Arms and Liberty, which was published as the 24th essay of As America Fades, I took the subject a somewhat different direction –that of basic firearms safety and personal preparation for tyranny or chaos.

I am going to take this 2nd Amendment essay a totally different direction. This essay is going to examine the words of the 2nd Amendment, and that of several state constitutions. For brevity’s sake, I shall abbreviate the phrase Right to Keep and Bear Arms as RKBA.

The 2nd Amendment was ratified along with nine others to form what is (unofficially) termed the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution. It, along with the other nine amendments, were ratified on December 15, 1791. The text of the 2nd Amendment is the following:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”.

It is clear. The people, the citizens of the states, have a right to own and carry arms –a right that is not to be infringed upon whatsoever. One part of the reason for this was to maintain a state militia –which could defend its borders from marauding Indians –and an out of control national government.

Interestingly, Webster’s 1828 dictionary gives the verb “bear” 19 definitions. The third definition is the following “To wear; to bear as a mark of authority or distinction; as, to bear a sword, a badge, a name; to bear arms in a coat”. Bearing arms in a coat sounds like carrying a concealed weapon.

Also of import is the term “arms”. The first definition of arms in Webster’s 1828 dictionary is: “Weapons of offense, or armor for defense and protection of the body”. It was written broadly enough to cover all conventional arms such as firearms and edged weapons –and also body armor.

Let us now consider some of the state RKBA statues. The original (1816) and current (1851) constitutions of my home state of Indiana both have an RKBA clause. The original (no longer in effect) 1816 constitution states the following:

“That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves, and the State; and that the military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil power”.

The current (1851 with amendments) constitution of Indiana dropped the military restrictions and simply states the following:

The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State”.

Wyoming’s constitutional guarantee, enacted in 1889, states the following:

“The right of citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the state shall not be denied”.

Montana’s constitutional guarantee, enacted in 1889 and kept by the 1972 constitution, states the following:

“The right of any person to keep or bear arms in defense of his own home, person, and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall not be called in question, but nothing herein contained shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons”.

The state guarantees of the RKBA are sometimes perhaps clearer worded that the 2nd Amendment. With the above quoted statues from Indiana, Montana, and Wyoming, it is clear that there is both an individual right and a collective (aka militia duty) right.

   While it would perhaps be stunning to modern urbanized Americans, the private ownership of all types of small arms for both personal defense and militia duty was not only common place, but legally protected when the U.S.A. and the majority of its states were set up. Not all state RKBA provisions mentioned the militia, and some specifically allowed the regulation of the carrying of concealed weapons.

It appears that the first restrictions of the RKBA were state laws against concealed carry. (I support the right to both open and conceal carry). Several states –such as Montana, Wyoming, and Kentucky- currently allow open carry of handguns without a permit, but require a permit for concealed carry. Indiana, in violation of its constitution, requires a permit for both.

In fact, it used to be common for gentlemen –not just frontiersmen- to be armed in public. For example, have you ever seen paintings of George Washington, as the 1796 one by Gilbert Stuart, showing Washington wearing private/civilian clothes –and a sword!

Regarding history, a few years ago I read Clayton E. Cramer’s 2006 book Armed America The Remarkable Story of How and Why Guns Became as American as Apple Pie. Cramer’s Armed America gives an in-depth coverage of firearms usage, ownership, and laws from Colonial America to the American Revolution period to the early Republic. It is worth reading, and I may end up rereading and reviewing it here on this blog in the future.

About a decade ago, I read and greatly enjoyed David T. Hardy’s little book Origins and Development of the Second Amendment.  I liked it enough to refer back to it a few times over the years. It is a 95 page, hardback work published by Blacksmith Corporation of Chino Valley, Arizona back in 1986. As it is now long out of print, I do not intend to review it on this blog, but used copies might still be located for those of my readers who are interested.

But I have ignored the primary issue of the matter. That issue is the origin of rights! While morally existent, the right to life, liberty, and property are little more than a meaningless fantasy without the means to defend them. If government passed a law requiring a permit to breath air, would that make breathing without a permit wrong? Of course not!

Governments have no authority to remove, or even infringe on, God given rights. God grants rights to man; government laws such as the 2nd Amendment and the state RKBA guarantees quoted in this essay are merely an acknowledgment of a preexisting God given right. The government is not a god; it does not dispense rights.

That being said, wicked governments do attempt to infringe upon our God given rights, viewing our rights as a mere privilege granted by the state and subject to its whims and regulations. This is illegitimate.

When you have a government that acts to restrict –or even abolish- one’s God given right to own and carry firearms without any governmental restriction, what does one do? I suppose that the answer to that depends on one’s religious and political beliefs, the level of repression, and upon the tactical situation one finds himself in.

My personal stance is that I have complied with the unconstitutional laws, but I will go no farther. All of my firearms are legal by current Federal and Indiana state laws. I do have a current Indiana “License To Carry Handgun” issued by the ISP.

But I will go no farther. If laws are passed requiring registration or surrender of firearms, or certain types of firearms, I will not comply. A freeman must draw a line somewhere, a line that he does not cross. If the government becomes tyrannical enough, and enough men still consider themselves free, things get “interesting”.

One cannot escape Federal laws, only obey or resist. State laws are a little different. If one lives in a state where one cannot own certain types of firearms, high capacity magazines, or carry a handgun in public –perhaps one should consider moving to a freer state?

Though I was born in the hospital in Paoli, Indiana and have lived my entire thirty three years here in rural Orange County, I have considered moving to a state with more freedom, including recognizing legal open carry without a permit required. Basically, the less people in a state, the freer the laws –in regards to firearms and other things.

I hope this essay has given patriots and liberty advocates some information to consider concerning our rights, and the government’s legal assault on them.

Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.



Hillary’s Eunuchs at the Window?

In the last week, Hillary Clinton’s rumored health concerns have become so obvious that the mainstream media is reporting on them. But first, let us consider her recent remarks on those her progressive type hate.

Late last week, Hillary proclaimed that half of Trump supporters were “irredeemable” and a “basket of deplorables”. They were this because they were “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic -you name it”. She said this while addressing an LGBT audience. (On a side note, what would she think of people like me who hold that Trump is a liberal and borderline establishment candidate?)

Apparently, Hillary holds that white Americans who believe in traditional (and Biblical) gender roles, do not approve of sexual perversion, and do not wish to see their country turned into a socialist  Third World cesspool with pockets of jihadis are “irredeemable”. In a sense it was nice to hear her say that, just as it was nice to hear Barbara Lerner Spectre’s quote about Jews leading Europe into a multicultural mode; they are now openly saying what patriots have been warning of for years. Now that the enemy is openly telling the media what they believe, maybe a few Americans will wake up to the peril we face.

There was a recent hack of former Secretary of State Colin Luther Powell’s emails. Some of them are critical of Trump, and there are rumors that he might consider endorsing Hillary. Would not it be interesting if this NYC born, Yiddish speaking, mulatto, CFR member, former General for the empire’s army, and George W. Bush administration official endorsed Hillary Clinton for president?

But now on to the subject of this essay: Hillary’s health and a potential replacement for her. By the time I finish this article, the title will be self-explanatory. (No, Bill is not one of the eunuchs!)

Hillary has been battling coughing fits for a while. On September 11, she had to leave a 9/11 memorial service in NYC. A video showed her unable to enter her van, and being placed inside by her Secret Service protective detail. Rather than rush her to the hospital, they took her to Chelsea’s apartment. Supposedly she became overheated and dehydrated. She has claimed that she had been previously diagnosed with pneumonia, and felt overheated at the 9/11 ceremony.

This could be the tip of the iceberg. She fell as Secretary of State, and has had a deep vein thrombosis and a concussion. Some physicians have observed video of her, and concluded that she may have a neurological disorder, such as Parkinson’s. And this is not even mentioning that she is 68 years old. A recent video has also emerged of her having what appears to be a mini-seizure with head, neck, and shoulder convulsion while standing in a group of people and then trying to go on like nothing happened!

