“As we awaken more of the sleeping masses we gain more strength. People who have been living comfortable lives up to this point are getting jolted from their complacency. There will be a major shift. The shift in energy has been happening for some time now and is really kicking into high gear. Release all fear and you are unstoppable.” - Ann Capotosto
WeAreChangeLA’s lead organizer Bruno Bruhwiler is being targeted as a terrorist threat. It all began when Bruno was sitting in the audience at a civil hearing for another WACLA member. The Judge literally did not like Bruno’s involuntary facial expressions, and ordered him out of the courtroom.
He was detained in the hall after asking to see the officers’ ID cards before he left the building. They are required according to their own manual to provide ID upon request, but apparently don’t like to be asked for it. When the supervising officer ordered Bruno to turn around and put his hands behind his back, Bruno instantly turned around and put his hands behind his back with absolutely no resistance.
At first he was supposedly being detained for trespassing (which is a misdemeanor) but of course, you can’t trespass on public property so then they dropped trespassing and told him he was being detained for a public disturbance. About an hour later, when the supervisor actually placed Bruno under arrest, the original charge was changed to misdemeanor contempt of court. None of the witnesses present heard the judge mention anything about contempt when asking him to leave.
Two felony resisting arrest charges were then tacked on, which means Bruno is charged with physically resisting the officers – twice? - though witnesses observed that Bruno did not ever resist the officers. The arresting supervising officer claimed that Bruno threatened to assassinate him, then the same officer ordered an underling to back up his claim as a false witness and charged Bruno with making a “terrorist” threat. After 911, legislation was passed making it very easy to charge ordinary citizens as “terrorists” for almost any reason.
They are calling him a potential cop killer. We are talking about Bruno, a man who raises money for 9/11 First Responders and the Fealgood Foundation. He’s also a member of So Cal Oath Keepers and the initiator of “Talk to a cop Wednesdays,” an outreach effort to befriend and educate law enforcement throughout Los Angeles. We are talking about a man committed to non-violent change, peace and social justice. Yes THAT Bruno.
While in custody, at another location for incarceration, Bruno was asked by an officer if he was the lead organizer of WeAreChangeLA, and the officer asked with a snide tone if Bruno had a website, with other officers looking on. Either they did some quick research on him or they recognized Bruno from some other way, but they knew he was the lead organizer of WeAreChangeLA. The mention of WeAreChangeLA made it abundantly clear that Bruno is being targeted for who he is.
This is about all of us. This is about freedom. The struggle for Bruno’s freedom is a microcosm of what is happening all across the United States. We cannot allow WeAreChange leaders to be labeled and targeted as terrorists. It can easily be ascertained that Bruno is being railroaded through procedures.
Friends of Bruno and the WeAreChange family are literally spending their life savings fighting in Bruno’s defense. We know this is a total inconvenience for all of us, but Bruno and WeAreChangeLA are out there in the streets in a big way every chance they can to help make people aware of all the lies and injustices that are being used to steal our rights, our freedoms, and our future, including the biggest lie of them all, the official story of 9-11. We don’t intend to ever stop reaching out, so please help us defend liberty and freedom by donating ANY amount you can spare. It’s easy, just go to wacla.org and click “CHIP-IN” at the top of the page. Our site has also recently been hacked multiple times but the “CHIP-IN” is still functional. Luckily we have devoted 9-11 Truth web experts working diligently to keep the website clean and up and running. Please step up. This is a very serious, and we need your help! We have strength in numbers. Let’s make our presence known. Thank you so much and love to you all.
the American states were united at war with Great Britain and had just declared their Independance. But what did it mean? What does it mean now? - Independence. This nation acted like one of England’s colonies for hundreds of years and in that time had grown to become one of Great Britain’s most productive resources. Then the French American War began and England came to defend the “colonists” incurring great debts and finally winning the war. Britain decided that it needed to keep troops here even though it did not have sufficient forts and that it could not afford to build such forts; therefore they decided to compel the people here to quarter the British troops in their homes with room and board; for protection of such troops they confiscated the peoples guns; the King also created a sales tax. The rights of the colonists became so abused that it became necessary to stand against Great Britain’s abuse over, “the last straw” — though most of the sales taxes were dropped, on a few key imported items like tea and shugar they went from from 3% to 6%. In response, rather than paying the increased tax, some of the colonists had a party (the Boston Tea Party) and threw a load of tea into the harbor; while others formed the Declaration of Independence and went to war.
When the War was over they formed a new foundational document, The Articles of Confederation, that document recognized this nation as a nation made up of independent sovereign United States, and gave the name “The United States of America” to the new government. Many of the people of this new nation felt that it was wrong to leave England. Sure there were rights violations but those were livable and their future was a certainty as an English Colony. Now that they were on their own nothing at all was sure.
