Article Image
Radio/TV • Declare Your Independence with Ernest Hancock
Program Date:

02-26-14 -- Davi Barker - Keith Cyrnek - Patrick Wood (MP3 & VIDEO LOADED)

Davi Barker (BitcoinNotBombs/Muslim Agorist) talks about his encounter with the TSA on his way back from Liberty Forum - Keith Cyrnek (local activist) stops by the studio - Patrick Wood (Editor of The August Fore­cast and The August Review

Hour 1 - 3

Media Type: Audio • Time: 180 Minutes and 0 Secs
Guests: Davi Barker
Hour 1 -- Davi Barker (BitcoinNotBombs/Muslim Agorist) talks about his encounter with the TSA on his way back from Liberty Forum
Hour 2 -- Keith Cyrnek (local activist) stops by the studio
Hour 3 -- Patrick Wood (Editor of The August Fore­cast and The August Review) on Technocracy and Transhumanism

CALL IN TO SHOW: 602-264-2800

February 26th, 2014
Declare Your Independence with Ernest Hancock
on LRN.FM / Monday - Friday
9 a.m. - Noon (EST)
Studio Line: 602-264-2800 

Hour 1
2014-02-26 Hour 1 Davi Barker (Video Archive):

2014-02-26 Hour 1 Davi Barker from Ernest Hancock on Vimeo.

Davi Barker

The TSA “saw” my Bitcoin and wanted to count it
It seems like every NH Liberty Forum I have a post about my interaction with the TSA while flying home. In 2012 I was even declared Rebel of the Week by Wesley Messamore from the Silver Underground for my cool but assertive approach. But this year has proven to be the most frightening, as well as the most cautionary for the Bitcoin community.  

I was majorly harassed by the TSA after opting out with Bill Buppert from, even after I’d already been cleared by security. I was given the standard blue glove pat down, so was Bill, and then a second agent searched my bag because all my lapel pins looked suspicious in the x-ray machine. I sold metallic lapel pins from at the conference. She unpacked my bag and ran all my lapel pins separately. That was the first indication of something strange. 

After she cleared me and I was free to leave I was approached and questioned by two supervisors in dress shirts and ties because they said they “saw” Bitcoin in my bag. This is, of course, absurd. They asked me about international travel. They asked to search my bag again. They evaded my questions, and ultimately threatened to arrest me when I said, “Do you have a superior officer, because I don’t think you know what you’re talking about.”

The issue was about international travel carrying over $10,000. I think what happened is that they saw my Bitcoin Not Bombs hoodie, then all the metal lapel pins, and they thought they hit the jackpot on a stockpile of Casascius coins. For the record I was sold out of Bitcoin pins, and out of Bitcoin flyers. The only Bitcoin logos on my person were my Bitcoin Not Bombs hoodie and a logo that I drew on a plastic case in my bag.

As soon as they discovered I was not traveling internationally they disappeared as quickly as they appeared.

It was scary. I was shaking. Immediately afterward I made a voice recording with Bill to record all the facts as we observed them while the experience was fresh.



Hour 2

Guests: Keith Cyrnek
Hour 2
2014-02-26 Hour 2 Keith Cyrnek In Studio
(Video Archive):

2014-02-26 Hour 2 Keith Cyrnek In Studio from Ernest Hancock on Vimeo.

Keith Cyrnek
Local Phoenix Activist stops by the studio to show his support for Hillary...

Hour 3

Guests: Patrick Wood
Hour 3
2014-02-26 Hour 3 Patrick Wood (Video Archive):

2014-02-26 Hour 3 Patrick Wood from Ernest Hancock on Vimeo.

Patrick Wood
Founder - August Corporation
Editor - August Forecast and the August Review
Webpage: AugustForecast.Com

To Contact Patrick, email him at Editor@AugustForecast.Com

Patrick M. Wood is editor of The August Fore­cast and The August Review. The August Fore­cast pro­vides a suc­cinct look for­ward to ana­lyze trends relating to mar­kets, eco­nomics, pol­i­tics and finance; The August Review is an his­tor­ical review of global elitism, its players and policies.