Furthermore, regarding her 9/11 “dehydration” Bill Clinton was recently videoed as saying that: “because frequently, not frequently, rarely, but on more than one occasion, over the last many, many years, the same sort of thing has happened where she got severely dehydrated…”  How vacillating, how Slick Willie, how what is the meaning of is-ish.

Lay aside her anti-American and liberty trashing positions, and that a woman is arguably Constitutionally ineligible to be the U.S. president, Hillary is obviously not in good enough health to endure the strain of high office.

A former DNC chairman, Don Fowler, has publically stated that the DNC needs to have contingency plans in place to select a new Presidential nominee in the event that Hillary steps aside for reason of her ailments! Talk about an “October Surprise” scenario, but a month early!

I wonder what drives a wealthy, well-educated old woman in ill health who has already risen to great political power under Obama to push her failing body this far in an attempt to grab the ultimate prize –the White House. Is it lust for power? Image? To take the last step in the feminist revolution? Or maybe something even darker, a crazed desire to destroy what remnant of good there is in America?

Hillary Clinton has proven herself to be incarnate evil. From her feminist rejection of God’s place for women to her legal career to her partnership with Bill in Arkansas to the Mena drug smuggling allegations to her term as first lady to her time as Obama’s Secretary of State to her laughter at toppling and killing Quadifi –Hillary is totally morally and philosophically unfit to be anywhere near political power. And this is not even mentioning the allegations some have made of her concerning her alleged youthful connection to communism or Dolly Kyle’s statements concerning Hillary’s “personal sexual preference”.

To think that after a lifetime of working for causes to destroy America, Hillary would get this close to the figurehead of power –the presidency- and then have her health spiral downward until she recused herself, became incapacitated, or died- would be the ultimate burn to her.

Wait a minute. Does not the Bible tell us of a case like this many years ago? The Old Testament records the story of a wicked woman named Jezebel. Jezebel is even now a synonym for a very wicked woman. Who was Jezebel, what did she do, and how did she die?

Jezebel was a Zidonian. She was married to Jewish king Ahab. Ahab was the king of Israel, the upper kingdom comprising the northern ten tribes, after Israel and Judah split into two kingdoms after Solomon’s death. Ahab was an idolater, and married the idolatress Jezebel, who was the daughter of a heathen king. It is also recorded that Jezebel “painted her face” –obviously an act of vanity.

Jezebel is notable for several reasons. It sometimes appears that she was even more evil than her husband. She commanded or otherwise engineered the slaughter of the true prophets of the Lord, though Elijah and a remnant escaped; as she did this, she simultaneously fed the prophets of Baal from her table (see 1st Kings 18).

Later Elijah, the prophet of God, confronted king Ahab “for his wickedness in the sight of the LORD”, and proclaimed judgment on him, his posterity, and his wife Jezebel -who had “stirred up” his wicked actions.

After this, Ahab humbled himself before God, but was killed in battle. God appointed Elijah to anoint Jehu king of Israel, and to bring wrath upon the house of Ahab. This culminated with Jehu personally killing Ahab in battle, and then riding up to the palace.

Jehu called out to Jezebel and those with her, and a few of her eunuchs came to the window. At the request of Jehu these eunuchs threw their mistress Jezebel out the window to her death. She was trodden under foot, and the dogs licked up her blood.

Could it be that the true powerbrokers behind the Democratic Party are preparing to have their front men (eunuchs) metaphorically throw Hillary out the window? Perhaps this evil woman’s time is done?

I do not worry about who will be “installed” as President after the elections this coming November. I say installed for several reasons.

First, I hold that the government and media have foisted upon us a basically rigged two party system in which hard core patriots and true outsiders are, for practical purposes, barred. Second, I hold electronic voting machines produce a vote count that cannot be independently verified -allowing elections to be stolen. The third opinion will be the most shocking to my readers.

The third reason is that, unlike most professing Christians, I actually believe that God is absolutely sovereign over the affairs of men. I hold that all actions of man, and his governments, fall under the control of God. Furthermore, God has declared the end from the beginning (Isiah 46:10) before he laid the foundation of the world. Proverbs 21:1 informs us that: “The king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will”. God even hardened Pharaoh’s heart (Exodus 7:13), so that he might glorify himself in his overthrow.

God is perfectly righteous and cannot sin or tempt man to sin. He may overrule the will of fallen man at any time for any reason that he chooses. Thus, all evil that occurs is totally the fault of the individual, but also restrained by the decree of God.

In short, a wicked leader may not sit upon his throne –or in the Oval Office- without the consent of Almighty God. Evil leaders are perhaps sometimes raised up as a punishment to an evil people –which America now most certainly is. Furthermore, there are times, such as Jehu’s destruction of Ahab and Jezebel, when God approves of a people deposing and destroying their evil and tyrannical leader.

Whoever takes the seat in the Oval Office next January, I am not afraid. God’s eternal purpose will be accomplished in this, whatever that may be.

So, do you think Hillary’s eunuchs are at the window?

Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.


Thoughts on Conservative, Libertarian, Patriot, and Alt-Right


I have been thinking about resistance ideologies lately, and the terms they use to identify themselves. While the four ideological groups mentioned in the title of this essay all oppose the Democratic Party, they are by no means the same thing. A book could be written on each of these four philosophies if one had the time and inclination to do that level of research. I do not. Hence this brief essay.

I shall begin with the term conservative. Suffice it to say that conservative is just an adjective implying that one wants to preserve whatever exists. This is neither good nor bad; that is determined by the merits of the system one wishes to conserve.

There are several flavors of conservative. For example, after the rise of the Neo-Conservatives in the 20th century, there arose a push back movement termed Paleo-conservative.

The Neo-Conservatives were led by men such as Leo Straus and Irving Kristol. The Neo-conservatives are often referred to as Trotskyites (or Neo-Cohens) because it was basically founded by “former” Jewish leftists who admired Soviet communist Leon Trotsky (aka Lev Bronstein). The Neo-Cons pretty much ran the (pro-Israel) foreign policy of the George W. Bush administration.

It seems the Paleo-Conservatives, who generally admire America’s Founding Fathers, wish to preserve the concept of the moral society and limited-government-republic established by the U.S. Constitution. Paleo-Conservatives can range from Protestant Southerners to Traditional Catholics. Some of these Paleos, such as the late M.E. Bradford, even upheld the tradition of Southern Agrarianism. The Paleos even seem to be inclined toward pride in their ancestors, the white males who built our country!

The libertarians are split into many camps. The modern Libertarian Party, which is currently running (former Republican) Gary Johnson for Toker in Chief, was not founded until 1971. Of course, libertarian thought predates the current political party. It appears to me that the philosophy of libertarianism is roughly split-able into three camps: sort-of libertarians, limited government libertarians, and libertarian anarchists.

Some self-described libertarians are sort-of libertarians, basically just Republican Party types who are liberal on social issues like drugs and sodomite marriage.

Some libertarians think that liberty in America is fading away, but that some government is still needed to restrain men from harming the life or property of others. These type often like the U.S. Constitution, but often get vague or illogical when it comes to securing the borders of their would-be minimal government libertarian paradise.

The final group, the libertarian anarchist type, take it much farther, and have made a god of physical liberty. They often wish to have no civil government, the government being basically replaced with corporations –including police and arbitration corporations to take the place of police and courts. (I still have not figured out how corporations, a legal entity chartered by and under the authority of a state, exist without the state and claim arresting {and incarcerating?} authority over individuals who did not contract with them).

All libertarians, like most conservatives, love corporations and making money. Of course, Republican Party types do also. Furthermore, the post-WWII libertarian movement in America has been basically run by Christ rejecting Jews.

Next we come to the term patriot. While most Americans might term themselves patriot, I use the term “patriot” here in the hard-core sense that it is used by the loose knit ideological group that might be termed the “patriot movement”.