Over the next ten years conditions in this country continually got worse. The individual States gave little regard to any other State and paid nearly no attention at all to the central government. After ten years of independence from Great Britain conditions were far worse than they had ever been under Great Britain’s rule and protection. Many wanted government officials to go back to Great Britain and beg the King to take us back, and they almost did.
“To form a more perfect Union”
That movement was considered too severe to take without first attempting to resolve the problems of this new nation by the sitting of what later became known as the Constitutional Convention. Each of the Sovereign States gave authority to (deputized) a few men to form a college to review and reform the present form of government and to eliminate the errors made in thier first attempt at the Articles of Confederation. In other words those few men were collectively entrusted with the peoples’ sovereign authority to reform the government. The Deputies created a Trust Indenture. Though some people say the Indenture had no title, because there was no Title written in bold letters at its head, its title, “The Constitution for the United States of America”, was given in its Preamble: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”It containes VII Articles, concluding with the signatures of the twelve States’ Deputies present at the convention. Once agreed to on, September 17th, 1787 and signed by the Deputies, the Trust was formed. This Indenture, (Constitution) with the intent and authority of the sovereign people, created a “Constitutional Republic” form of government in trust. Though the Deputies were empowered to reform the government to more perfectly align it with the will of the people, the States had not fully expected that their sovereignty and control over the land would be removed, wherefore the Deputies resolved to take the Trust back to the individual States for their respective ratification. The States conditionally refused ratification until limits were placed upon the new government that would secure man’s God given inherent rights.
Remember, under the Articles of Confederation, these individual States were recognized as individually Sovereign States, which was the problem with the Articles of Confederation, there was no accountability or control over the individual States. Without accountability whoever was in power simply ignored the central government and moved forward literally however they saw fit (in violation of individual rights, or not). In essence, they were each absolutely powerful kingdoms. It was obvious that if something wasn’t done to unite the Union of States as, “United States” they would be destroyed from within or without. So when offered the Trust Indenture, the individual sovereign States’ leaders could see that they would no longer be sovereign if they accepted the Trust, and they would be destroyed if they didn’t accept it.
Not much of a choice, but the war with England ended only a little over ten years earlier and they didn’t want to go back, so they demanded that if they were to give up their sovereignty, the people’s rights must be preserved from the central government. Thus they conditionally refused the Trust until the insisted on “Bill of Rights” were added. Therefore, the Trust document was first created to create a Trust known as the “United States”. The Trust created a government controlled by the Trust. Government officials were set up within the Trust as Trustees with specific defined responsibilities and functions. The People were set up as the beneficiaries of the Trust and when any government official takes office he/she is required to swear an oath of allegiance [make a contract with the people to uphold the Constitution]. Remember, at this point the government has already been created in trust, by the signed Constitution.
As yet the Trust has nobody sitting in the offices of government, however, the States are not willing to support the Trust and authorize its officers to function with control over them unless the people’s rights and the State’s rights are secured. The Conventioneers went back to work to draft the requested, Bill of Rights, which were later provided as the First Ten Amendments to the, Constitution of the United States of America, a document that was created to bind officers in an Oath to uphold the Trust of the people and securing the peoples rights.
Then the Trust, the Constitution for the United States of America (still signed and unchanged from its original version as first presented to the states), along with the “Bill of Rights” as the first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America, were returned to the individual States and were ratified by each of those States and returned to the Constitutional Convention where the new government was made effective and put in operation on or after, December 15th, 1791, the “Effective date of the Constitution which was then rewritten with the Title, The Constitution of the United States of America, including the Bill of Rights.
Now let’s go back and again review the documents created in the process by name. (Names are about to become (more…)
The Internet is an effective source of information for many Americans, therefore, the attack on the free Internet is in full force, from numerous angles. Unless people wake up and demand freedom, it will be lost. As usual, the collectivists are using fear in order to sway the public to embrace their predetermined outcome.
Last week, freedoms began to be threatened when the news came out about “cyberthreats” to the Internet, using the tired excuse of terrorism, despite the many years without any serious attacks.(1) Their solution, of course, is to take control over the Internet. The Senate is considering a law to allow the military to seize control over the Internet and content on personal computers, by way of comandeering America’s privately operated power grids.
The Cybersecurity Bill is another way that those in power are trying to take over the Internet, using the all-purpose excuse of terrorism again. Those who want to control what information you read, write and share are doing so under the guise of protecting the critical U.S. network infrastructure. Senator Jay Rockefeller, the driving force behind this bill, has publicly stated that it would have been better if the Internet had never existed. Perhaps this is because so many people have awoken to the truth of the Rockefeller family’s involvement in creating the fraudulent Federal Reserve System. Why is this guy still in office?