He founded The August Cor­po­ra­tion on October 11, 1975. As a reg­is­tered invest­ment adviser with the Secu­ri­ties and Exchange Com­mis­sion, the com­pany ini­tially offered port­folio man­age­ment ser­vices to investors in the United States until 1980.

In 1978, Wood com­menced pub­li­ca­tion of The Tri­lat­eral Observer (TO), to specif­i­cally track and doc­u­ment the activ­i­ties of The Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion, which was then seen to be the very core of elitism and multi-nationalism in the United States and abroad. TO was co-edited by Pro­fessor Antony Sutton, for­merly a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Insti­tu­tion for War, Peace and Rev­o­lu­tion at Stan­ford University.

Wood and Sutton co-authored two suc­ces­sive book vol­umes, Tri­lat­erals Over Wash­ington — Volume I and Tri­lat­erals Over Wash­ington — Volume II.

Tri­lat­erals Over Wash­ington quickly became a best-seller and over the course of about two years, sold over 75,000 copies inter­na­tion­ally. The books were very well received for excel­lent schol­ar­ship and orig­inal research, and even became a frequently-used text­book in polit­ical sci­ence classes at many col­leges in U.S. universities.
Arizona Breakfast Club - February 1, 2014:

The monthly meeting of the Arizona Breakfast Club. There were two guest speakers. The first speaker asked that there be no recording, however, the meeting with the second speaker is provided here! The second speaker was Patrick Wood (Editor The August Forecast & Review) will give a Power Point presentation on Technocracy and Transhumanism.

2 Comments in Response to

Comment by Kathleen Moore
Entered on:

P.S.  And even more to the point.  The following article in comparative law was published in 1990, 2-1/5 decades ago, well before today's "nullification" and "state sovereignty" push was underway. The author therefore had no ax to grind regarding today's issues.

Title:  THE LOCUS OF SOVEREIGNTY: JUDICIAL REVIEW, LEGISLATIVE SUPREMACY, AND FEDERALISM IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL TRADITIONS OF CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES by Calvin R. Massey**• Associate Professor of Law, University of California, Hastings. B.A., 1969, Whitman Col­lege; M.B.A., 1971, Harvard University; J.D., 1974, Columbia University. I am grateftil to the Roger J. Traynor Fund for a research grant which aided this study, to Professors Tom Barnes, Victor Jones, and the Canadian Studies group at the University of California, Berkeley, upon whom I inflicted an earlier version of this paper, to my colleagues Scott Sundby and Bill Wang, who sharp­ened some of my thinking, to Professors Alan Cairns and Ronald Watts, who reviewed and com­mented upon earlier drafts, and to the residents of Hornby Island, British Columbia, from whom I have gained invaluable insight into the Canadian national character. An earlier version was presented to the Association for Canadian Studies in the United States at its 1989 biennial meeting under the title "Meech Lake and Calhoun's 'Concurrent Majority.'" The errors and omissions are, of course, mine alone.

Source:  1230 DUKE LAW JOURNAL Vol. 1990:1228 et seq.


/ 1242


I. Calhoun's Concurrent Majority and the Expediency of Sovereignty Doctrine in Antebellum America

The political theory of John C. Calhoun represents the fullest ex­pression of the decentralized, state-focused view of the American federal union. Although this attitude often is associated with antebellum South­ern agrarians,55 it was by no means unique to the South. It is an estab­lished American political pastime to manipulate state sovereignty principles in order to achieve immediate political objectives. What makes Calhoun remarkable is that his theory was perhaps the best rea­soned and most thoughtful of the genre, albeit no less instrumental. A brief look at the development of American state sovereignty principles provides contextual understanding of Calhoun's political philosophy and a basis for comparison with the development of Canadian principles of provincial autonomy.