The patriot movement is often very conservative, but can have libertarian elements. The patriot movement usually places a great deal of emphasis on the American Revolution and the Constitution and Bill of Rights. These patriots often hate the following: the Federal Reserve System and paper money, all gun control, the IRS and the income tax, the UN, socialism, Freemasonry, CFR, Bilderbergers, public schooling, Social Security Numbers and state issued driver’s licenses. These patriots often support the formation of private/non-government citizen militia units. The Sovereign Citizen movement would fall under the term patriot movement –though all hard-core patriots do not embrace its theories. The patriot movement would generally be open to 9/11 Truth, and generally does not like corporations (unlike basically everybody else). The patriot movement is pro-white, but usually not openly white nationalist. The patriot movement will discuss the Jewish subversion of America.

Last comes the Alt-Right. I believe that it was a young man named Richard Spencer who coined that term a few years back. It simply means the alternative right, an alternative to the official Republican Party and all of its weakness and baggage. One feature of the Alt-Right is that it is openly Identitarian. Basically, Identatarian means that they are ethno-nationalists; they wish for Europe and America to stay white countries forever.

The Alt-Right openly discusses the JQ (Jewish Question). The alt-Right is politically conservative in that it advocates for traditional gender roles, nuclear families, gun rights, etc. That does not mean that they keep their language clean! Some Alt-Righters are openly fascist. Judging by the Alt-Right websites I visited last weekend, the Alt-Right does not seem interested in 9/11 Truth. The Alt-Right is rallying around Donald Trump for president. The preferred weapon of the Alt-Right is not an AK47, it is the meme -an internet panel cartoon with a satirical message.

It appears to me that the Alt-Right generally does not hate the current government and its programs; it hates the fact that the current government (and economy) is basically ran by Jews and is opening the borders and promoting multiculturalism though blacks advocacy and third world immigration. Perhaps the alt-right does not want to completely overhaul the system –only effect a change of command and a pro-white reorientation, including good jobs for working class white males.

It appears to me that these four groups have some common ground. Perhaps they differ more than they agree, especially the libertarians versus the alt-righters.

Concerning religion, conservatives are often “Christian” –and I write Christian in quotation marks to signify the broadest possible, Bible standard ignoring way. Rank and file conservatives are often one or other flavor of evangelical. The current “intellectual” class of conservativism seems often –but not always- seems to be Roman Catholic. As America was colonized and founded primarily by Protestants of the Calvinist variety, this seems a tad strange.

I do not know many libertarians personally, the “intellectual” class seems to be primarily either Roman Catholic or Jewish (ethnically Jewish even if personally atheist).

Like conservatives, the patriot movement is often “Christian”. They are perhaps even more all over the denominational spectrum that conservatives, from Protestant to Evangelical to Mormon to Christian Identity.

I have not got a good read on the Alt-Right religiously. While there are some “Christians”, I suspect that there is a high degree of atheists and agnostics –and perhaps a few neo-pagans.

One thing that almost all of these groups agree on is that they love industrialism and the consumer economy. Most conservative love it, although there are agrarian holdouts. Libertarians love urbanism, industrialism, and imported goods –as they wish to be rich. Some patriots are “preppers”, getting ready to weather a tyranny or economic collapse that they believe to be coming. That does not mean they dislike industrialism or inexpensive consumer goods, they are just preparing to live without them for a time (often by stockpiling consumer goods like freeze dried food).  The alt-right likewise appears to love the urban industrial model, as long as the jobs pay well and are for white males.

Except for a remnant of Paleo-Conservatives and hard-core patriots, no one seems to want to voluntarily go back to the principles and lifestyles of American’s Founders. By “go back”, I do not mean not using a gas powered tiller or chainsaw, or only owning a muzzleloader; I mean a purposeful rejection of urbanization and industrialism for a society where the majority of people live on the land and take their sustenance from it.

I suppose that I identify with all four of these groups on at least one area. Perhaps sort-of paleo-conservative, racially conscious, agrarian, hard-core patriot who does not want to hunt down and imprison drug users and sodomites while holding ultra-conservative Protestant Christian beliefs describes me fairly well. The problem is that the average American has no idea what all that means.

Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.



9/11: Fifteen Years After

Today is the 15th anniversary of 9/11. I feel it appropriate to post this somewhat lengthy essay to remind my countrymen of what happened.

The events of September 11, 2001 could be called the crime of the century. The size and intricacy of the conspiracy involved in the criminal assault on America that day rivals anything, even the JFK assassination.

The events of 9/11 have been used as an excuse to invade two foreign countries, wage a so-called Global War on Terror, militarize American law enforcement officers, and further erode the liberties of the American people. The events of 9/11 are arguably the defining moment of my generation.

Before I tear apart the official story, let me encapsulate the main points of the official story/fantasy that the government and controlled media have been promoting from the beginning.

The official story/fantasy goes like this. A bunch of Arabs (pronounced A-Rabs by many who watch Fox News) who lived in caves half way around the world were led by an aging Osama Bin Laden in ill health and called themselves Al Qaida.

As Dubya/Baby Bush proclaimed about Al Qaida, “they hate us for our freedom”, so they decided to send 19 guys to America to become basically unskilled pilots (and I use the term “pilot” in the loosest possible sense of the word) use boxcutters to hijack four Boeing civilian airliners and crash them into the Twin Towers in NYC, the Pentagon, and another target that they failed to reach because of a (supposed) passenger revolt that (supposedly) caused the plane to crash into a field outside of Shanksville, Pennsylvania. This was supposed to have been done to ignite a jihad/holy war against the west.

These boxcutter wielding, semi-trained pilots who had never before flown a jet airliner (supposedly) proceeded to fly these jets with extreme skill and precision-at times exceeding that of highly experienced pilots- at hard to hit targets, evaded the FAA and the U.S. military’s sophisticated air defense systems of NORAD/NEADS, got someone to call back American fighter jets scrambled to intercept them, and hit relatively small targets with high precision, resulting in the destruction of modern steel and concrete buildings in ways that are not physically possible.

Officially, the World Trade Center Towers 1 and 2 (the North and South Towers) were struck by American Airlines 11 and United Airlines 175, respectively. Officially, the Pentagon was struck by American Airlines 77; whereas, United Airlines 93 is claimed to have crashed in rural Pennsylvania near Shanksville-leaving a trail of debris scattered over a long distance -as if it came apart in midair.

The forty seven story World Trade Center 7 (WTC 7) just down the street from the Twin Towers also collapsed on 9/11, although it was not hit by an airplane! Americans who (foolishly) use Jewish phrases might say that something is not kosher here, but what they do not realize is that something here is VERY KOSHER.

The ridiculousness of Arab hijackers bringing down the Twin Towers with civilian jet airliners will be laughable before you finish this essay. Where do I begin to unravel this ridiculous story?

There is some good 9/11 Truth material already out there. Regarding the how it was done, a viewing of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth superb documentary 9/11 Explosive Evidence Experts Speak Out does a great job of proving that the Twin Towers could not have been brought down by two hits from jet aircraft. ( )

Furthermore, let me state that Christopher’ Bollyn’s book Solving 9/11 The Deception That Changed The World does an excellent and indepth job of documenting the connections of Israel to all aspects of 9/11. ( )

The section on 9/11 in Pat Shannan’s book Everything They* Ever Told Me Was A Lie published by American Free Press is also worth reading; Shannan’s section entitled “Fairytale Magic of the Bin Laden Legend” is informative, entertaining, and one of the best pieces of political satire that I have ever read!

The two hour documentary film 9/11 Missing Links that was put together by Mike Delaney and based largely on Christopher Bollyn’s research is also worth viewing. For those unfamiliar with the above sources, or who would like a refresher, here I go.

This will be politically incorrect, but not an un-P>C. as questioning the Most Holy Number 6 Million. Let the sacred cows of A-Rabs on planes now be slaughtered!

The Twin Towers were hit by one plane each; these two planes were probably Boeing jet airliners. When the planes hit, they exploded into a fireball, which burned up most of the jet fuel.

