Skip navigation

This story has gone viral in the past 3 days. originally gave light of the story and thus now many media outlets and bloggers have picked up on it.

Link to the story below with the report in clickable images.

Upon its release , the Associated press had picked up on it and had caught the attention of Chris Knox (The Firearms Coalition).

Missouri State Police Profiles “Modern Militia Movement”

Mo. State Police Report says You’re a Potential Terrorist:  Not Profiling, It’s An “Educational” Document…

A document from the Missouri Information Analysis Center, a division of the state police, conflates privately organized militia groups with libertarians, Ron Paul supporters, Constitutionalists, race separatists, and even some collectivists, who distrust the Federal Reserve.  The document, which we obtained last week, is marked “Unclassified, Law Enforcement Sensitive,” indicating that the Missouri state patrol guys don’t want to talk about it.  We can confirm that last bit as they failed to return phone calls or email.  Before running the document I wanted to verify it.  The Associated Press has since picked the story up, so we’re running it now.  You can see the document here.

The AP story quotes Lt. John Hotz of the Missouri State Highway Patrol who called the report “an educational thing.”

“Troopers have been shot by members of groups, so it’s our job to let law enforcement officers know what the trends are in the modern militia movement.”

The most encouraging thing I see in this story is that it leaked.

We’ll be following this one.

March 16, 2009 Update. The Missouri Libertarian Party issued a press release, available here.

Additional Note from Jeff: This “analysis” by the Missouri Information Analysis Center has the fingerprints of the Southern Poverty Law Center all over it.  Morris Dees of SPLC has for years maintained a site for tracking “hate groups.”  That’s fine and dandy, but Mr. Dees is very good at drawing connecting lines between organizations and individuals even when there is rather obviously very little or nothing to connect them.  Back in the mid 90’s I attended a presentation by an associate of the SPLC and sat in stunned disbelief as he drew circles on the board containing the names of organizations and individuals he said were connected.  Among these were connections between groups like the KKK, neo-Nazis, and such, and groups like NRA, the John Birch Society, and GOA. He drew other links between these groups, militia organizations, and individuals including Larry Pratt of GOA, and most shocking to me, Neal Knox, my own father.

Now I know a bit about the NRA and I know Larry Pratt to be a fine Christian man.  I also know that there is absolutely no truth to any allegation that Neal Knox was any more connected to these groups and their philosophies than Morris Dees himself is.  The “connections” were based on the simple fact that the individuals and many in the groups al espoused one or more similar beliefs such as belief in the Second Amendment as an individual right and that the federal government should be constrained by the US Constitution.

For Dees and his friends to make such links is simply outrageous.  For official government agencies – particularly law enforcement agencies – to use these bogus connections or draw connections of their own suggesting that millions of law-abiding,  patriotic Americans are “potential terrorists” because they object to excessive taxation or question the wisdom and constitutionality of the Federal Reserve system – or they believe that they have a God given right to the means necessary to defend their families and their nation – is beyond outrageous, it borders on criminal.

Barack Obama has much closer ties and connections to terrorists and subversive philosophies than do most tax protesters, gunowners, or Constitutionalists, yet asking questions about these connections is one of the indicators that the Missouri “analysis” suggests is an indication of being a dangerous extremist.

Rather than paint with a broad brush anyone who questions government actions or motives, the government needs to be openly, and honestly answering questions, correcting procedures, and abiding by the letter and spirit of the Constitution.

Case in point: After the lunatic in Alabama’s recent killing spree, the streets of the small town where it happened were patrolled by armed soldiers from nearby fort Rucker.  While some would say that’s a reasonable response to such a violent event, especially in light of the terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India recently, the fact of the matter is that armed military troops patrolling the streets of America is ILLEGAL.  The military is for fighting foreign enemies in wars, not enforcing laws in the US.  There are specific and clear proscriptions against military involvement in civil affairs.  Whether their use in this case was “harmless,” or “reasonable,” or “appropriate,” the fact remains that it is absolutely ILLEGAL and must not be done.  If we the people wish to change that, we need to address it Constitutionally and legislatively, not just allow the government to ignore the law.

March 18 2009 update. Rush Limbaugh reported on this story at the beginning of his broadcast today.

This isn’t done yet, as I’ve just  learned that number of other media sources have picked up on the story. Lew Rockwell decided to put in their voice.

