America’s Midnight Hour

This post is not having anything to do with the Operation American Spring directly, but rather an “idea” that some of the “sprung Springs” (unhinged membership) of OAS are repeatedly promoting.   What is offered here is not just opinion, but rather is grounded in inescapable fact.

In such discussions as  The Posse’s “Universe Shattering Evidence”,  comment is made in support of Sheriff Arpaio’s “posse” investigation of Obama’s digital release of his  birth certificate, an entirely irrelevant and false “affidavit”, and a frenzy over the much  anticipated release of new “bombshell” evidence. .

First,  I recognize that Obama is undeniably, by known facts, unable to hold the Office of President; he’s absolutely not an Article II natural born citizen.  See “Natural Born Defined” (PDF).   That’s not the issue here.

However Arpaio’s investigation of the layered digital document served no purpose, and did not establish fraud, nor forgery.

The fact is that the Hawaiian Dept of Health (HDOH) is entitled BY LAW, under Hawaiian Revised Statute (See HRS §338-13 below), to produce birth information in whatever form it deems necessary, which is reasonable.  Can you imagine if a Dept of Health were not able to produce vital birth information  in whatever form as necessary, and provide it to, say, court hearings, judges, or other authorities whose business is to consider such issues?

HDOH might literally put the birth information on a cocktail napkin, and along with appropriate certifications, it would be valid.  The released Obama digital birth document is rather obviously the result of a digital compilation of at least 3 separate documents: 1) a photocopy of the bound ledger information,  2) the certification page, and 3) the digitized security background, which can be seen to not conform to the curved ledger book page, making claims that it is  “tampered with” considerably oblivious.  Of course it’s been “tampered with” – it’s a digital compilation! Beyond that, the document could be loaded with all sorts of conflicting font types, and hidden smiley faces, and none of this would undermine the fact that it is (still) a legally valid, legitimate document.

Not Forgery

Furthermore that Obama document did not attempt to mimic any sort of official document form, but was a distinct document unto itself, therefore incapable of being “forgery” of some other document form.  If one sets out forge something, it would be something with its own distinct form, like a Picasso, or a $100 bill.  Being a compilation of other documents,   the Obama digital birth document is obviously not any sort of pre-established  format, and thus cannot be a “forgery” of anything! Those who imagine that a birth certificate must have things such as doctor signature,  parent’s signatures and addresses, and even an inked baby footprint, really are not aware of what such documents are. Such documents are not final birth certificates at all, and rather only the hospital’s application for a birth certificate – notifications of birth.

Not Fraud

And to be “fraud”, the  birth terms indicated in that document must themselves be shown to be false, and deliberately false, but Arpaio’s investigation did not even attempt to establish this.   The “posse” affidavit  offers no statements to undermine the birth data on  Obama’s birth documentation, so the Posse’s claim that it proved fraud is just utterly irresponsible nonsense.

On a larger scale, what bothers me about this still ongoing Arpaio investigation is that, even at this late date, it continues to focus attention on the “birth document”, as if being a citizen, or “born citizen”, were sufficient to meet the Article II requirement of natural born citizen, when it is not.   This focus on the “birth certificate” is entirely distorting the terms of natural born citizen, and corrupting the issue in the public eye.

In fact this whole investigation is doing exactly what Obama himself wants, even as demonstrated on his early FightTheSmears page, because it continues to reduce the issue before the public and media to involving mere “citizenship” status, rather than the actual terms of natural born citizen  — “birth on U.S. soil to parents who were citizens”, even as recognized repeatedly by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Harry Riley has consistently made supporting statements of Arpaio on programs such as the “Birther Report”, which makes my discussion of this issue appropriate here.   (In the interest of full disclosure, I should point out that Birther Report recognized my own writing on Natural Born Defined.)  The sort of “inexact thought” evidenced in the Arpaio investigation seems to proliferate throughout the OAS movement, and is particularly evident in Riley’s 3-phase plan, and glaring absence of demands justified in terms of the Constitution.  Normally such sloppy thinking is not a problem, but when our nation’s future is at stake, and lives are on the the line, with the distinct  possibility of indefinite incarceration in federal prison,  then this sort of “rank” stupidity cannot be indulged.

With such vital issues at stake involving this country’s very existence, it’s time to stop with the “stupid people tricks”.  This ain’t Ringling Bros, and Harry Riley is no Ring Master.  If Riley is even any sort of “C.O.” (Commanding Officer), as they love to refer to him, then one has to question  what exactly he is demonstrating command of.

Seriously, wake up, my fellow Americans.  Dear God, wake up now; it’s America’s Midnight Hour!

Footnote: U.S.N. Commander (Ret.) Charles Kerchner also cited my article “Natural Born Defined” on his personal blog.  . Kerchner sued Obama in 2010 in Kerchner vs Obama, represented by Mario Apuzzo. wethepeople-s[1] Hawaiian Revised Statute (HRS):

     §338-13  Certified copies.  (a)  Subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18, the department of health shall, upon request, furnish to any applicant a certified copy of any certificate, or the contents of any certificate, or any part thereof.

     (b)  Copies of the contents of any certificate on file in the department, certified by the department shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original, subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18.

     (c)  Copies may be made by photography, dry copy reproduction, typing, computer printout or other process approved by the director of health. [L 1949, c 327, §17; RL 1955, §57-16; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-13; am L 1978, c 49, §1]


Riley Backtracking …

Riley Backtracking on OAS …

In emailed OAS “Update 24” and “Update 25” Harry Riley is backtracking on his expectations for OAS, and showing first signs of recognition that the movement, as planned and executed, will fail.