The Twin Towers (aka WTC 1 & 2) were both 110 stories high. The Twin Towers did not fall immediately after being impacted by the airplanes.

Fires, of relatively low temperatures, were ignited in the buildings at impact, fueled primarily by office carpet (which would have been fire retardant per building codes), office furniture, and wiring.

When the Twin Towers fell, both towers collapsed very rapidly in less than 12 seconds each and fell in a symmetrical way straight down into their footprint (foundation). A portion of the fall of the twin Towers was at free fall sped (no resistance beneath the object falling). This was not a typical structural collapse from fire or impact damage.

There is no possible way that fires fueled by jet fuel could have reached the high temperatures necessary to cut through or melt the steel structure of the towers. Steel does not melt until it reaches at least 2,500F, some steel alloys might not melt until 2,800F.

Jet fuel has a maximum burn temperature of 1800F and an open air burn temperature of 500-600F. The maximum burn temperature is under special conditions, namely an enclosed, fuel injected engine combustion chamber. The fires at the WTC towers were open air. There is no chance whatsoever that jet fuel fires could have cut through the support columns or melted the steel structure of the Twin Towers, just as it could not melt the steel of the engines that burn jet fuel!

When you have an intact steel support structure, as the Twin Towers did, the buildings could not have collapsed, but they did collapse. How can this be? The only logical and scientifically acceptable answer is the Twin Towers were brought down by a controlled demolition using explosives and/or thermite.

There are many eyewitnesses, including New York firefighters, who reported an explosion or series of explosions immediately before the towers collapsed. Much of the concrete was literally pulverized into dust by the collapses. There is superb documentation of the explosions, explosives, thermite, and eyewitness statements in the film 9/11 Explosive Evidence Experts Speak Out by Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth.

Video evidence clearly shows that the Twin Towers rapidly and symmetrically collapsed into their own footprints while spewing dust, steel beams, and molten metal out of the sides of the building. Steel beams were hurled laterally across the street; video analysis shows some of the ejected steel beams were clocked at 60mph! Some of these ejections were several stories below the areas receiving the downward thrust of the building.

A building with a few support columns weakened or cut would totter and fall at an angle to the ground; it would not collapse into its footprint like a classic controlled demolition.

If a building of heavy steel and concrete structure were to collapse by each floor “pancaking” onto the one below, there would be a visually discernable pause as each floor collapsed. This pausing is absent from the smooth, perfect free fall of the twin Towers.

Of great importance is the video evidence of yellow molten steel pouring out of one of the Twin Towers before it collapsed. How can steel melt? Thermite.

Thermite is a military grade incendiary that is composed of aluminum and iron oxide powder. Thermite creates temperatures in excess of 4,000F, which is more than enough to melt steel I beams and create the molten steel that was seen pouring out of one of the towers.

Thermite hand grenades will cut through the heavy steel of an enemy tank’s armor and destroy heavy steel equipment and structures, which is why the U.S. military employs them. Thermite will even burn underwater or in other oxygen free environments because thermite is its own oxidizer. There are multiple eyewitness accounts of pools of molten steel in the rubble of the WTCs when the rubble was being removed. There is also physical evidence of melted steel and steel that was thinned or had holes melted though it.

In addition to this, there is verified evidence of tiny iron spheres (aka microspheres) in the dust from the Twin Towers that spread throughout Manhattan. These iron microspheres were everywhere and may account for as much as 6% of the dust produced from the collapses.

As Thomas Cahill of the University of California has stated, “Ultra-fine particles require extremely high temperatures, namely the boiling point of the metal” (quote from Christopher Bollyn’s Solving 9/11 The Deception That Changed the World ). Thermite melting of the structural steel of the Twin Towers is the only logical explanation for these iron microspheres.

In addition to the iron microspheres, there is also recovered and verified physical evidence of unreacted thermite chips in the rubble of the Twin Towers. These chips were two sided, red/grey in color, and were determined to be nano-thermite.

As Dr. Steven Jones of Brigham Young University has stated:

“Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/grey chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material”. (quote from page 268 of Christopher Bollyn’s 2012 book Solving 9-11 The Deception That Changed The World)

Nano-thermite is produced with a smaller molecular structure, will react quicker than conventional thermite, and can be produced in a gel form and painted onto surfaces to be destroyed. The structural steel of the Twin Towers (and possibly the under floors) were likely coated with nano-thermite.

How did thermite and explosives get placed in the Twin Towers and WTC 7? There are several possibilities. One possibility is that whoever had access to the elevator shafts (security, maintenance personnel, etc.) would have had access to the support columns of the building at any time.

People posing as maintenance personnel could have easily rigged the towers for demolition if they were waived pass security, especially if the building leaser and/or security company had ties to a foreign power hostile to the United States. While we may not be sure exactly how or by whom the thermite was placed in the Twin Towers, the physical evidence shows that it was there.

The collapse of WTC 7 is perhaps the slap in the face that will wake up Americans to the true nature of the events of 9/11. The 47 story high World Trade Center 7 (WTC 7) was part of the World Trade Center complex in Manhattan and also collapsed on 9/11, even though it was not hit by an airplane. WTC 7 was owned by Larry Silverstein and was being leased by the Salomon Brothers investment banking group. WTC 7 was not hit by a plane and only suffered minor damage from debris, yet it mysteriously collapsed late on the afternoon of 9/11. WTC 7 went down in a perfect, symmetrical collapse into its footprint in under 7 seconds. WTC 7 fell at freefall velocity (no resistance).

The documentary 9/11 Explosive Evidence Experts Speak Out has video of Tom Sullivan-a demolitions professional, certified explosives handler, and employee of a company named Controlled Demolition Incorporated- clearly and unquestionably stating that the demolition of WTC 7 was a “classic implosion”.

There is also a video clip of Larry Silverstein talking about WTC 7 where he says that on 9/11 he said “lets pull it” and then he watched the building come down. Interestingly, the BBC reported the collapse of WTC 7 approximately 20 minutes before it happened! Yes, my readers, BEFORE it happened.

Yet another laughable part of the 9/11 official story/fantasy is the passport of one of the hijackers found on the streets of New York City on 9/11. The passport of Satam al Suqami was found in Manhattan. Supposedly al Suqami’s body was destroyed from the explosion and fire of the plane impact, but his passport survived unharmed and landed on the street below!

The Twin Towers and WTC 7 were brought down by a professionally ran controlled demolition operation. This is what the evidence indicates. The pathetic “Arabs with planes” story of the media and government is impossible and laughable. America needs to face reality about the events of 9/11 and begin to look for the culprits.

The Boeing jet aircraft that supposedly hit the Pentagon on 9/11 left very little debris at the impact site and did not make a big enough hole for the plane and its wings to enter the Pentagon. Why has no clear video footage showing a large Bowing aircraft hitting the Pentagon ever been released to the public, despite the Pentagon being one of the most monitored and secure buildings in the world.

Where is the clearly and independently identifiable wreckage from the Boeing airliner recovered from the Pentagon and presented to the public?  Why were their no large engines, luggage, or bodies strewn across the impact site? I do not believe that American Airlines flight 77 or any other Boeing civilian aircraft hit the Pentagon.

Whether or not the Pentagon was hit by a missile or an explosive laden UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle/drone) such as a Global Hawk is an interesting question, but it is somewhat immaterial to exposing the lie of the official story.

The supposed crash of UA 93 near Shanksville, Pennsylvania is very suspect. Why was the wreckage from the supposed crash strewn across a large area (perhaps a mile), as if the plane came apart in midair? Why were there eyewitness reports of an A-10 Warthog flying near UA 93 over Shanksville that morning? Why is the crater at the supposed crash site much too small for a large plane to have made? Why was debris basically absent from the crater site, but scattered through the nearby woods? Was UA 93 over Shanksville that morning, and if so was it shot down by the U.S. military? These questions have never been answered satisfactorily.