March 15, 2009

If you’re reading this blog, you could be a terrorist…

Posted by David Kramer at March 15, 2009 11:13 AM
If you haven’t heard by now, the Missouri Information Analysis Center issued a no-longer-secret report about what it considers to be signs of a suspected terrorist:

“The Feb. 20 report called “The Modern Militia Movement” mentions such red flags as political bumper stickers for third-party candidates, such as U.S. Rep. Ron Paul [sic]¹, who ran for president last year; talk of conspiracy theories, such as the plan for a superhighway linking Canada to Mexico; and possession of subversive literature.”

Page 6 of the report states:

Federal Reserve Banks: Members of the militia movement are strongly against the FRS and see it as a mechanism of the elitist New World Order. In November End the Fed protests were held nationwide at Federal Reserve Banks in opposition to the FRS. Many right-wing extremists oppose the FRS and propose a system backed by gold. Federal Reserve banks may also draw attention from anti bailout protestors and activists.”

MEMO to Lew Rockwell: Please disavow any knowledge of me and please remove all of my blogs from your archives.

¹UPDATE: David Bardallis wrote to me pointing out that Ron Paul was NOT a Third Party candidate.

Even the Kansas City Star ran the story. Which is the A.P. article but do take the time to view the comments.

Columbia Daily Tribune ran a very interesting article.

‘Fusion center’ data draws fire over assertions

Politics, banners seen as suspect.

“If a police officer is pulling me over with my family in the car and he sees a bumper sticker on my vehicle that has been specifically identified as one that an extremist would have in their vehicle, the guy is probably going to be pretty apprehensive and not thinking in a rational manner,” Neal said. “And this guy’s walking up to my vehicle with a gun.”

Worldnetdaily has even been so kind to chime in on the story. And the author really tells it like it is.…w&pageId=91937

Are you a terrorist suspect?

Posted: March 17, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009 

Are you a terrorist suspect?

Did you support Ron Paul for president last year?

Do you believe there are people actively working to merge the U.S. with Mexico and Canada?

Do you display an American flag?

Did you ever display a Libertarian Party bumper sticker on your car?

Do you buy gold?

Any of these characteristics might lead law enforcement authorities to conclude you represent a danger to the republic. You are more likely to be a militia member or a domestic terrorist, according to a document distributed to Missouri police and, potentially, law enforcement authorities nationwide.

That is the stunning news from a Feb. 20 report called “The Modern Militia Movement,” which identified these “red flags” or warning signs.

Of course, I want you to notice what are not considered red flags and warning signs by the Missouri Information Analysis Center, which works with resources from the Department of Homeland Security and other government agencies.

You are not suspect if you have an “I like Osama” bumper sticker on your car.

You are not a suspect if you attend regularly attend a Wahhabi mosque.

You are not a suspect if you are preaching hate and anti-Americanism in a church formerly attended by the president of the United States.

You are not a suspect if you are a member of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Do you get the picture?

Welcome to the Obama World.

And the scary thing is that cops are going along with this.

Lt. John Hotz of the Missouri State Highway Patrol said the report comes from publicly available trend data on militias: “All this is an educational thing,” he said. “Troopers have been shot by members of groups, so it’s our job to let law enforcement officers know what the trends are in the modern militia movement.”

The center, which opened in 2005, was set up to collect local intelligence to better combat terrorism and other criminal activity, he said.

Hotz assures the public that using factors in the report to determine whether someone could be a terrorist is not profiling. He said people who display signs or bumper stickers from third-party groups are not in danger of harassment from police.

“It’s giving the makeup of militia members and their political beliefs,” Hotz said of the report. “It’s not saying that everybody who supports these candidates is involved in a militia. It’s not even saying that all militias are bad.”

So then how is this misinformation helpful?

Hotz doesn’t offer a clue.

All of this smacks of something I recall from the days of Attorney General Janet Reno during the Clinton administration.

Back then it was the highly politicized FBI warning that conservative Christians posed a danger to the republic. That astute warning came in the form of Project Megiddo.

The name “Megiddo” came from the biblical location in Israel associated with the Battle of Armageddon, the final great battle between the forces of good and evil as some believe is foretold in the book of Revelation.

Sent to police chiefs throughout the country in an effort to warn them of potential difficulties they may encounter in their local areas, the controversial FBI report described a number of Christian-based groups that ostensibly posed a violent threat to society. By the way, this all came after Islamic terrorists bombed the World Trade Center and destroyed the Khobar Towers.