Update 24 indicates:

 Demands/Grievances –  Many have been asking “what if Obama, Biden, Reid, McConnell, Boehner, Pelosi, Holder don’t resign?”  We will present a package to each member of Congress (535) including Demands/Grievances; Provable Articles of Impeachment; record of millions of signed petitions; and validated/verified by millions of boots on the ground, also a plan to keep tens of thousands in D.C. beyond May 16, 2014. As a team we’re doing all we can to right the ship in a peaceful, non-violent, unarmed operation.

Note that the “tens of thousands” to remain in D.C. after May 16th is an enormous reduction from the million originally indicated by Riley to remain in D.C.  This is a tacit admission of Riley’s recognition that the movement is failing to garner the numbers hoped for.

Riley’s Phase-2 specifically states, “One million or more of the assembled 10 million must be prepared to stay in D.C. as long as it takes..”  The reduction of this number to tens of thousands, not even hundreds of thousands, is at least a HUNDRED fold decrease of those anticipated to remain in D.C..  That’s a big change.

In Update 25, released on March 23,  Riley trumpets an OAS Petition to Congress for redress of grievances, regarding which Riley indicates, “It’s all laid out for your folks”.   Well, that petition does anything but “lay out” grievances.

There are in fact no demands, nor grievances, stated anywhere in that petition!  However, remaining true to form, the only portion of the constitution referenced is the right of the people to petition the government for redress of grievances!  (Does it get any more inane than a petition about the right to petition?)

What’s curious is that Riley has previously stated on more than one occasion that petitions and protests get no results, and are a waste of time.

Would you sign on to support an organization that does not state its demands?  Would you sign a contract whose terms you do not know?

What that petition does do is provide one other list —  a list of names supporting OAS,  … and by whatever terms that might be created in the future, which is certainly convenient for the federal government!

“I am petitioning the government to fund navel lint fishing rods for all those signing Riley’s petition.”

Of further note, the first page of that petition uses a motto that I came up with early on,  to promote OAS, but got no positive feedback whatsoever from Riley on: “If not us, who? If not now, when?”   It’s a shame that Riley is not equally inclined to rely on the Founder’s terms lain out for him in the Constitution.


Obama and Martial Law

Those who think that Obama would never implement Martial Law might (or might not) like to read the following article:
Russian GRU Warns: Obama Preparing to Declare ‘Insurrection’, Implement martial law

Note carefully the date of publication – Oct 7, 2013.

"According to this MoFA bulletin, GRU intelligence assests were notified by their Pentagon counterparts this past week that President Barack Obama is preparing to invoke the powers given to him under 50 USC Chapter 13 to hold that various American States are now in a ‘state of insurrection’ thus allowing him to invoke the National Emergencies Act under 50 USC § 1621 and invoke the highly controversial ‘continuity of government’ plan for the United States allowing him, in essence, to rule with supreme powers." So, in October of 2013 (around the time of an alledged EMP plot) Martial Law was contemplated in response to some major event.

Here we are now, a mere seven weeks until millions arrive in Washington demanding major changes in the government and with the intention of trying the politicians by a tribunal. But wait, there’s more. Masses of well equipped Militia will be nearby.

Obama has clearly shown that Martial Law is an option, and it would give him and his buddies immense power to accomplish his plans. All he needs is an excuse, a trigger. Would over a million protesters in Washington, plus an unknown number of well armed militia nearby, be that trigger? Would even the solid evidence that plans are being made to overthrow the government by non-constitutional means trigger Martial Law and a pre-emptive roundup of the conspirators well before May 16?

Martial Law in the Not Distant Future

[an email from TJ McCann]

On December 13, 2013  “Harry”, or Harry Riley, made a post to the PatriotsForAmerican Ning site titled “Purging Senior Military Officers/NCOs……….Martial Law in the not distant future—Sounds feasible to me”.

This topic appears to be posting the email correspondence from a “Col Jack”, ostensibly to Harry Riley, and discusses the motivation for Obama’s purging senior  military offices and NCO’s based upon their unwillingness to fire upon American people in the event of martial law. There’s nothing new about this assumption as to motivation, and indeed numerous web sites across the Internet have postings stating this same motivation for the purging.

What should be startling to everyone is that this recognition came on, or around the time of Riley’s indicated motivation to start “Operation American Spring”.in December of last year.

This recognition of the Administration’s desire to institute martial law, even with Obama’s intent “to stay in office beyond two terms”, should be duly noted particularly given the fact that the OAS plan, as currently lain out, involves the intent for masses to go to D.C. and demand the removal, not impeachment, of seven individuals, “Obama, Biden, Reid, Pelosi, Holder, McConnell, and Boehner”, The country would then be subject to a military-style “tribunal” (right out of martial law text books) made up of hand-chosen members, who seemingly all pass judgment upon those Seven, as well as other issues.

Apparently Harry Riley believes his own brand of martial law to be infinitely preferable to Obama’s martial law. It is from just such arrogance and ignorance that Banana Republics are made, and nation’s thrown into prolonged bloodshed. Despite George Washington’s picture being conspicuously placed all over the OAS sites, this is quite the opposite of what Washington himself did, removing himself from a 3rd term as President and allowing the Republic to flourish.