As of late March, the Cybersecurity Act bill has passed the House and made is still pending before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs (it is my opinion that it will pass through this committee with ease). Many in the Senate are rushing the enactment of this bill, and are trumpeting the necessity for “safety”. It is safe to presume that they are not acting in the interests of the individual. Further, Public- Private Partnerships (PPP) are planned as part of the takeover.(2) More people need to become aware of the true nature of the PPP (a tool used to implement fascism within the Agenda
Jesse covers a wide range of topics in this hour long interview with Alex Jones.
Alex welcomes back to the show former Minnesota governor, retired professional wrestler and color commentator, Navy Seal veteran, actor, and the host of Tru TV’s popular series Conspiracy Theory, Jesse Ventura. Jesse’s latest book is American Conspiracies: Lies, Lies, and More Dirty Lies That the Government Tells Us. Ventura’s previous book is Don’t Start the Revolution Without Me!
WeAreChangeLA’s Jeremy Rothe-Kushel calls in to CSPAN’s Washington Journal and brilliantly lays out a powerful and effective message to all Americans and our military troops.
CSPAN’s Washington Journal
FAST FORWARD and start watching @ ~19 min.
December 2, 2009- The Morning after President Obama’s Afghanistan Escalation Speech
Tape of Obama’s speech: “This vast and diverse citizenry will not always agree on every issue, nor should we. But I also know that we as a country cannot sustain our leadership, nor navigate the momentous challenges of our time, if we allow ourselves to be split asunder by the same rancor and cynicism, and partisanship that has in recent times poisoned our national discourse.
.
It’s easy to forget that when this war began, we were united, bound together by the fresh memory of a horrific attack, and by the determination to defend our homeland and the values we hold dear. I refuse to accept the notion that we cannot summon that unity again…”
.
CSPAN host Robb Harleston: Some of the split that the President was talking to is referred to in this morning’s Wall Street Journal with this headline: “Critics From Across the Spectrum Rip Plan: Some of Obama’s most loyal backers denounce escalation despite quick draw-down designs, signaling political troubles ahead.” Next up, Columbus Georgia- James, supports the President.
.
James: Yes sir.
.
CSPAN host: Go ahead James.
.
James: Sir, I’m an NCO in the Army right now.
.
CSPAN host: Yes?
.
James: And it bothers me that the American people are not following our President, because we’re trained to follow our leaders, no matter right, wrong or indifferent.
.
CSPAN host: There’s an article, James, in this morning’s New York Times talking about the strain of military service meets the resolve to go on. And in it, they quote a Colonel Viet Luong, who’s the commander of the 3rd Brigade, one of the Army’s most deployed divisions. He says, “It’s tough to go on another deployment, but for us, it’s another mission and we embrace the opportunity to be able to accomplish our mission and do the jobs that we came in the army to do.” Your thoughts.
.
James: Yes sir, I totally agree. And that’s the thing. Being an NCO, I’m a leader myself. And I must, no matter what, I gotta make sure my troops are ready. And it bothers me that the American people don’t follow. And no matter if they dislike or like what he does, because, you know, me, as a leader, I have to take my troops into combat and do what I’m told. And that’s just what I do.
.
CSPAN host: Have you been deployed to either Iraq or Afghanistan, James?
.
James: I’ve been there twice sir.
.
CSPAN host: To Afghanistan?
.
James: To Iraq sir.
.
CSPAN host: Ok. Any- Do you know if there are any plans in the pipeline for you to be part of that 30 thousand’s that’s going to Afghanistan.
.
James: I’m not sure right now sir.
.
CSPAN host: Ok, thanks for your call. Let’s move on to Los Angeles- Jeremy opposes the President’s proposal.
.
Jeremy: I prop— I oppose the President’s proposal because I support and defend the Constitution. And I would remind the previous service member who called that the first duty, oath— that was part of the oath that he took- was to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, and then, secondly, to follow all orders, if they are lawful. And the reason that I think that opposing the President is to defend the Constitution is because I am looking at historical fact and scientific fact very clearly about where terrorism comes from. And it looks clear that Obama is following his predecessor George W. Bush in committing what, under Article III Section 3 of the Constitution, is defined as treason, giving aid and comfort to the enemies who attacked us on 9/11.
.
And I would just point out the clear and convincing proof of multiple evidence strains of these buildings being brought down in controlled demolitions with living human beings in them—from the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, over a thousand of them, multi—numerous civil and structural engineers, and then, finally, this paper, “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in the Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center…” Anyone can go find it. I, personally, have indicated its presence to the Attorney General, to the Vice President, to Senators and Representatives on both Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, and to my own Congressperson. None of them have disputed the science. None of them will actually respond in any coherent manner. So it is time for the American people and the American soldiers to do their duty and to speak the truth.
Comments Off