And how did all that paranoia work out?

Two years later, a small band of Islamic terrorists plotting in the U.S. undetected destroyed the World Trade Center and attacked the Pentagon, downing four commercial airliners along with them.

We’re still awaiting the first terrorist attack by flag-waving, gold-buying Ron Paul supporters.

While some people want to make a laughing matter out of this or roll their eyes or push it off as craziness. I for one do not take this as a grain of salt.

For one we have FEMA teaching their agents that the founding fathers were TERRORISTS. How easy it is, that those of us regardless if we are Ron Paul Supporters,Constitutionalists,Gun Owners,GunVoters,NRA members, Gun Owners Of America , Campaign For Liberty members or those who believe in accountability , transparency,limited and small government,honest and sound money just got lumped into a group which will probably now be vilified in the coming months or years to the naive, poorly informed General American public and also the ill-informed foreign countries and their populations as TERRORISTS How nice!

Campaign For Liberty President  had sent this email to it’s members.

C4L Responds to Missouri Report



March 17, 2009

Dear Friend of Liberty,

Maybe you’ve heard, or maybe not, but the Missouri State Police think you might be a security threat.

Why?  Because you support Ron Paul and the Campaign for Liberty.  Also, because maybe you own guns, oppose abortion or homeschool.

Even, and I’m serious, because you support the U.S. Constitution.

I know, it’s ridiculous…and probably steams you a bit.

But here at Campaign for Liberty we are going to give this foolishness the treatment it deserves.  More on that in a moment.  Let me give you a bit more background.

As you may be aware by now, the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) recently released a report titled, “The Modern Militia Movement” to over one thousand Missouri law enforcement officers.

What is the Missouri Information Analysis Center?  According to its website,

“MIAC is the mechanism to collect incident reports of suspicious activities to be evaluated and analyzed in an effort to identify potential trends or patterns of terrorist or criminal operations within the state of Missouri.  MIAC will also function as a vehicle for two-way communication between federal, state and local law enforcement community within our region.”The MIAC warned officers that violent militia members are “usually” supporters of presidential candidates like Ron Paul and are also known for opposition to things like the Federal Reserve and the income tax.

The “study” was undoubtably written by some university liberal who knows nothing of the hundreds of thousands of Missourians who share our values.  I can only imagine how many hundreds of thousands of Missouri tax dollars funded this.

Both Ron Paul and Campaign for Liberty champion principles of freedom, peace, and prosperity.  We believe that the Founder’s vision for America can be reclaimed through education and peaceful activism.  It is a common practice of elitist intellectuals and backroom bureaucrats to attempt to crowd everyone into groups and stick labels on them, especially when it involves those who support a Constitutionally-limited government.

Anthony Gregory, editor-in-chief at Campaign for Liberty, has posted an excellent new article on our site concerning government broad-brush fear campaigns.

It is important that we respond in the right way when faced with such a government labeling, and the proper way is to go straight to the top in Missouri.

The way to fight thugs and ignorant people in authority is not to cower or rage, but to proudly proclaim who you are and what you believe.

That’s why I urge you to sign our Citizen’s Petition here today.

Our petition spells out in no uncertain terms who we are and what we believe.  And it reminds those in charge of enforcing Missouri’s laws that we are citizen activists who will not be intimidated nor embarassed into silence.

Simply owning a gun does not make you a threat.  It means you are a free citizen.

Supporting our Constitution does not make you worthy of a watchlist, it makes you a Patriot.

So please, sign our Citizen’s Petition today.  Be sure to stay tuned for more information on how we plan to respond to the MIAC.

Finally, I want to ask you a final favor.  If you can, please join us next week as we gather in St. Louis for the first Campaign for Liberty Regional Conference and show the people of Missouri what Campaign for Liberty truly stands for and represents.

We will be hosting a free event on Friday Night with Ron Paul and Judge Andrew Napolitano that is open to the public, and the conference will be highlighted by grassroots training on Saturday, March 28.

Learning how to properly mobilize in order to implement liberty-based legislation is absolutely critical to our success as a movement, and our Regional Conference will provide you with the tools you need as we move forward.

For more information on our Conference, check out our Regional Conference page.  For special travel and hotel information, click here.

Liberty is never free, and demands vigilance.

I look forward to seeing you in St. Louis for an exciting weekend of celebration and training!