We must also recall that the U.S. Department of Defense wrote a plan called Operation Northwoods in 1962, but it was rejected by President Kennedy. Operation Northwoods suggested that the U.S. government could stage terror attacks inside the U.S.A., including the downing of a civilian jet, to blame on Cuba and then attack Cuba.

It is possible for jet airliners to be taken over/highjacked by computer and flown by remote control. This was in existence, at least in experimental form, before 9/11. It is possible that all of the planes of 9/11 were flown by remote control from a command center on the ground. It is entirely possible that there were no highjackers-Arab or otherwise- on the four flights that allegedly crashed on 9/11. It is possible that the planes were empty/ no passengers; it is possible that the planes that allegedly crashed were Boeing airliners, but ones selected and prepared for that day and not the four flights officially named.

My readers, it took someone who has a powerful intelligence agency, huge amounts of money, traitorous agents in America, access to American computer systems, and control of the mainstream media of the U.S.A. to pull off and then cover up the events 9/11.

The cover up was obviously carried out with the full assistance of the U.S. government, showing complicity after the fact at the very least. So, was 9/11 an inside job, or was it an “outside job” planned and carried out by a foreign government with the help of American traitors?

When approaching an act of terrorism such as 9/11, or any other crime, it is necessary to ask some basic questions. Who could have pulled off 9/11? Who had the motive and capability to do so? Who benefited from 9/11? I believe that investigative journalist, author, and American patriot Christopher Bollyn has the answer.

First of all, who benefited? The U.S.A., its people, and its institutions certainly did not benefit from the events of 9/11. One could argue that the corrupted Federal government did profit from 9/11 by using 9/11 as an excuse to basically trash the Constitution by passing the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, NDAA, implementing warrantless execution of American citizens by drone strike, etc.

Al Qaida, Muslims, and the Arab world certainly did not benefit from 9/11. Al Qaida was bombed, attacked, and scattered. Muslims are now almost universally feared and hated by Americans. Arabs and Arab countries now experience a level of hate from the western world that they never felt before. The U.S. has bombed or invaded several Arab countries and laid waste to their economy, infrastructure, and cultural sites. The U.S. government has possibly killed as many as one million civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan alone. Many Arabs accused of supporting Al Qaida or of fighting against the American invasions of their countries have been imprisoned or tortured (Gitmo and Abu Ghraib). Al Qaida, Muslims, and Arabs did not benefit from 9/11.

My readers, Israel did benefit from the 9/11 attacks. Israel received and continues to receive huge amounts of foreign aid money and weapons to defend itself from its Arab enemies. By claiming to be engaged in a war with Muslim terrorists, many Americans are fooled into believing that Arabs are the common enemy of the U.S.A. and Israel.

Israel also benefitted by having attention diverted away from the Mideast peace process, which has made it easier for people to ignore or even condone the illegal theft of Palestinian land by Israel and the plight of the Palestinians confined in the Gaza strip.

Israel benefitted by getting the U.S. government to invade Middle Eastern countries and fight against Israel’s enemies. Since America destabilized everything by invading Iraq and supporting rebel forces in Syria and Lebanon, Israel has become the dominant power in the Middle East.

In 2008 the Israeli newspaper Haaretz quoted Benjamin Netanyahu as stating “We are benefiting from one thing. And that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq”. Indeed.

Not only did they benefit from 9/11, Israel also had the motive. Israel knew that a major terror attack in America would cause Americans to: support a war or wars in the Middle East, hate Muslims, and have feelings of goodwill toward Israel.

We must realize that the state of Israel is not now and has never been the friend of the U.S.A. Israel staged bombings against American and British targets in Egypt during the 1950s in what has been called the Lavon Affair. Jews and Israel have stolen nuclear secrets and possibly actual plutonium from the U.S.A. (Who do you think the Rosenbergs were?) Israel has been running a spy network in the U.S.A. for decades, as highlighted by the Jonathan Pollard case. There is also the unprovoked attack on the U.S.S. Liberty by Israeli fighter jets in international waters in June 1967. Not only did Israel have a motive to carry out 9/11, they have previous experience and a track record of actions against America!

It is clear that Israel benefited and had the motive, but could they have carried out such a large and complex operation? Yes.

Whither we talk of Mossad, Mossad front companies, IAI and other aircraft companies, Israeli security companies in America, Ptech and other Israel connected software companies who sold software to critical users including the FAA and U.S. military, Larry Silverstein attempting to cash in on the Twin Towers insurance policy twice (by claiming the two planes were two different attacks), previous Israeli operations, the dancing Israelis photographing themselves celebrating with the ruins of the Twin Towers as a backdrop on 9/11, or the controlled media response-Israel is everywhere.

Have you heard of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a neo-con think tank- that issued a report entitled Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and Resources For A New Century in September 2000, a year before the events of 9/11?

This report suggested that a “new Pearl Harbor” might stimulate America to rebuild her war machine and hold her position of global dominance. Exactly one year later they got their “new Pearl Harbor”. PNAC was founded in 1997 by William Kristol and Robert Kagan. Both Kristol and Kagan are Jewish.

There was also a paper issued in 1996 entitled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, issued by the Institute for Advanced Strategies and Political Studies (IASPS). This paper talked about defense of the “realm”, hearkening back to the day when Israel was a religious kingdom.

The IASPS is an Israel based think tank with ties to American neo-conservatives and was founded by one Robert J. Lowenberg. The discussion group that produced this paper included some familiar “American” names including: Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser. Douglas Feith, an Undersecretary of Defense Public Policy during the Bush era, worked for the Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. Several of these men have also been affiliated with the American Enterprise Institute think tank. This is covered in former (six term) U.S. Congressman John N. Hostettler’s book Nothing for the Nation Who Got What Out Of Iraq.

And just in case you have not figured it out yet, William Kristol, Robert Kagan (and his brother Frederick), Robert Lowenberg, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, David Wurmser (and his wife Meyrav), and Paul Wolfowitz are all Jewish.

Much of the “9/11 Was An Inside Job” position is based upon Bush and/or Cheney having foreknowledge about 9/11 and refusing to react, such as by belatedly scrambling and then calling back American fighter jets sent to intercept the (supposedly) hijacked airliners. Much has also been theorized about Bush’s delayed reaction to 9/11 while at a school reading function at an elementary school in Florida

Bollyn documents that there was a company called Ptech that was supposedly started by a Lebanese immigrant named Oussama Ziade in the 1980s. However, this firm was represented and partially managed by a Jewish lawyer from Massachusetts named Michael Goff. (Goff’s father and grandfather were members of B’nai B’rith). Ptech developed software that was used by the FAA, U.S. military, and even NORAD! How many Arab immigrant boys with a Jewish lawyer sell critical software to America? How many Jewish lawyers work for Arab immigrants? Goff also worked for Gaurdium, an Israeli software company. I believe that it is safe to assume that Ptech was a Mossad front company from the beginning.

There were terror preparedness drills being practiced the morning of 9/11. One terror drill was named Vigilant Guardian and put forth a “pretend” scenario of hijacked airplanes and false radar blips on the screens representing these planes from the make believe exercise. When one has personnel on standby to play a war game scenario and the actual scenario unfolds in real life before them, they may at first assume it to be the war game and not reality. This can be confusing and delay reactions to the real threat. A foreign agent can use a terror drill to their advantage by planning a similar action to coincide with the terror drill so that they may exploit the confusion.

It is possible that FAA and U.S. military officials had a delayed reaction because of the terror drills and then issued orders that were delayed, reversed, or never delivered because of electronic sabotage of the FAA and military’s computer systems thanks to Ptech! Instead of American treachery, we may have experienced Israeli sabotage.

There are also the five dancing Israelis who were arrested after they were seen videoing and photographing the Twin Towers and themselves with the Twin Towers’ burning rubble as a backdrop on 9/11. They were arrested while driving a van owned by Urban Moving Systems, which appears to be a Mossad front company.

At least two of these men were Mossad agents. One of the photos was reportedly of them flicking a cigarette lighter with the Towers’ rubble as a backdrop! These men were deported without trial for immigration violations. After being deported to Israel they appeared on an Israeli talk show and stated that their purpose was to “document the event” on 9/11.

There is also the Israeli “art students” who were in America at the time. Many of these art students just so happened to have served in intelligence and explosive ordinance units of the Israeli military.

There is also the Odigo messaging system that sent alerts to Israelis in New York City telling them not to go to work on the morning of 9/11.This story did not get much media attention, but it is real.

Going back to Al Qaida for a moment, it is worth noting that Osama bin Laden was in ill health by the time of 9/11 and possibly died within a year from natural causes. Whoever (presumably) died in the SEAL raid in Pakistan in 2011, it is almost certain that it was not bin Laden. Why was Osama bin Laden never formally charged with the events of 9/11 as he had been for a bombing back in the 1990s? Because there was no hard evidence that he or Al Qaida was connected to 9/11! (Check out his FBI wanted poster). There is also some evidence that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was killed in a gun battle and that the man held at Gitmo is a patsy.

The fantasy about Arabs on planes pulling off 9/11 and bringing down the Twin Towers and hitting the Pentagon is just that-fantasy. At some point America must wake up and face reality about 9/11. Sometimes reality is stunning, especially when one has been brainwashed by government, media, and corrupted churches their whole life. To stop an enemy from striking oneself again, one must first identify that enemy. Israel did 9/11. 

Copyright (c) 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.

Book Review: The Kennedy brother’s “The South Was Right!”


I have decided to phase in an occasional book review on my blog. Today I am going to begin with The South Was Right!, by proud Southern brothers James Ronald Kennedy and Walter Donald Kennedy. My copy of their work is a hardcover, 431 page, September 2008 14th printing, of the 1994 second edition published by Pelican.

As an admirer of America’s Founding Fathers, resident of rural southern Indiana, aspiring homesteader, and descendant of agrarians (some of them Southerners), I have long been draw toward the South –and what might be termed Southern agrarianism. Some of my mother’s family lived in the antebellum South.

Also, I remember visiting the Great Smoky Mountains National Park several times as a child and teenager. When I turned 12 in 1995, my parents and I visited the Gettysburg battlefield and Washington, D.C.  That summer I walked around the battlefield –and through the White House- wearing a rawhide gray Confederate cap. We never went to New England, a beach or a big city for a vacation.

I greatly respect the Virginians among the Founding fathers, and those of the C.S.A such as Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson.

I hold that the Southern states had a legal right to secede from the Union and form the C.S.A. when they felt their rights and economy were being exploited, that they were unjustly invaded by the U.S. Army, and that the Reconstruction period was a brutal and dark time in American history.

Now that this has been established, let me tell why this book was disappointing –despite the accuracy of its title. First I will mention the good points of the book, and then describe why I was not thrilled with the book.

The Kennedy brothers open their book with a preface that desire to restore the U.S. Constitutional republic- and if that fails to reestablish the Confederate States! This is repeated in the final chapter. The Kennedy brothers make it clear that they are Southern Nationalists –with a capital “S” and “N”. They openly consider the South to be their nation.

They demonstrate that slavery was practiced throughout the American states, not just in the South. True. They show that some masters treated their slaves kindly, and that this relationship lasted after the negroes were freed. They also point out that there were free blacks in the South. Most modern day Americans do not understand this.

They make the case that any people, including the people of the South, have a moral right to be free from oppression. I agree, whether we are speaking of the 13 Colonies, the C.S.A., or occupied Germany after 1945.

They also point out cultural differences between the North and the South. This could be summed up as the relaxed, individualistic, primarily Celtic, county government centered, agrarian Southern culture versus the urban, industrialized, town government centered, wealth obsessed, Anglo ruled culture of the New England states. One quote concerning this from page 21 is:

“Their contempt for materialism was a natural part of the cultural heritage of the Celtic people from which the majority of them sprang. This contempt for wealth was a major factor in the true assessment of Southern society, a factor that the Yankee mind refused to understand…”

The Kennedy brothers also complain about the cultural genocide of the South, something that I certainly would sympathize with them on. From those who write public school textbooks to the book publishing houses in NYC to the media –there is an anti-South bias and inclination to unjustly depict Southerners as uneducated, culturally backward, tobacco chewing hillbillies saving up their moonshine profits in order to buy a new Klan robe.

The Kennedy brothers included several appendixes/addendums, which I enjoyed as much as their writings. I especially enjoyed the Addendum II, which was Jefferson Davis’ principled and eloquent, farewell address to the U.S. Senate as he resigned when his state seceded. It is a piece of oratory that can stand with that of the Founders in the 1770s; it is that good.

I also found Addendum X, a brief piece by Forrest McDonald on the fraudulent “ratification” of the 14th Amendment, quite worth reading. Law passed under duress is not law. Citizenship to all born on our territory was never really law!

The Kennedy brothers sometimes seem to think that the words “liberal” and “Yankee” are basically interchangeable. They seem to view unconstitutional and tyrannical modern day acts of the American national government as a liberal attack on the conservative South by Yankees –and not an attack by the Feds on all true Americans in all states. This seemed strange to me.

The Kennedy brothers still wish to work within the corrupt political system. If that fails, they wish to peacefully reestablish the Confederate States of America. Considering how peaceful secession turned out when tried in 1861, I am unsure if they really believe that it work in 21st century –especially when they believe that their people have been mistreated and basically occupied by the enemy for a century and a half.

In the last chapter, “Summary and Call to Action”, they talk about preserving history, displaying the Confederate battle flag, and political activism. They also make it clear that: “The last thing we need is for Skin-Heads and neo-Nazis to be seen as the ones who are represented by our nation’s flags”. I assume they may be referring to the various Confederate flags as “our nations’s flags”, not the American and Confederate flags.

The fatal flaw which ruined this book for me was the one absolutely illogical theme that ran throughout it: insurmountable cultural conflict between Celts and Anglos but not between whites, blacks, and Mexicans in the South.

The Kennedy brothers hold that the English speaking (primarily Anglo-Saxon and German Northerners) and the (primarily Celtic) English speaking Southerners could not get along because of cultural differences. But, they go to lengths to show that whites, free blacks, black slaves, a half breed Indian Confederate soldier from Oklahoma named McCool, Hispanic/ethnic Mexican soldiers from Santos Benavides Texas Cavalry, and a Jewess named Rosanne Osterman who allegedly nursed wounded confederate soldiers all got along just fine as one big happy multiethnic Southern family. Please.

If Western European racial brothers speaking the same language and unified under the Common Law legal tradition –the Anglos and Celts in America- cannot get along, how can EXTREMELY dissimilar racial and cultural people get along? This reminds me of the Bible passage about the beam and the mote. This fundamental illogic ruined he book for me.

This book might be a good introduction to the righteousness of the Southern cause against the Union invaders to those who are unfamiliar with this piece of history. But the book was greatly flawed by its simultaneous anti-Anglo and pro-multiculturalism theory.

Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.

Red, White, and Blue Fever

Quite a while back, I came across the term “Red, White, and Blue Fever”. I believe that it was coined by patriot author and journalist Pat Shannan shortly after 9/11.

Pat Shannan discusses this concept in his 2010 conspiracy oriented book Everything They* Ever Told Me Was a Lie. On page 165 Mr. Shannan defines it as follows:

“Red, White, and Blue Fever. It is usually isolated within the ranks of military personnel and Regan/Bush loving, Judeo-Christian conservatives. The fever prevents otherwise intelligent Americans from seeing the truth going on all around them and causes them to behave, vote (especially while on a jury) and speak very stupidly”.

Shannan also notes that believing the 9/11 official story/fairytale about A-Rabs on planes downing the crash resistant Twin Towers (which fell symmetrically at near free fall speed straight down into their footprints) is common among those afflicted with Red, White, and Blue Fever.

Basically, Red, White, and Blue fever is a false –or at least ignorant and misplaced- patriotism that is usually manifested by Republican Party types. The church I used to attend was a hotspot for this fever.

We recently saw an outburst of Red, White, and Blue fever about the national anthem. Recently a professional football player named Colin Kaepernick, a mulatto who was raised by white parents, made headlines when he refused to stand for the national anthem at a football game. It appears he was doing so as a protest to the government because of the police shooting of black males –the Black Lives Matter movement.

Fox News was in a tizzy. Pretend patriots and conservatives are offended that he would not stand for the song of empire. Let us think before we sound off.

The Founding Fathers did not have a national anthem. The Founding Fathers felt no need for a national anthem, and did not adopt one. Is there a need to analyze further?

The national anthem, “The Star Spangled Banner”, was written during the War of 1812 –long after George Washington’s death, over two decades after the Constitution was adopted, and almost 40 years after Lexington and Concord!

The Star Spangled Banner was written by a young American lawyer named Francis Scot Key in 1814, as he stood imprisoned on a British ship of war during the siege of Fort McHenry. He rejoiced to see the American flag still flying on the morning after the night bombardment.

The Star Spangled banner grew in popularity over time, and the U.S. Navy began to officially use the Star Spangled Banner in 1889. The U.S. congress did not make it the national anthem until 1931, when America had moved into empire mode. Yes, not until 1931! We had no national anthem from 1775 until 1931.

Regardless of its history, in the minds of most Americans, the Star Spangled Banner represents the current Constitution trashing, multicultural, foreign interventionist American empire –not the Founder’s republic.

The Founders, who apparently felt no need for a song celebrating the state with ritualized shows of submission such as standing or removing one’s hat, probably would not be offended by Kaepernick’s refusing to stand.

That being said, many of the Founders would most likely be offended that a mulatto such as Kaepernick was on equal citizenship/political rights with white people, and that he was advocating for the white majority to acquiesce to the demands of mobs of black folk demanding gifts and special treatment from whitey/ ‘da man/the government.

As such, we have the “leftist” Black Lives Matter gibsmedat protesters in the streets on one side and the “rightist” RWB fever patients on the other side watching Fox News and longing for Trump to save this country.

Recently, an 87 year old German lady by the name of Ursula Haverbeck was sentenced to 10 months in jail in her country for denying the Holocaust. She spoke out for her people and heritage, in opposition to the (((official promoted story))) about the labor camps in Poland. Her exercise of free speech landed her in the slammer. I suppose that she is a victim of Black, Orange, and Gold fever.

Readers of this blog and my book As America Fades are no doubt aware of my occasional mocking reference to the “holy number 6 million”. In honor of courageous German patriot and “thought criminal” Ursula Haverbeck, I am now going to refer to the Most Holy Number 6 Million. Christian Zionists, neo-conservatives, and Fox News watchers may stand at attention and salute (like during the anthem of empire) whenever the Most Holy Number 6 Million is mentioned. Opening one’s Bible to the 20th chapter of Revelation while saluting is optional. (Instead of saluting, Papists may bow their head as their last three papas did at the Wailing Wall).

————————————————————————–Note: Those wishing to obtain a copy of Pat Shannan’s book Everything They* Ever Told Me Was a Lie can contact the publisher, American Free Press, the following ways.

Postal mail:


1600 Trade Zone Avenue, Unit 406

Upper Marlboro, MD 20774


phone: 1-202-544-5977


Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.

Ruby Ridge, Twent Four Years Later


This essay shall describe the horrific events that the Federal government carried out during the sieges against the Weaver family at Ruby Ridge, Idaho in late 1992 –just over 24 years ago. I was a child when this occurred, and I suppose that many young patriots do not remember it. I am writing this essay in part to keep the memory of Ruby Ridge alive.

Randy Weaver was a family man who decided that he wished to live a peaceful life separated from the religious, political, and cultural corruption that he saw destroying his country. In 1983 Randy and his wife Vicki decided to sell their home in Weaver’s birth state of Iowa and move to the Pacific northwest and homestead. They packed up their children Sara, Samuel, and Rachael and headed west to a new life of freedom!

The Weaver family decided to purchase a small piece of property in rural Idaho. According to Randy and Sara Weaver’s book The Federal Siege At Ruby Ridge, there is no “Ruby Ridge” on their land; their property lay in the area of Caribou Ridge and Ruby Creek Drainage; the name Ruby Ridge was fabricated by the press.

Randy and Vicki began to build a cabin and prepare a homestead like their pioneer ancestors had. They built their own house by hand, near a huge boulder that gave them a picturesque view of their driveway and the surrounding mountains.

While living at their cabin Vicki gave birth to a fourth child, Elisheba. The Weavers also befriended a young man named Kevin Harris who helped them build their cabin and who lived with them off and on for the next nine years.

The Weavers raised their food and homeschooled their children as had generations before them. They hunted and owned firearms for both food procurement and defense.

Mr. Weaver simply wanted to separate from what he believed to be error religiously, politically, and culturally. Part of Randy’s religious beliefs was that the races should not intermarry; this was peaceful separation, not hate.

Randy Weaver did attend a few meetings of an Aryan Nations group in Idaho which is where the serious trouble began for him. After being convinced to attend by an acquaintance named Frank, Randy took his family to the Aryan Nations World Congress held in Idaho in 1986, 87, and 89. Randy did not join and was only curious as to their beliefs.

Frank introduced Weaver to Gus, who happened to be an undercover government informant! Frank and Gus tried to involve Weaver in their supposed plans (sting operations) about attacking the government and raiding government arsenals, however Weaver refused to participate in any illegal activity. Weaver distanced himself from Frank and Gus, but they pursued him.

Gus made contact with Weaver and asked Randy to sell him some guns. As Randy was in a tight financial strait at the time he consented. The one problem is that Gus demanded Randy cut the shotgun barrels off ¼ inch shorter than the NFA specified legal limit -yes, just one quarter of an inch. (Note: The 2nd Amendment clearly protects all guns, the NFA 34 and all laws infringing upon the right are “null and void” as Justice Marshall put it; however, the government does currently enforce these illegal laws).

Randy cut off the barrels and sold Gus the two shotguns in late 1989, although he never received full payment. After this a man named Rico (another Federal informant) warned Randy that Gus was “dirty”.

In 1990 the head of the ATF office in Spokane, Washington threated to charge Weaver with multiple federal firearms violations IF Weaver would not go undercover for him as a snitch! Randy Weaver was a principled man and refused to inform on or entrap others.

It appears that the whole shotgun deal was an entrapment operation orchestrated to get leverage over Weaver and recruit him as an informant for the ATF.

In January 1991, Weaver and his wife (Vicki had done nothing) were arrested for the firearms charges when they stopped to help a stranded motorist-who was actually an undercover ATF agent waiting for them.

Weaver was released from custody after putting up his land for bail. Weaver was told that if he lost his case at trial that the government would take his land that he had put up for bail. (During Weaver’s post siege trial, the magistrate who told him that admitted in court that he gave Randy incorrect information).Vicki was released that day with no charges filed against her.

Randy’s trial was set for Feb. 19, 1990, but then the probation officer sent Randy a letter stating that the date was changed to March 20, 1990. However the letter was incorrect because the actual date was changed to Feb. 20, 1990-unknown to Weaver. When Randy did not show up for the Feb. 20th court date that he was unaware of, a local radio station broadcasted that Randy was like a “wild animal” up at his cabin on the mountain. The United States Attorney’s Office then officially indicted Randy for failure to appear six days before the March 20th date that he was told to appear!

At this point Randy realized that he had been befriended by a Fed snitch, lied to, entrapped, indicted, legally railroaded, and forced into signing over his home for bail to avoid pretrial incarceration. Not having the money to flee or a place to go, Randy made the decision to stay up on the mountain and ignore the government that had set him up.

Eventually the U.S. Marshalls Service began a camouflage wearing, machinegun carrying, covert surveillance mission of the Weaver property and the surrounding area. It all began to unravel as little Samuel and his dog stumbled across this federal “surveillance”.

On August 21, 1992 fourteen year old Samuel Weaver’s yellow Labrador Striker began barking and Samuel and family friend Kevin Harris believed that Striker had caught the scent of a deer or other animal; Samuel and Kevin decided to follow Striker into the woods while Randy walked down an unused logging road that was parallel to Samuel and Kevin’s path.

After an alleged confrontation with Striker, a U.S. Marshall shot and killed Striker while Striker was running away. Then there was an exchange of gunfire between the marshalls and Samuel and Kevin. Little Samuel Weaver was killed by a shot in the back as he was fleeing; his right arm was almost blown off from a second shot. A U.S. Marshall named William Degan was killed in this exchange. Kevin was unwounded. Randy Weaver did not fire a shot at anyone on this or any other occasion; he was not part of the gun battle.

After this stunning event Randy and Vicki walked down to the murder site and retrieved their son Samuel’s body and brought him to a shed near their cabin. The U.S. Marshalls got all freaked out that Degan was killed and called in the elite, paramilitary FBI Hostage Rescue Team (HRT). National Guard troops were also summoned to Ruby Ridge to assist the federal agents; this was a violation of the principle of separation of the military and police forces that America had long enjoyed.  The federal agents then laid siege to the terrified Weaver homestead.

Unknown to the Weaver family, the government was telling the Federal agents lies about Randy’s supposed dangerousness. They were making legally baseless and factually incorrect allegations that Randy might have booby trapped or dug tunnels over his property and that he was connected to a string of bank robberies; all of this was false.

The government then instituted new, unprecedented, and un-Constitutional “Rules of Engagement” for the siege on the Weavers.

These stunning rules declared that (1) any armed adult male could be shot before a surrender announcement was given if the children would not be endangered by the shot, (2) any adult observed armed after the surrender announcement was made could be shot, (3) if compromised by an animal the animal should be killed, and (4) subjects other than Randy, Kevin, and Vicki could be shot if they were presenting a threat to themselves or another.

Carefully consider these rules. The government issued kill on sight orders for any adult male at any time (expect during surrender), any armed adult after a refusal to surrender, and any child who was a “threat” to themselves or others. These rules disregard the 5th Amendment right to life. Also, does the bizarre statement of no. 4 (a threat to themselves) mean the Federal agents were authorized to kill a child who was attempting to commit suicide?

The government wanted nothing but death at Ruby Ridge. After Ruby Ridge, the United States Senate did an investigation of the Ruby Ridge incident and released a report that harshly condemned these rules of engagement and other federal actions at Ruby Ridge (these rules are covered on pages 127-32 of The Federal Siege At Ruby Ridge). No Federal agent or official ever took responsibility for approving these modified rules of engagement.

On August 22 Randy, Sara, and Kevin ventured outside when their dogs began whimpering; when they saw no one around Randy decided to go to the shed and check on Samuel’s body. Unknown to them, a FBI sniper by the name of Lon Tomohisa Horiuchi lay in weight with an optically sighted, .308 caliber, sniper rifle. Randy was shot once in the back by a round that penetrated his shoulder.

After being shot, Randy fled to the house with his daughter Sara pushing him and Kevin following behind them. Unarmed, Vicki Weaver was standing in the doorway holding the door open while also holding her 10 month old daughter Elisheba in her arms.

As Kevin entered the doorway Horiuchi fired a second shot that hit Vicki in the head and then grievously wounded Kevin in the chest. Vicki was instantly killed and her little daughter Elisheba was covered in her mother’s blood and bone fragments.

The sniper who fired these shots was Lon Tomohisa Horiuchi, a West Point graduate and former U.S. Army officer who had been with the FBI for years. This man (correction: male) was willing to kill an unarmed mother, and risk killing her children with the same round, to carry out illegal shoot-on-sight orders based on a supposed minor weapons violation. Horiuchi later claimed that he didn’t see Vicki and was aiming at Kevin Harris, however this was impossible based upon the geometry of the people/doorway and the curtains being open.

Horiuchi was charged with manslaughter for the killing of Vicki Weaver by an Idaho county court; the federal government removed State jurisdiction and placed the case in Federal court –at which point (in 1998) the Feds dismissed the case under the “supremacy clause”, claiming that Federal agents are immune from prosecution for carrying out their duties in a reasonable way. Even the Redcoats involved in the Boston Massacre were tried, but not Lon Horiuchi. This was a very dark day for the USA.

After the shots fired at Randy and Vicki, the government laid siege to the Weaver house and drove an APC around their yard and harassed them with lights and sound recordings. The Federal agents attempted to make contact by sending a 750 pound robot equipped with a telephone-and a shotgun pointed at whoever would pick up the phone! Needless to say, Randy was not stupid enough to pick up the phone.

Eventually Randy yelled to them that he would talk to well-known patriot (and highly decorated former Green Beret officer) Colonel Bo Gritz. On August 31st, Gritz convinced Weaver to surrender.

Randy Weaver and Kevin Harris were arrested and the girls were placed in the care of their grandparents. The nightmare was almost over.

Weaver and Harris were placed on trial. Harris was acquitted of all charges and Weaver was convicted only of failure to appear. Yes, Randy was not convicted for the original ¼” too short shotgun charge that stared this whole ball rolling downhill. The government settled a civil lawsuit with the Weaver family for the death of Vicki, but Horiuchi was never tried for his crime.

During the Weaver/Harris trial, the Federal government burned down the church at Mt. Carmel, violently ending the siege at Waco, Texas. Over 80 men, women, and children perished in the Waco atrocity. FBI sniper Lon Horiuchi was also present at Waco. The government was on a rampage at that time in our nation’s history.

In 2014, things heated up a bit when a Nevada rancher named Cliven Bundy was involved in a dispute over grazing rights on federal land near his ranch. (For those unaware, the federal government owns absolutely HUGE swaths of land out west –often managed by the Forrest service and the Bureau of Land Management {BLM}).

A huge amount of patriots converged on the Bundy ranch to offer assistance to Cliven, to guard his ranch from a federal raid, and to ensure that it did not turn into another Ruby Ridge! I remember listening to Mark Koernke’s patriot internet radio broadcast, The Intelligence Report, when this was going down, and I thought that America might be near the tipping point to revolution if the government went too far.

Eventually, the government backed off and Cliven got back his cattle that the government had rounded up, but did not win his point legally.

In early January 2016, a group of men led by Ammon Bundy, a son of Cliven Bundy, began a sit-in/occupation of the federally owned Malheur National Wildlife refuge in Oregon.

This armed occupation of the Malheur Refuge was done as a protest against the unjust jailing of two Oregon ranchers, father and son Dwight and Steven Hammond, and over federal ownership and control of lands inside the territory of a state. The occupiers of the Malheur seemed to be primarily of the Mormon faith.

For those unaware, cattle still graze on federal lands, just as they did in the days of the old west. The state sometimes demands grazing fees. I have personally seen free range cattle grazing on federal land in the woods of the Mogollon Rim in Arizona in the late summer of 2012.

On January 26, 2016 several of the occupiers of the Malheur Refuge left the property and begun traveling to a nearby town for a meeting, at which point they were ambushed by state and federal agents on a snowy mountain road. As events degraded Robert “LaVoy” Finicum –who was not visually armed, let alone attacking anyone- exited his vehicle and was shot to death by government agents. The vehicle, which had not engaged government authorities, was allegedly under fire when LaVoy exited to save his passenger’s lives by personally surrendering.

Cliven Bundy was arrested at the airport as he sought to travel to Malheur. The remaining occupiers surrendered to the government after LaVoy Finicum’s murder. The government’s message was clear: cross the state and you die.

The same government who murdered Vicki and Samuel Weaver killed –without any cause- Robert “LaVoy” Finicum during the events at the occupation of the federal Malhauer Wildlife Refuge in Oregon in January 2016. How many more innocent American patriots will die before the American people awaken?

As things continue to deteriorate, some patriots believe that we will see another government rampage against innocent Americans –perhaps even martial law and the extinguishment of liberty.

Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.