.... .... ....


The Alien and Sedition Acts were a Federalist attempt "to discredit the Republicans and to reduce them to political impotence by associating them with foreign influence and by attacking their loyalty, ideology, and morality.. .. The XYZ affair was not so much the cause, as the occa­sion, for striking at political opposition."67 It was, in short, an opportu­nity for Federalists "to equate opposition to the government's policy with sedition and near treason."68 Although Adams may have thought that the Acts were a sufficient sop to outraged Federalists, Republicans such as Madison and Jefferson proclaimed them unconstitutional because they went beyond the proper sphere of congressional power, impaired free speech and the right to trial by jury, and contravened the constitutional principle of separation of powers.69

..... .....

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Jefferson's rhetorical denunciation of the Acts was a deft political statement. He composed the 1798 Kentucky Resolutions, which de­clared that the federal union, as a compact among the states, enabled each state to decide for itself when and whether the national government had exceeded its constitutional authority. Jefferson's Kentucky Resolu­tions even suggested that a state might declare null and void a federal law that it believed to infringe upon its state sovereignty.70 But this was not a statement of grand principle; it was a calculated bit of political posturing. In a letter to James Madison, Jefferson admitted that:

[W]e should distinctly affirm all the important principles... [the Reso­lutions] contain, so as to hold that ground in the future, and leave the matter in such a train as that we may not be committed absolutely to push the matter to extremities, and yet may be free to push as far as events may render prudent.71 '

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

More circumspect, Madison's Virginia Resolutions reaffirmed the compact theory of union and declared that the constituent states "have the right and are in duty bound to interpose, for the arresting the pro­gress of evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the au­thorities, rights, and liberties appertaining to them."72  Madison did not go so far as to suggest that a state possessed the unilateral power of nulli­fication of federal law.


But Madison did deliver an implied endorsement of this corollary to the compact theory of federal union in his collateral Virginia Report adopted by the Virginia Legislature; "[T]here can be no tribunal above their [the states'] authority, to decide in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated . .. .**73 It was not im­mediately evident whether this meant that the states possessed the unilat­eral right to nullify federal law they deemed unconstitutional, or only that, in the years prior to Martin v. Hunter's Lessee,14 Madison thought the United States Supreme Court lacked the constitutional authority to review the actions of the states.73


Even though Madison's position, more fully stated in the Virginia Report, suggested that the Virginia Resolutions might have arisen from bedrock principles of constitutional union, the Report contained other evidence that belied the suggestion. Madison admitted to the Virginia House of Delegates that the Resolutions "were designed merely to be an expression of opinion, 'unaccompanied by any other effect than what they may produce on opinion by exciting reflection.' "76 This frank ad­mission, coupled with Jefferson's equally candid letter to Madison,77 in­dicate that these early statements of state sovereignty within the federal system of the United States primarily may have been propaganda designed to foster Republican victory in 1800. Rather than thoughtful statements of the political theory of federalism, these statements were campaign position papers.78 Whatever their origin, they left a lasting imprint on later debate concerning the nature of federal union.


It contains the file:  The Locus of Sovereignty_ Judicial Review Legislative Supremacy.pdf

Kind regards from Canada.

Kathleen Moore


The Official Legal Challenge

To North American Union


WordPress: - CANADA: How The Communists Took Control.

- 30 -









Comment by Kathleen Moore
Entered on:


Watch Streaming Broadcast Live:

Watch the Ernest Hancock Show on Flote
Watch the Ernest Hancock Show on DLive
Watch the Ernest Hancock Show on
Live Chat
Talk about the Ernest Hancock Show on Telegram
Listen to the Ernest Hancock Show
Live Phone:

Apple Podcast

Please help fund Declare Your Independence with a one-time or recurring donation.

Archive By Year

Shows By Topic

Shows By Guest