In Liberty,

John Tate
President, Campaign for Liberty

P.S. And don’t forget to fill out our Citizen’s Petition, which we will deliver to the Missouri Governor and Attorney General.

Anthony Gregory Had written a wonderful article in response to the Missouri state police report.

Peaceful Dissent and Government Witch Hunts
By Anthony Gregory

As most readers of this are probably aware, the Campaign for Liberty has been singled out, along with a few other political groups, in a leaked Missouri state government report, “The Modern Militia Movement.” The document tells state officials to be on the lookout for violent extremists while conflating them with pretty much anyone who criticizes the government. Perhaps most troubling, the information apparently comes from the Department of Homeland Security, meaning that similar documents could be circulating in states other than Missouri.

The brush with which this report paints critics of the federal government is so absurdly broad that it should not have to be taken seriously. The report lumps together violent white supremacists with the diverse and broad coalition behind Ron Paul, a man who has called racism “simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans only as members of groups and never as individuals.” People who favor peace and cooperation among nations are thrown together with belligerent nationalists. Militants who saw George W. Bush as their savior and loved the war on terror are associated with those of us who saw Bush’s reign as a long period of attacks on social peace, international harmony and freedom. We who criticize the Federal Reserve, fiat money, and inflation — many of whom were inspired by great Jewish economists like Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard — are conflated with peddlers of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. Promoters of social harmony and cooperation are branded as antisocial promoters of conflict. The wide net cast catches both domestic terrorists and anyone who happens to favor constitutional government, oppose international bureaucracies, question the IRS, CIA, FBI or United Nations, subscribe to libertarian politics or oppose the military draft.

This should all be too ridiculous to address, but police carrying out nationally directed profiling have not been known to be the most nuanced in their investigations. So there is some legitimate concern for freedom activists of all stripes.

The report’s categorization of so many different types of people as potential threats to domestic peace takes on a distinct flavor in these Obama years, targeting tens of millions of conservative-leaning Americans who wish to peacefully live their lives in freedom — people who take their Second Amendment rights seriously, people who oppose the staggering growth of government in modern times, people who do not fit into a politically correct mold of good citizenship. It is thus a dangerous report, but it is not anything qualitatively new in the history of the American Republic. Sometimes the fear-mongering was simply stupid and counterproductive; but many times it meant severe attacks on the civil liberties of peaceful Americans.

During the American Revolution, peaceful colonial skeptics of the war had their property confiscated. President John Adams targeted the Jeffersonians with the unconstitutional Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. During the War on 1812, Louis Louaillier, a Louisiana journalist, was jailed by General Andrew Jackson merely for protesting martial law — and then the judge who issued him a habeas corpus writ was also jailed. Many critics during the Civil War were jailed without due process simply for expressing their opposition to Abraham Lincoln’s power grabs. Critics of Reconstruction were also thrown in prison for their opinions.

With the advent of the national leviathan and technological modernity, oppression of peaceful dissenters hit new heights. Much of this was rooted in the Red Scare. Those thought to be socialist sympathizers were harassed. Labor agitators were brutalized, hundreds of thousands of Americans ended up on government lists, and hundreds of suspected communists were deported to Bolshevik Russia.

The whole time, government used fear of activist violence to chip away the freedom of all Americans. Labor organizers were hardly all angels. Many violently lashed out at scabs and their activism sometimes degenerated into riots and crimes against the innocent. Communist ideology is certainly one of the more dangerous belief systems. Yet the government lumped all these people together, effectively criminalizing free speech, opinions and associations, and persecuting people simply for disagreeing with the establishment view.

War hysteria brought on the worst abuses. During World War I, those who were German, spoke German, taught German or patronized German art and music were targeted by lynch mobs and government crackdowns. Under the Espionage and Sedition Acts, critics of the war, conscription, the American flag, Constitution or U.S. military were thrown in prison. Woodrow Wilson put Eugene Debs, his socialist presidential opponent, in prison for giving a speech that correctly said the draft was a form of compulsory service illegal under the Constitution. Apparently, either being too pro-Constitution or too anti-Constitution was enough to find oneself in a cage.

Criticism of American allies, including Britain, could also land one in jail. Robert Goldstein was sentenced to prison for making a patriotic movie, The Spirit of ’76, which was about the American Revolution and appropriately portrayed the British as the antagonists. After the war, abuses continued. In the late 1920s, the Bureau of Investigation, today called the FBI, spied on Albert Einstein.