While one may generally approve of the principles of “West, Cruz, Dr. Ben Carson, Lee, DeMint, Paul, Gov Walker, Sessions, Gowdy, and Jordan”, neither I nor the Constitution itself recognize these men as having any constitutional legitimacy under the terms indicated, and their extra-constitutional dictate would not represent the rule of law, but rather usurpation of rule by men and the overthrow by conspiracy of the U.S. Constitution! Not to malign any of these men, but we do not even know for certain that they each have the integrity to cast off such unbridled authority, as Washington himself did, and we should not have to blindly rely on such.

What should be recognized is that the massed Americans going to D.C. on May 16th for OAS will be doing so advocating Riley’s stated intentions to overthrow  the Constitution’s terms, and acting by conspiratorial pre-agreement seen prominently on both OAS web sites, which is beyond insurrection, to actual treason intending the overthrow of government, and such provides legitimate license for the existing Obama Administration to institute just that martial law, suspending the Constitution and those allegedly “unalienable” individual rights.

QUESTION: Is Col Harry Riley really this oblivious to the impact of his plan, or does he imagine Americans to be so ignorant and desperate so as to sign on to a plan that brings about the demise of their own freedoms, and this Republic itself? When the title of Riley’s posting indicates of martial law, “sounds feasible to me”, which is nowhere in the letter itself, is that martial law really Riley’s own objective?

Has Riley even paused to recognize, beyond official government response, that many Constitution-respecting, law-abiding Conservative Americans will likely feel compelled to raise arms against the actions of he and his misguided minions?

Of further note, there is no evidence anywhere on Riley’s two sites, that he rejects the authority by the unilateral dictate of the Executive (i.e. President Obama) to impose martial law. In fact nowhere in Article II of the Constitution, which outlines the authorities of the President, is there any provision for the President to suspend the Constitution, abridging the rights and freedoms of Americans, and to utilize the military against the American people. While Article 1, Section 8, Powers of Congress, does provide for the Congress the authority to call forth the militia to resist insurrection, the Constitution provides no direct authority to any body to suspend the Constitution and the rights which it does protect. The authority to institute martial law originally came about via Supreme Court interpretation, and has been generally expanded via a series of illegitimate Executive Orders, with Obama most recently having unilaterally usurped the authority to declare martial law even in peacetime.

While my recognition of Riley’s public failure on his web sites to indicate the absent constitutional authority for martial law may seem unfair, it certainly seems appropriate given Riley’s call to institute his own brand of martial law. “Quo warranto”, by what authority, does Riley imagine he might do this? There is no such authority, and nothing would be remedied in its accomplishment, while much that is precious will be forever destroyed.

If you want to discard the Constitution, and throw the dice to see what we might end up with, then by all means head to D.C. with Operation American Spring on May 16th.

The Jingle

Operation American Spring now has a catchy Jingle.

In the Youtube video there is a crowd scene, everybody having a nice day, perhaps suggesting that this is what OAS will be like.

OAS jingle

From Youtube also are the following scenes depicting others who also disagree with their government’s behavior. Your mileage may vary.

police clubwater cannonswoman

A cartoon


Riley’s List of Grievances from Montana Republic Radio

[An email from TJ McCann, March 19, 2014]

To Whom it may Concern:

This email addresses Col Harry Riley’s list of OAS grievances revealed in his March 18th interview on Montana Republic program, with host Wolf (download HERE), from the 01:09 time stamp.  The full list of these grievances provided by Riley, are at the bottom of this email.

At first airing, I was pleasantly surprised by these grievances, and do applaud Riley’s overall effort. Those grievance sure seem fine, right?   However after subsequent review those grievances can be recognized to be generally individually flawed, and cumulatively involve a flawed premise.   What comments I have regarding each individual grievance are [included within brackets.]

What is glaringly obvious about these grievances is their obvious focus on “the Administration”, or more accurately, this administration, the Administration of Barack Obama. Quite literally there is no reference to the egregious transgressions by Congress, nor the Supreme Court itself, both of whom have distinguished themselves, both during and before this administration, by tremendous violations of the Constitution and disregard for that Constitution’s limits upon their particular branch, and the federal government overall.

In fact, by the standards established implicitly by these grievances as well as the indicated Articles of impeachment for Obama, the OAS movement is not really about restoration of the Constitution at all!

In Truth, OAS is far more accurately about the removal of the Obama administration, and presumes the legitimacy of the Legislative and Judicial branches, ignoring how even the most recent corrupt legislation might have come about, particularly ObamaCare, and the Defense of Marriage Act. (I have to wonder if the OAS leadershipmaCare as valid and constitutional. If we’re not marching on D.C. because of government’s mistaken belief that it owns us, then why go at all?)

If this is only about the removal of the Obama Administration, then one must question why we are unable to rely on the constitutionally recognized method of impeachment, which does not necessitate masses marching on D.C..    Again, the inescapable answer is that those members of Congress, both the House and Senate, are themselves also extremely corrupt, and unwilling themselves to uphold the Constitution, nor acting in the best interest of this Nation and its citizenry, much less willing to apply the Constitution and laws to this administration,

Sure, we freedom-loving Americans understand that the Obama administration is composed of despicable Marxists, outright enemies of individual freedoms, and a threat to this country’s very existence, but many of us recognize this administration as being only the culmination of a longstanding corruption of the Constitution by all three branches of government, with the threat existing more broadly in government beyond just this administration itself.

Overall, the obvious intent of these grievances is to mimic the Declaration of Independence with its grievances against King George,  so much so that these grievances stumble over themselves in an the attempt to sound more lofty.  Once again, a focus on the larger picture results in the overwhelming question of why we have to state unsupported grievances, rather than cite direct and repeated violations of the Constitution itself.

If the Constitution is yet valid, then why would OAS demands want to retreat to the format of the Declaration of Independence, and if the government overall were valid, we would even need to do so? The only reason this Nation’s founders relied on the format of the Declaration of Independence is that they had no other legal reference guaranteeing that their interests should be met.

This all relates to what I’ve pointed out previously – that our concerns should not just be about removing individuals from office, and by merely removing those individuals, or even the entire Obama administration, we will have done literally nothing to remedy the dire conditions this country and our freedoms now face. Removing people from office is only a salve upon a much larger systemic Cancer corrupting all 3 branches of government, and the corruption of the Constitution itself.

There is also the high probability that even if this movement’s goals of removing (only) 7 people from office should succeed, that this will only more severely weaken the Constitution overall, and we too will be “as short in [our life] as [we’d be] violent in [our] death” (Madison #10), just as with Egypt.

GRIEVANCES (Stated by Riley, March 18th, Montana Republic)

1) The administration refuses to assent to laws of the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

[The “public good” is subjective. The most fundamental recognition by the Constitution involves the most limited legislative authority by the federal government is to the greatest public good. How is public good needing to be legislated? By that, would not  the public good become the dictate of sustainable development, and political correctness, etc? ]

2) Allows illegal immigration as a state to go unfettered, which imperils security of the population of the States.

[True, and reasonable.]

3) The Administration endeavors to deny the population of the states the rightful security and sovereignty by corrupting laws of the naturalization of foreigners and its responsibility to secure our borders.

[Again, true and reasonable.]

4) Obstructing the execution of Justice by refusing to abide by the original Constitution and Bill of Rights enacted by the people of the United States.

[Confusing. Is the Bill of Rights separate from the Constitution? Did anything or anyone enact those rights in the Bill of Rights?]

5) Administration of the United States of America is operating outside the Constitution from which it derives its just authority to govern and as such has ceased to support and defend our just and legal government.

6) Administration interferes with the judiciary process to rule without prejudice, disregarding the rights and powers the Constitution and Bill of Rights specified as the sole inheritization [SIC] of the people of the United States.

7) Administration has bypassed the Congress to erect a multitude of new offices, agencies, inappropriate authorities, czars, and since sent officers to harass our people and implement unlawful taxes, regulations and strategies, aimed to take away our substance and impede our rightful conduct of business.

[major hat tip to the Declaration of Independence]

8) Administration has enabled the confiscation of personal property by redefining eminent domain, for the purpose of personal profit for political allies, and increased taxes for local governments to the detriment of the people, and in violation of their public trust.

[What about the Congress itself being immune from the laws it writes, not to mention immune from insider trading, and profiting from its own legislation?]

9) The Administration denies freedom of speech and freedom of religion to certain political and religious groups in these States, through implementation of unnecessary and punitive laws, and unfettered department rules and regulations, established with impunity, and without appropriate legislative representation.

[Relevant to enumerated powers,  and Separation of Powers]

10) Administration has enacted laws and issued executive orders denying and inhibiting free expression of private communications.

[It seems they are redefining what “private communications” are.]

11) Administration enacts laws and issues executive orders taxing and arbitrarily punishing the people without the consent of the people of the sovereign states.

[The real issue here the fact that the government should not be able to pick winners and losers, much less be able to target particular individuals or industries, and this was part of the original intent of the Constitution. “Consent of the governed” was established upon ratification of the Constitution, and is irrelevant to current populist opinion, the terms of government being established.]

12) The Administration has not hesitated to murder the lesser of us with wanton disregard for rights and due process.

[Actually, the issue should be that the federal government has no authority to pass laws applicable to the states and the people within, and only the authority to pursue piracy, treason, printing of fraudulent currency, tax evasion, or violation of other things that are in federal control.]

13) The Administration encourages and supports ideologies within its jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution and unacknowledged by our laws, giving ascent by their acts of pretended legislation.

[Good thing no one in congress is putting Islamists on terrorist advisory groups]

14) The Administration is limiting our military effectiveness by decreasing support for, and of, our military forces, both in the States and in foreign lands.

[True, but I also dont think we want military effectiveness in the states, much less militarization of the police, and other branches of government.]

15) The Administration imposes inappropriate, unlawful and punitive taxes on us, to our detriment, and without our consent.

[Actually “consent” came about at the time of the ratification of the Constitution. Any subsequent reliance on “consent” would involve interpreting election results as being able to validate what government might do. We’re not a Democracy.]

16) The Administration imposes trade agreements with foreign governments, where the sole benefit is for those governments and corporations, and not the people of the States.

[See the Supremacy Clause, and laws and treaties no longer being “pursuant” to the Constitution.]

17) The Administration is guilty of negotiating and signing agreements in secret, or by obfuscation, with foreign governments, where the purpose is to subjugate the citizens of the United States of America to the laws of a foreign power, namely the United Nations.

[See the Supremacy Clause, and laws and treaties no longer being “pursuant” to the Constitution. ]

18) The Administration is dissolving and suborning our charters, abolishing our most valued laws, and altering fundamentally our form of government.

[See the Supremacy Clause, and laws and treaties no longer being “pursuant” to the Constitution.]

19) The Administration allows foreign entities the power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever on a global scale.

[See the Supremacy Clause, and laws and treaties no longer being “pursuant” to the Constitution.]

20) The Administration encourages and permits foreign entities to limit our access to the seas for sustenance, research, and travel.

[See the Supremacy Clause, and laws and treaties no longer being “pursuant” to the Constitution. See also, “treason”.]

21) The Administration allows access of foreign governments, our intellectual property, which could be detrimental to the economic benefit, safety, and security of the people of the states.

[See “treason”.]

22) The Administration allows foreign entities access to personal and private information pertinent to the population and industries of the States, in direct contradiction to our best interests.

[See the Supremacy Clause, and laws and treaties no longer being “pursuant” to the Constitution. ]

23) The Administration encourages and supports foreign entities which threaten to subject the populous of the States to its foreign agencies, laws, and regulations.

[See the Supremacy Clause, and laws and treaties no longer being “pursuant” to the Constitution. See also, “treason”.]

24) The Administration supports the Charter of the Organization of American States, which upon this action, the people of the United States became subjects of a foreign entity, and subject to foreign laws.

[See the Supremacy Clause, and laws and treaties no longer being “pursuant” to the Constitution. See also, “treason”. What about Congress and the Supreme Court doing the same? What about the fact of U.N World Heritage,sites, despite the enduring sovereignty of each State,even over federal property? See Pollard’s Lessee v Hagan (1845)]

25) The Administration subjects the people of the United States to the payment of monies to foreign entities, without regard for entitlement, or logical justification, and in many cases contrary to our best interest and security.

[See the Supremacy Clause, and laws and treaties no longer being “pursuant” to the Constitution. See also, “treason”.]

26) The Administration holds the people of the United States subject to the mandates of said entity.


27) The Administration has made the people of the United States relinquish their sovereignty to said entity.


28) The Administration has constrained our fellow citizens, taken their homes, made laws, and allowed the States to make laws, which infringe our right to bear arms.

29) The Administration has incited domestic insurrection among us, seeking to divide us against ourselves, in support of their political ends.

30) This Administration has created laws and rules to remove our freedom of speech, religion, and peaceful assembly.

Riley: The last paragraph reads, “Therefore, we the people demand an immediate suspension all Bills in the national houses of legislature, not directly related to proper replacement of designated officials, or necessary to maintain order, until vacated offices are filled and normal operations resume under U.S. Constitutional authority.”

Questions that want “Answered”

[an email written by TJ McCann March 18th, 2014]

On 2014-03-18 3:51 pm, Chris Blystone wrote:

Don’t feed the trolls and just block the email address. Not worth getting into any discussions with someone who will not listen to logic. If you have any questions you want answered based on the crap TJ is writing, feel free to pick up the phone


I apologize in advance for this email. You seem to be a decent and likable guy, but all the decency and good intentions in the world are not going to change facts and reality, and you pretty much put your head in this ‘noose’ of your own free will.

It is particularly bad form to refer to me as a “troll” given the fact that you, Alex Coffey, and Commonwealth Patriot (Roberto), came to me, by your own agreement, and suggested that I write the OAS mission goals specifically tailored to the Constitution, with Roberto himself suggesting a “coup” (his word) to bypass Riley with those demands and bring them to Congress directly from State leadership, if necessary.

If what I’ve suggested as necessary all along were not recognized and agreed to by you three as being absolutely necessary for OAS’s success, then you would not have come to me to write those demands tailored to the Constitution. Up to this point I’ve left any reference to you out of emails, but you put your own neck in the noose by now pretending things to be otherwise.

You claim to have answers to “questions want answered”, how about answering just the most basic of questions here in open email, since we all know the NSA, DHS, FEMA and other groups are already following our every communication:

     1) How can a movement allegedly based on the restoration of government to the terms of the U.S. Constitution, not only avoid every reference to that Constitution, but also promote the removal of individuals and subjecting them to trial by “tribunal” of hand-selected judges, when this is nowhere in line with the Constitution, and represents that Constitution’s overthrow?

     2) Does this movement believe the Constitution and all 3 branches of government have become thoroughly corrupted, OR does it believe the problem is merely the 7 named individuals, ” “? If only intending removal of those 7 individuals, is not the proper Constitutional remedy impeachment, and there is really no need for millions to gather in D..C. ?

     It would seem that targeting those 7 individuals is nothing but feel-good action, advocated by means entirely outside of, and hostile to, that Constitution, and which CANNOT POSSIBLY remedy, nor cure, the very real problems which so many want addressed!

These simple questions address the very heart of the Operation American Spring movement, and its motivation.

And like it or not, the means that OAS leadership itself has chosen to lay out these goals, repeatedly and deliberately avoiding the Constitution’s reference, does indeed bring up the issues of insurrection, conspiracy to overthrow the government, treason, and very likely the deliberate instigation of martial law !

There really is no avoiding these questions, not for anyone who is paying real attention and understanding the enormity of the stakes that are on the table. This is not a matter of “logic”, as you so conveniently reference it, but rather the truth, and cold, hard facts.

Chris, do you have any answers to these questions and concerns, or will you just blow happy-smoke up people’s wazoos and have them ignore these concerns, kicking the ‘can’ further down field, claiming a leadership that is repeatedly without answers and solutions (and unanswerable) is “handling it” ? If you think this is all “crap”, then it should be able to be easily addressed, and dismissed.


T.J. McCann
Valley Forge.

Dear Harry Riley (ONE QUESTION)

[an email from TJ McCann dated March 17th]

HARRY RILEY, you’ve been listening to these emails, but you’ve been strangely silent. You claim yourself this movement’s leader, but you dont seem to lead anything but character assassination and falsehoods from the shadows.

Now’s the time to speak up, Harry, and I’ve got a real simple question for you, one about the most fundamental principle of this movement:

What is this movement really about, the Constitution or Individuals?

1) Is this movement about the U.S. Government and Constitution both being so thoroughly and systemically corrupted, throughout all three branches, that we must demand that Constitution’s restoration?

2) OR is the problem really just corrupt individuals, with no corruption of the Constitution, no systemic corruption of the government, thereby making it reasonable to only just demand the ejection of 7 individuals without any constitutional reference, "Obama, Biden, Reid McConnell, Boehner, Pelosi and Holder", and then everything will be fine. Is the problem really only just specific criminals, Harry?

We look forward to your answer to this simple question, Harry.

Now is the time to show actual leadership.


The Cold Hard Truth

An email from TJ McCann, Mar 16, 2014.
OAS — List of Concerns – "The Cold Hard Truth"

To Those for Whom Freedom is a Concern:


  1. National Militia Concerns
  2. Other Concerns – NorCom, NDAA, Insurrection Act, Martial Law
  3. Intrinsic Weaknesses of OAS – "Big Fish, Small Pond"
  4. Conclusion


Recent contacts from the national militia movement indicate the strong belief by these militia leaders that the Operation American Spring (OAS) movement is being manipulated to set up an ambush that will scapegoat the Conservative religious, ex-military and constitutionalists, already recognized by DHS as potential terrorist threats, who are known enemies of this administration in particular, and the globalist agenda overall. While these national militia leaders do not necessarily believe Colonel Riley is himself intending to provide this service to the globalist agenda and martial law, they are pursuing background checks of Colonel Riley and OAS leadership, because they find it difficult to believe the unwise methods employed by OAS could be the result of mere ignorance alone. More information will be forthcoming as it becomes available.

Additional concerns

Plans to use military force against any sort of substantial insurrection, intending to disrupt the continuity of government, particularly those advocating government overthrow (the OAS "Plan") and providing obstacles to societal and government function.

   • Video: Troops Ordered To Kill All Americans Who Do Not Turn In Guns (set to time-stamp)

   • Article:

   • Article:

Further Considerations:

The purpose of NorCom, Northern Command – Mission Statement: "Conduct operations to deter, prevent, and defeat threats and aggression aimed at the United States, its territories, and interests within the assigned area of responsibility and …. As directed by the President or Secretary of Defense provide military assistance to civil authorities including consequence management operations."

SEE ALSO NDAA (2012), which contains several controversial sections, the chief being §§ 1021-1022, which affirm provisions authorizing the indefinite
military detention of civilians, including U.S. citizens, without habeas corpus or due process, contained in the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), Pub.L. 107–40

SEE ALSO: Insurrection Act: (applicable amended flow chart, below, on right side, as effected by 2008 Defense Authorization Bill ) which would trigger NorCom action – the employ of U.S. military forces within CONUS.

      (1) Does OAS intend to "oppose or obstruct … the laws of the
      United States" or "impeded the course of Justice under those laws"?
      Yes, and OAS does so openly, even advocating processes entirely
      outside the support of the U.S. Constitution, even necessitating the
      overthrow of the Constitution. Government by Oligarchy of a few
      hand-chosen men, and institution of a "tribunal", is entirely
      without constitutional support.

      (2) Do the conditions of "Insurrection, domestic violence,
      unlawful combination, or conspiracy" exist, or are they likely to
      come about from OAS actions, and intended results? Yes.

      Given this, the Insurrection Act, as amended, is applicable, and
      the use of Military Force is authorized under that Act. Also,
      particularly given the attendee numbers referenced by Riley and OAS,
      the OAS movement could be large enough, and severe enough, to
      justify the implementation of martial law.

It is important, even critical, to recognize the extreme vulnerabilities that OAS has set up. Even something as seemingly innocuous as "Bull Run", involving only the reservations by OAS participants for camping locations, some of whom intend to bring firearms, many of whom comprise 3 or 4 militia groups, in a State (Virginia) that allows open carry, and even provides a shooting range at that campground, is a tremendous hazard. All the federal government would have to do is find excuse for a raid on Bull Run, with suddenly those firearms, lawfully held and used, are being offered as evidence of an intended armed overthrow of the government. Very quickly, with the help of the complaint Mainstream Media, the term “Bull Run” would become synonymous with "Waco" and "Ruby Ridge", and serve as cause for the condemnation of the OAS movement in the public eye — and justification for martial law.

Under Martial Law, Congress itself has no authority to even challenge anything about that martial law for six months. Even once those six months pass, there is no guarantee Congress could end Martial Law even if it chose to do so. Imagine the "fundamental change" that can happen in even only those 6 months. At the whim of a dictator already absent restraint, the federal government can nationalize any company, any industry, and even commandeer personal vehicles, and ration anything and everything. There would be NO Bill of Rights, NO protection from unreasonable search and seizure, NO due process, and NO right to face one’s accusers. People would just be disappeared in the dark of night – GONE! Those "FEMA Camps" would suddenly have their occupants, but without any forwarding address provided, and no one accountable for what might happen to those imprisoned. Dr David Manning hit the nail on the head when he indicated that revolution can stop martial law, but also that martial law can stop revolution.

Imagine the chilling effect that would result from the bravest among us, those most eager and willing to actually stand for our guaranteed freedoms, being no longer among us, and no longer even able to be found. It is not as if similar things have not happened before in history, and numerous times.

These are not just the "Chicken Little" fears of an idle mind running amok, but the actual authority our federal government has given itself, to exercise over us under the false color of law, and has repeatedly shown its intent to use! And Operation American Spring is currently structured to play entirely into the hands of that tyrannous government, able to claim itself within its legitimate authority, while OAS participants are shown to be outside the law and Constitution, while allegedly asking for legitimate governance by that Constitution.

Subject: Big Fish, Small Pond — How to Fix OAS

Some have asked for solutions to fix the weaknesses of the OAS movement, to make it more effective and even give it any opportunity for success.

      1) we need to put the constant religious references on the back
      burner, particularly the references to us being "washed in prayer"
      and God being "with us", etc. To those not extremely religious, it
      only makes us look fanatical and extremist, while alienating those
      who are not.

      2) Riley needs to be tutored to improve his responses. Either
      Riley needs to tutor himself, or we need to get Riley a tutor, or
      have someone appear with him to provide supplemental answers,
      someone who is more conversant in the Constitution and political
      response in spontaneous discussion.

      3) Riley needs to switch up his message and perhaps supplement each
      interview with specifically-planned areas of more information,
      generally with direct reference to current problems in our
      government – those grievances. The purpose of this is to give
      people who are listening more reason to continue to listen to Riley
      – and join the movement. Too few are going to join for simply Riley
      himself. Furthermore it done in a calculated fashion, these
      supplemented responses could be applied in answers to specific
      interviewer questions in the future, thereby promoting a consistent
      and substantive message. This is all a consideration of modern
      Public Relations. Riley’s continued generic responses just do not
      cut it.

      4) we need to minimize the idea that this is militarist, or
      military-based movement, and not do as several spokespersons have
      done, claiming that OAS is going to work because of military
      backgrounds and experience. This only alienates people, and has not
      been showing all that great success in OAS’s actual results. Most
      people rightfully do not connect our freedoms under the Constitution
      with the military, and military philosophy, and in fact the two are
      rather in conflict. While the authoritative dictate of a "tribunal"
      coincides with military philosophy, it does not dovetail at all with
      the Constitution’s terms. Also the idea of it being a militarist
      movement only affirms doubts that what this group will accomplish
      would be more equivalent to a military coup, entirely outside the

      5) we need a detailed list of demands, each with a reference to the
      Constitution providing indication why we should expect they are met,
      and why the government is way beyond its legitimate authority.
      Riley’s planned supplemental responses in #3 could be used to
      advance this.

      6) We need to do brainstorming on some P.R. events we might engage
      that would force both somewhat sympathetic and even unsympathetic
      media to recognize the movement.

While some of these considerations have been broached within the OAS movement, it is clear they none have been adequately implemented.

WHY OAS Has Intrinsic Problems:

Small Pond, Big Fish
Before even OAS, Riley wanted to create his own site, the result being "Patriots for America" (PFA). And Riley put his name prominently on that free Ning site, showing a good degree of personal confidence – he, Riley himself, was to be the draw. We’ve all seen that prominent name, and heard it said it is "Riley’s site".

Riley then attracted a bunch of like-minded people to that PFA site, religious people, and the philosophy is overwhelmingly that of Bible thumping Evangelicals, but there’s not much political commentary, nor much in the way of Constitutional argument – that wasn’t what Harry was good at, and it was not what his site offers. And indeed, anyone can review the history of that forum and see for themselves that there is not much in-depth Constitutional analysis and political discussion going on in the historic records, beyond "oh, look how unconstitutional this is!" This same is not true of other more politically and constitutionally savvy sites. Let’s face it: savvy political people just do not gravitate to a site to discuss U.S. politics, much less expecting to participate in any thorough discussion of the violations of the Constitution, particularly not a site that is tailored around the personae of an ex Military person.

This may be a harsh recognition, but what the Ning Site is, is a cult of personality, really not all that different than those rabid supporters of Obama, and they think this Riley guy should have our support because A) he’s ex military, and B) he’s religious — and we hear both of these references repeatedly, ad nauseum. However the Constitution’s terms really don’t come into play at all in either of those considerations. And this personality cultism is not helping the movement achieve anything. and as it is continuing, is only hindering and prohibiting the movement’s success.

Bigger Pond, Same Fish

Now Riley wants to go from being a big fish, in his own small pond, to being a big fish in a national movement, but he’s evidently not equipped with any sort of working, applied-knowledge of the Constitution (as shown repeatedly by his own performances), much less any experience with how to argue it politically in an open, spontaneous real-world environment. Instead, it is apparent that Riley believes the same message on the PFA site can be continued in the national movement.

And since the start of OAS, Riley has shown no desire to get tutored, or to put someone else with him on interviews, someone who actually does have that ability to argue the Constitution’s terms and the ongoing transgressions of government extemporaneously. To do so takes work, study, and evidently Riley does not believe this to be necessary. Good intentions alone will not draw others to unite with OAS.

Nor has Riley shown any recognition that the Evangelical religious fervor can no longer be on the front burner, because it is, undeniably, driving people away, and winning this movement only the reputation of being "right wing extremism", even from those sympathetic to the movement, even those who are religious and wanting the Constitution restored, myself being only one of many.

    • He wants to lead, but the claims there’s no OAS leader.
    • He wants to dictate the terms from a closed group, but claims there
       is no such closed group in interviews.
    • He wants his cronies to lead the group, but frankly they are not the
      best equipped to argue political considerations or the Constitution
      in front of an open mic.

And in fact even a marginally competent Alan Colmes picked out the inconsistencies of Riley’s message, and confronted him with those by playing sound clips from previous interviews which contradicted what Riley had just said in that interview. And you can guarantee that the more competent national media is going to go for the overall soft underbelly being presented by Riley far to far greater effect than Colmes did. Riley needs to be preparing for this, but it is evident he is not adequately doing so.

RIGHT NOW we have a movement that thinks it’s more about military, than it does that it’s about the Constitution. It’s more about Scripture and verse, than it is about Article and Section of the Constitution. Even a couple days ago on an interview, Chris Blystone was saying this movement is going to succeed "…. because of its military base, and command structure." WHAT?! What command structure is that? the same one that is continually screwing things up? When exactly are we going to militarize a bunch of old farts? Wasn’t this about the Constitution and a decentralized grass roots movement?

Big Fish Are Being Fed Evangelical Scripture & Militarism, rather than Constitution, and leaving. Citing Article and Section is far more mission-critical than reciting Chapter and Verse, in a movement allegedly intending to restore the Constitution.

Think about it… ALL of this — the roots of this group … is everything that is guaranteeing this will only appeal to a very limited audience, thereby minimizing chance of success, and assuring that a movement relying on numbers will FAIL, and not just fail a little, but FAIL in a big way, capable of even killing this country’s last remaining hope.


There are those among you who are angry at me, and you may feel justified in that. However the fact remains I am as strongly wanting OAS to be a success as any among you. What I am not willing to do is to sacrifice my own and other’s freedoms, and very LIVES, to engage in a feel-good operation that is not only structured so that it has NO reasonable chance of success, but also structured so that it provides our enemies the justification to act against us in the harshest of terms, even employing military force, able to charge OAS members with insurrection and intended government overthrow, and thereby to claim the authority to profoundly change the country virtually overnight via martial law.

There is those who mistakenly believe there is no realistic opportunity for martial law to effectively lock down the country (with some of these having difficulty spelling "martial law"). Unfortunately this country’s own history would stand against such a belief, with martial law having been instituted during the Civil War, and World War II. Many are entirely unaware that Obama already declared a state of National Emergency on June 25, 2012, inclusive of enacting the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) (NEA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code. And what triggered this national emergency? This state of emergency was declared simply because it was believed that Russia’s nuke demilitarization program lost control of fissile materials, and by this Obama gave himself Emergency Powers over civilians and the economy, despite the obvious fact that the civilian populace would not commonly come in contact with the trade of fissile materials! This was a test run.

There have been other test runs too. Military drills have been held in U.S. cities, with the military working with local police:
     Los Angeles Jan 26 2012,
     Chicago April 17 2012,
     St Louis July 3 2012,
     Minneapolis Aug 28 2012,
     Miami January 24, 2013,
     Houston January 28 2013.

In each of these exercises the police were working with the military, and all show the training exercises being in a heightened state, dangerous, reckless with regard to citizens and onlookers, with an outright disregard for life, and no advance warning as to what was going on. In Chicago the local police were training with the military and the Polish military, Polish BOA – Bureau Of Anti-terrorism, and they even pulled the Boy Scouts into it, training them to be victims, and to be servile when martial law comes.

If they are training for mountainous terrain they go to the mountains, if they are training for desert terrain, they go to the desert, if they are training for coastal terrain they go to the coasts. The reason they are going to American cities, is they plan to operate in American cities – martial law.

Not only are they training the military to act against American citizens on American soil, and desensitizing the citizens to the military command, they are also militarizing the police, and training them to accept directions from the military, and to not protect the citizenry.

After Katrina, the police came and took away firearms from the law-abiding citizens, without too much outcry. After the Boston Marathon bombing, Boston and its surrounding burbs were put under martial law, with people being marched from their homes at gunpoint, without the slightest cause. These too were tests, to acclimate Americans.

In 2008 when Hank Paulson and the bankers went to the Congress and told them they had to bail out the banks for 700 Billion dollars, or else martial law would be declared, they were not lying. If you recall, some of the braver Congresspersons made statements to this effect from the floor. They were prepared to execute martial law even to only protect the profits of the bankers, and what we want now threatens their entire corrupt system.

Those of you camping at Bull Run and similar places should not be worrying so much about cooking food for the gathered people there. Do not consider where your bedroll is thrown out in Virginia to be any sort of sanctuary. You should be more worried about setting up lookouts on the surrounding roads to provide an advance alert, and be prepared for helicopters overhead in the dead of night, with spotlights darting from place to place, while jackbooted thugs rush in with full body armor, shouting demands to you at the point of a gun. They are not going to strike you where you are strongest, massed on the Mall, but where you are weakest and unprepared, under the false claim that OAS is intending a government overthrow.

That is what you need to be prepared for. It is time to take off the rose-colored glasses, and to behave like mature, responsible men and women who really want their freedoms back, and deserve them.

T.J. McCann
Valley Forge

If you want to talk openly about OAS:
Keep an eye on: