“…The county sheriff is being introduced to a maneuver that
will gradually eliminate him by a merger with federal marshals. Already
under threat by an Advisory group,[1] the traditional American constitutional
sheriff will be divested of his authority. He will lose his control over
the jails and the courts, and all civilian law enforcement will be consolidated
on the federal regional government level…”
The Sheriff: A Necessary Office
by Bernadine Smith
As posted at Second
Amendment Committee
Federal ‘change agents’ have
been inserting military command and control techniques into America’s civilian
law enforcement system with the objective of enhancing global management.
Transforming America from a constitutional republic into a segment of socialist
world government required many changes, one of which is the elimination of the
sheriff. There are those of us who consider the American state, the
sheriff and his traditional office as vital.
Already laid over the
nation is a militarized infrastructure: the Homeland Security Agency. It
is the foundation upon which a worldwide regional system of total command and
control can be applied to operate what was once meant to be a republic. Very
little will be left to local autonomy. This is a violation of the
principles of the Constitution: the Supreme Law of the Land. The ridiculous
excuse for this installation is that we may have to give up some of our rights
for safety and security. What it is really saying is that we must
co-operate in the overthrow of our own government in order to provide protection
for ourselves and our government! It does not make
sense!
The county sheriff is being introduced to a maneuver that
will gradually eliminate him by a merger with federal marshals. Already
under threat by an Advisory group,[1] the
traditional American constitutional sheriff will be divested of his
authority. He will lose his control over the jails and the courts, and all
civilian law enforcement will be consolidated on the federal regional government
level.
The first intent is to demote the sheriff and his deputies
down to the functions of a beat officer where they can be managed by the
Homeland Security Agency as a non-elective county police
system.
If the sheriff disappears, good citizens
will lose the only opportunity they have to vote for a representative in law
enforcement of their own choosing who is endowed with special powers to deal
with special crimes. The assault on the sheriff had its beginning as far
back as the Wickersham Report, done under Herbert Hoover’s
administration.
The work of the Hoover Commission was to make
studies, gather statistics, and make recommendations which the Roosevelt
administration was later to use in an effort to install regional government over
the nation. Roosevelt was all set to eliminate the states in 1935.[2]
The Wickersham Report’s critical remark was: “The sheriff is an
elective office and any force under him is almost sure to be a makeshift
affair….If protection is to be given our rural districts we cannot rely upon the
sheriff-constable system to supply it.”
The intent and purpose of
regional government is not only to eliminate the states but to operate the
nation with metropolitan-trained non-elective appointees. Elective
representation was strongly criticized by Roosevelt’s advisors.
A
world government thesis under the League of Nations was openly expressed by
Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1920 as he made 26 campaign speeches for the
vice-presidency, with James Cox as the presidential hopeful. Their effort was
unsuccessful and Roosevelt did not surface again until after his attack by polio
at which time he took over the presidency during the Depression years beginning
in 1932.
The outgoing governor in Colorado in his Farewell
Speech to the state legislature exposed Roosevelt’s machinations to the
extent that his National Resources Planning Board was ordered to be shut
down. Congress cut off all the funding and gave him six months to wind up
all the paper work.[3]
In the 1970’s, when the threat to
eliminate the sheriff was openly before California supervisors, Supervisor
William Johnson of El Dorado County persuaded two California State
representatives to join him in getting an initiative qualified for the
California ballot which stated in print in the state’s Constitution that the
sheriff must be an elective office. The proposition on the ballot
passed easily and it was entered into California’s
constitution.
At that time Supervisor Johnson declared that
it “was an attempt to put a road block in the way” of the ‘change agents’.
It gave the people more time to find ways to protect themselves against the
‘change agents’.
‘Change agents’ are still processing their
techniques and altering the concepts of how our traditional and proper
constitutional system is supposed to operate. They use clandestine methodologies
and persuasive techniques so that the public will never suspect the damage that
is being done to them or what their losses will be. They are moving with “in
perpetuity” formats.
Who is there to speak of the dangers of
merging the sheriffs with federal marshals? The answer is YOU whether you are an
individual or if you are the sheriff himself. The curtain has not yet
dropped!
In states where the sheriff is being merged with federal
marshals, federal funding being supplied from Washington, D.C. will speed up the
eventual superiority of the assigned marshal over the elected
sheriff. The sheriff will then more easily be lowered down with no more power or
authority than that of a beat officer and he will be nothing more than a
policeman in the county. That is the objective!
Marshals are
appointed. The sheriff swears to an oath to the Constitution. Marshals do
not. Their pledge is to obey their superiors but no written document is
required of marshals to support and defend the Constitution.
In
Connecticut the people have already voted in favor of a proposition to eliminate
sheriffs and replace them with federal marshals. Passage of this proposition
became known as Public Act #00-99 (House Bill #5832 entitled “An Act Reforming
the Sheriff System). The phone call to verify this action was connected to
a representative in the Connecticut General Assembly who said: “There are no
sheriffs left! They are all marshals now!” The bill itself ran
74 pages, but there were documents available on this subject which ran between
600 - 700 pages. Most likely, financial savings was the basis for
persuading the voters to pass such a measure! Sometimes the sales pitch is
“to eliminate duplication”; “to consolidate”.
In Ohio, one
resident had a conversation with the Homeland Security office, and he was told
by that office that the sheriffs in Ohio will be replaced by marshals in the
near future. Later this statement was denied. Someone slipped
up!
The California direction began to change when Governor Pete
Wilson signed into law on October 11, 1993 Assembly Bill 1587 authored by
Assemblyman Richard Katz (D -Sylmar), which allowed the Los Angeles
Supervisors to consolidate the sheriff’s department and the marshal’s department
together using the reason that it would save an estimated $10 - 15 million a
year. The bill is chaptered and this type of merger exists in many other
counties in California.
Replacing elected officials
(responsible to the people) with non-elected officials (which are not
responsible to the people, but only to the federal administration) is an
unworthy action because appointive representatives can not be voted out or
recalled by the people. It contributes to the effort to militarize law
enforcement for international command and control.
In one
California county where the sheriff has lost his control over the jails in his
county, they wear different uniforms and have new badges. Jack McLamb’s office
has reported that Las Vegas, Nevada has no sheriff’s department any more in
Clark County. They now have what is called the Las Vegas Metropolitan
police. In about 1993 in Washington State two counties accepted
“appointed” sheriffs. They are King County in the Seattle area and Pearce
County in the Tacoma area.
To further desecrate the people’s
protectors, plans are being considered to divest all divisions of civilian law enforcement of their
firearms. The idea is that only the global government (with its world army) will
be allowed to possess firearms.
The reason behind these changes is
not just supposed financial savings, it is because the “change agents”
cannot put over an international policing system if different departments of law
enforcement are working independently of the other. The
militarization of civilian law enforcement under a worldwide command requires
unified command. The
communist-oriented United Nations is now demanding control of our police systems
for its “rapid response mechanism”.[4]
Once the ‘change agents’ finalize this
work, and their internal security system is well in place, the federal
government will be in a position to enforce all the other regional
administrative systems, aided by the Planning, Programming and Budgeting System
(the P.P.B.S.), which is already in force, known as Management by Objectives,
Total Quality Management, etc. The nation is undergoing implementation of
total systems, viz-a-viz “total federal international regional management
and control”.
Sheriff Tom Brown was correct when he said back
in 1982:
“Public office today is run more and more by bureaucrats and bureaucracy
than it is by elected officials. Elected officials are held
responsible…but many times {they} have no control over changing things,
because it filters all the way down from the president of the United States to
the governor, etc. Bureaucracy is so widespread and there are so
many restrictions on the elected official that there is no way that he can
change things.”
Consequently, the federal government has turned some of our sheriffs into
WIMPS. Why? Because they have accepted federal funding in exchange for
federal reorganization of their offices. Yet, they fear the
loss of federal funding! Pleas from many concerned citizens went unheard,
when they once tried to warn sheriffs of the dangers inherent in accepting the
Law Enforcement Assistance Administration’s (L.E.A.A.) Regional Rural Law
Enforcement Programs and the funding that was attached. Being in charge of
the funding, the L.E.A.A. put the county sheriff in the crosshairs of the high
caliber long gun of the regional international police
movement.
We do have some sheriffs with the courage to tell the
federal government to stay out of their counties and not enter unless they clear
with the sheriff first. The
sheriff is not a part of the federal judicial system. He holds executive
powers.
Have some sheriffs forgotten that the traditional purpose
for having a sheriff is a major part of the ‘check and balance system’?
Once it was the king that needed watching, and then it moved to public officials
who needed watching. It is all about control over tyranny! There are
plenty of tyrants and traitors now, whose actions are causing the Constitution
to be overthrown. While the city police are content to allow the
metropolitan-trained city manager to manage them, the sheriff is supposed to be
a different breed of a man. The city manager can hire and fire the
chief of police, as well as any police officer, but that authority does
not apply to the role of the sheriff! The sheriff is the
supposed to be the first man over
the whole county![5] The sheriff is the people’s most trusted
representative.
As we witness the merger of Canada, Mexico and the
United States into one government system, many patriotic writers are blasting
open the devastation this North American Community will bring to the
Constitution. It means the end of our states, our sovereignty, and our
Bill of Rights! The police officer will not help against this criminal act
because most likely his city manager will be a regional government
appointee!
The law-abiding citizens have trusted the sheriff
to maintain good government. Can we convince the sheriff that he has a
responsibility to traditional constitutional government, and to those who have
voted for him, to resist the federal pressure and directives that will
eventually wipe him out as well as the whole Constitutional system? The
sheriffs has taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution. The sheriff is a necessary
office! Why, then, do we
not find hundreds of sheriffs all over the nation coming forth to fulfill
their primary
duty?
Footnotes
[1] Advisory Commission on
Intergovernmental Relations Washington, D.C.
[2] Refer to the New York Times Magazine article dated
April 21, 1935 entitled “Nine Departments Instead of the 48
States”.
[3] It is a
matter of history that the effort to continue Roosevelt’s internationalization
of the United States was re-established. When the United Nations Charter
was signed, the U.S. presidential administrations moved from theory to
implementation of global government.
[4] The United Nations sets the standards for control
of the jails in the United States.
[5] Bouvier’s Law Dictionary Unabridged Vol. 3 Page
3058 states: “It is the sheriff’s duty to preserve the peace within his
bailiwick or county. To this end he is the first man within the county,
and may apprehend and commit to prison all persons who break or attempt to break
the peace, or may bind them over in a recognizance to keep the peace. He
is bound, ex officio, to pursue and take all traitors, murderers, felons, and
rioters; has the safekeeping of the county jail, and must defend it against all
rioters; and for this, as well as for any other purpose, in the execution of his
duties he may command the inhabitants of the county to assist him, which is
called the posse comitatus. And this summons every person over fifteen
years of age is bound to obey, under pain of fine and imprisonment; Dalt.
Sheriff 355; 2d Inst. 454.
In his ministerial capacity he is bound
to execute, within his county, all processes that issue from the courts of
justice, except where he is a party to the proceeding, in which case the coroner
acts in his stead. On mesne process he is to execute the writ, to arrest
and take bail; when the cause comes to trial he summons and returns the jury,
and when it is determined, he carries into effect the judgment of the
court.”
http://gothinkblog.com/?p=408