Franklin Roosevelt spied on his political opponents, including Republican presidential candidate Wendell Wilkie, and had lists compiled of both rightwing opponents of his New Deal regime and leftwing radicals. The government was poised to round them all up. This did not end up happening, although FDR did force more than 100,000 peaceful Americans of Japanese descent into internment camps, depriving them of their liberty and property in the name of a war for freedom.

As the Cold War commenced, government monitoring and persecution of peaceful dissenters resumed. Many Americans mostly remember Senator Joe McCarthy, who focused on officials in power above him, but far worse abuses occurred against peaceful and powerless Americans. The Hollywood blacklist is the most well known example.

But the government witch hunts and agitation got worse than even this. The FBI infiltrated both rightwing critics of Civil Rights legislation and leftwing activists. In 1956 the agency launched COINTELPRO (Counter Intellgience Program). The purpose, according to one internal document, was to “track, expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, or otherwise neutralize the activities” of certain activist groups. In one San Diego operation, COINTELPRO used forged letters to incite violence between the Black Panthers and its rival, the United Slaves. The FBI celebrated the “shootings, beatings, and a high degree of unrest,” and gloated in a memo, “Although no specific counterintelligence action can be credited with contributing to this overall situation, it is felt that a substantial amount of the unrest is directly attributable to this program.” This was revealed in the famous U.S. Senate Church Committee reports in 1976. Far from making us safer, the government, looking for trouble, was proudly provoking civil unrest.

Throughout the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, the FBI spied on radicals, Civil Rights advocates, opponents of mandatory busing, and opponents of the Vietnam War. Victims of this surveillance included Martin Luther King and John Lennon — not exactly serious threats to national security.

After the Cold War, the emphasis was shifted toward rightwing extremists. Under the first Bush administration, Randy Weaver, a white separatist, was goaded into breaking the law by informants. This entrapment resulted in federal raids that killed Weaver’s son and wife. Early in the Clinton administration, from February to April 1993, federal hysteria directed at the separatist Branch Davidian group outside Waco, Texas — this group distinctively not white separatist (nearly half of the Davidians were people of color) — culminated in a military operation on American soil that cost the lives of about 80 American civilians, about a fourth of them children, and four federal officials. Much of what was said about the group was propaganda to save the face of the administration and exempt it from blame for this unspeakable and completely avoidable tragedy.

Many Americans, including conservatives jealous of their rights to live as free people, began criticizing the government for going way too far in its national police powers. Much of the dissent was chilled when the mass murder of innocents at Oklahoma City unfolded on April 19, 1995, precisely two years after the Waco siege ended.

Gulf War veteran Timothy McVeigh was implicated in the Oklahoma City atrocity, but the government and the liberal establishment pinned blame on an entire subculture, and even on mainstream conservatives. Rush Limbaugh was blamed for voicing anti-government opinions that supposedly contributed to domestic terrorism. For the rest of the 1990s, the rightwing was demonized, lumped together with the militia movement, and the threat of both were wildly exaggerated, even as the Clinton government used the IRS and other means to intimidate its peaceful critics. Prolife groups were harassed through RICO statutes. Gunowners were accused of being unpatriotic and un-American, and any talk of U.S. tyranny was seen as suspect.

With George W. Bush and the war on terror, the face of the targeted group changed, but the basic pattern continued. Muslims and Arabs were suspected as enemies of America, and hundreds were rounded up without due process. Bush thundered that “you are either with us or with the terrorists.” In December, 2001, Attorney General John Ashcroft lashed out at Americans concerned about civil liberties:

“To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this. Your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America’s enemies, and pause to America’s friends. They encourage people of good will to remain silent in the face of evil.”

Thus were peaceful critics of the war on terror targeted. Iraq war protesters were spied on and assaulted by police. In October 2003, the FBI oversaw surveillance of protesters, infiltrated their groups, monitored their “training grounds” and kept an eye out for “protest activity and potentially illegal acts,” as one formal memo put it. One FBI official was quoted in the New York Times saying, “it’s obvious that there are individuals capable of violence at these events. We know that they are anarchists.” It was a throwback to the Red Scare.

In the summer of 2005, the FBI admitted to collecting thousands of documents on non-violent activists, the ACLU, Greenpeace, and antiwar organizations. By using “National Security Letters,” the government could force citizens to relinquish personal and financial information while forbidding them from informing anyone, including their lawyer. By 2005, about 30,000 such letters were issued annually. The FBI spied on the Catholic Worker Movement, noting its “semi-communistic ideology.”

The same year, NBC News obtained a secret 400-page Pentagon document that tracked such “extremists” as anti-war Quakers in Florida, whose meeting was officially described as a “suspicious incident” and a “threat.” All the while, peaceful activists were denied their right to travel by being inexplicably put on federal No-Fly lists.

Now the flavor of government has changed from the Republican leviathan of George W. Bush to the Democratic leviathan of Barack Hussein Obama. A different group is vulnerable to being marginalized — in many ways a revitalization of the Clinton era atmosphere, although now with the post-9/11 concern about peace activists and all the surveillance powers inaugurated by Bush still in place.

But the general substance behind government fear-mongering and witch-hunts, and the attempts to chill dissent and silence peaceful political critics, have continued and have a long history. For the last century especially, we have seen the government lump together violent and in many cases unsavory agitators on both the left and right with Americans who simply question unlimited government, nationalist police powers and disastrous foreign wars. While there are indeed some violent and crazed elements on the fringes of the right and left — while there are likewise some extremist characters and frightening viewpoints in the mainstream of American politics, too — the result of such government persecution of dissenters is always to marginalize everyday citizens with unpopular views, conflate thoughtful and principled criticism of the government with agitation for social unrest and violence, and jeopardize the civil liberties of all Americans.

When the target is leftists, antiwar activists, or “un-American” radicals, statist conservatives have tended to look the other way. When the target is cultural conservatives, gunowners and American patriots who love the Constitution, it is statist liberals who tend to downplay the danger.

In truth, all such fear-mongering, when capitalized upon by unchecked national police powers in an atmosphere of hysteria, poses a severe threat to American liberty, and must be taken very seriously by any culture that respects freedom and the very foundations of civilization. The right to peacefully dissent and oppose government deprivations of life, liberty and property, is an inalienable right as fundamental as any other.

The right to question the government, even from a mistaken point of view, is at the heart of America’s proud heritage. When America relinquishes this understanding, it comes to adopt the features of the supposed enemy. In the name of rooting out Communists, America became just a bit more communistic. In an effort to keep an eye on violent extremists, the government resorts to violence and extremism. All the labor agitators, Muslim sympathizers and militia groups put together can never threaten American freedom and security as much as an unleashed police state in a climate of fear.

So it is that much more important to speak up; to tell the truth; to defend the freedoms of all people to speak, live in peace, pursue happiness in a world of liberty, so long as they do not commit aggression against their fellow man. For defending this vision of a free and peaceful world, for sticking up for the rights of others no matter who they are or what they believe, we at the Campaign for Liberty and those of like mind have been wrongly targeted by an overbearing government. But we who love liberty have the right ideas and the passion to stand by our principles. In the end, the national police, state governments, Homeland Security and all the SWAT Teams and spying powers in the world cannot defeat a idea that is true and whose time has come. And it is this idea — this idea at root of Ron Paul’s Love Revolution — the dream of peace and freedom for all Americans — that truly frightens those who favor the total state, intimidation and fear directed abroad and toward peaceful dissent at home. It is the idea of liberty, not militias or terrorists, that most threatens the establishment, even as it offers nothing but hope and promise for the American people and the people of the world.

I firmly believe that this  “Missouri Information Analysis Center” needs to be sued by everybody it lumped into a group and dismantled. It has maligned many people in the past years. This part in do to the fact there is probably very little to no accountability in its dealings and it’s findings.

For those of you who are C4L members (Campaign For Liberty) sign the petition. For those that are not join in and sign it, or draw up a petition to the Govnor of Missouri  or send emails and let them know how dis-satisfied you all are in this report. Enough is enough it’s time to stand up speak out and rally against this BIGOTRY.

I’m sure there will be more to come out of this report, stick around I’ll have the post updated with of all things “updates”. I have a feeling we have not heard the last of these types of reports yet.


You tube video’s of Rush Limbaugh , Chuck Baldwin and Glen Beck talking about the MIAC Report.

Update3-23-09: Ron Paul on Glenn Beck touching on the MIAC report and HR1207

My personal protest message to the MIAC REPORT



One Comment

    • wonker
    • Posted March 18, 2009 at 11:39 pm
    • Permalink

    Interesting blog, I’ll try and spread the word.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: