FRIDAY, MARCH 13, 2015
4 — THE BAKER COUNTY PRESS
Opinion
— Editorial —
Lukewarm on
new online
impersonation
bill
We’ve read with interest multiple
editorials and articles in other local media
referring to an allegedly fake Facebook
account through which someone imper-
sonated a local Democrat Precinct Com-
mittee Person (PCP)—without evidence to
the contrary, we take his word on that—by
friending and messaging several others in
the community.
We’ve found some of the media re-
sponse to be curious and certainly filled
with amateur attempts to draw a correla-
tion between the makeup of those who
wound up on his friends list one way or
another—and the perpetrator.
We’ve watched half-baked editorial fi -
ger-pointing attempts to connect random
parties—everyone from those in favor of
a past school board recall attempt… to
third parties who had never even heard
about the fake account… to local Republi-
can PCPs. The head-scratcher of a theory
seems to be that since mostly the liberally
inclined chose to add this person to their
Facebook friends, obviously the culprit
must come from the other side of the
political fence.
In all this tortured and misguided logic,
we’ve never once read a reference to those
who didn’t choose to become friends with
the fake account.
We know we didn’t. Two of us on this
Editorial Board also received friend
requests from the alleged fake account.
We’re aware of several prominent conser-
vatives in the community who received
friend requests and also didn’t accept.
From our perspective, there appears
to be no particular pattern to the friend-
ing attempts, but due to the name on the
account, the combination of those who
actually accepted the requests makes
perfect sense. They weren’t “targeted,” we
don’t believe, to any larger degree than we
were. On Facebook, people tend to accept
requests from people they know or would
like to get to know. People who receive
requests from individuals they don’t know
or don’t want privy to their personal infor-
mation tend to decline such requests. Such
was the case with us, our friends, and fam-
ily. And when we received a second friend
request from the same account, we then
blocked the obnoxious individual so that
no more requests could come.
From this situation, though, we under-
stand several local voters approached Rep.
Cliff Bentz with a request to draft legisla-
tion. Another Representative with local
ties, Jodi Hack, sister of former County
Clerk Tami Green, co-sponsored the ensu-
ing bill, which would criminalize online
impersonation. All things said, we’re not
totally opposed to an online impersonation
bill.
We’ve read this one, though, and the
language stating that if a person feels
“humiliated,” they’re entitled to sue for
compensation for that humiliation. We’ve
seen too many laws triggering too many
court cases in which lawyers try to prove
or disprove just how a bad a plaintiff felt.
If a waitress spills a drink on us, or
someone describes us in a way we maybe
don’t like, and as a result we feel embar-
rassed, is a lawsuit appropriate? Do we
really want a society in which hurting our
little feelers is considered a crime?
Strike that “humiliation” wording, and
we’d have no objection to the rest of the
bill. As it is, we wonder if the bill will
ever make it out of Committee.
To the largest degree, whom we accept
onto our social media pages and what we
choose to communicate in emails, texts
and private messages is a personal respon-
sibility.
We agree there are con artists and
crooks out there in the world who prey
on the weak-minded and naive. If they
use the internet to defraud an individual
financiall , it’s criminal, just like it would
be off the internet. We suspect we’re still
unaware of many details in our local situa-
tion, but it’s our understanding that no one
was financially or otherwise harmed in the
Baker County instance. As it is, we feel
fairly lukewarm about this bill.
—The Baker County Press Editorial Board
— Letters to the Editor —
Disagree with Southwick’s
maneuvering
To the Editor:
When did we come to the point in
Eastern Oregon, that we found ourselves
negotiating our access to public lands for
timber harvest and why is this an accept-
able model for our elected officials
The answer lies directly under our
noses, but for the fact that a great deal
of us don’t know it exists. Collaboration
and the bringing together of “interested”
parties to negotiate projects is killing our
individual rights each and every day.
The Grant County Court, as one ex-
ample, has decided to align itself with the
financial interest of Iron Triangle and its
ability to realize a profit from the “ste -
ardship contract” given throughout the
county.
In order for Iron Triangle to move for-
ward with getting its projects completed,
they must keep the Forest Service happy.
Mr. Beverlin, newly appointed Forest
Supervisor for Malheur National Forest,
made this very clear in early February
when he informed the American Forest
Resources Council that any interference
or preventing the Forest Service from
performing road closures will jeopardize
timber outputs on the Forest.
That my friends is where we have come
as a region and where the FS has come to
as an agency. You don’t support what we
want to do, we’ll break you, period, end
of story. So, what other choice do these
companies have? Either Hells Canyon
Preservation Council litigates a timber
project if it’s not closed afterward, or
the FS simply does not allow the project
because you can’t keep the public shut up
about it. This isn’t just in Grant County;
it’s throughout the Eastern Oregon Coun-
ties and the only way to address it is to
tell the commissioners that our motorized
access is not to be negotiated.
We’re being held hostage friends, who
stands up and says enough is enough.
John George
Bates
Letter to the Editor Policy: The Baker
County Press reserves the right not to pub-
lish letters containing factual falsehoods or
incoherent narrative. Letters promoting or
detracting from specific for-profit business-
es will not be published. Word limit is 375
words per letter. Letters are limited to one
every other week per author. Letters should
be submitted to Editor@TheBakerCounty-
Press.com.
Advertising and Opinion Page Dis-
claimer: Opinions submitted as Guest
Opinions or Letters to the Editor express
the opinions of their authors, and have not
been authored by and are not necessarily
the opinions of The Baker County Press, any
of our staff, management, independent
contractors or affiliates. Advertisements
placed by political groups, candidates,
businesses, etc., are printed as a paid
service, which does not constitute an
endorsement of or fulfillment obligation
by this newspaper for the products or
services advertised.
To the Editor:
I was concerned when the Baker County
Sheriff announced his retirement to the
Baker County Board of Commission-
ers that he also endorsed as his replace-
ment to fill the unexpired portion of his
term a friend of his, a lieutenant that was
promoted to that rank a few months ago
from the rank of sergeant. According to
my understanding, at the time the sergeant
was promoted, Sheriff Southwick also de-
moted to lieutenant the undersheriff who
had been in that position for about nine
years. As a general rule, the undersheriff
would have become the interim sheriff
and would have served in that position for
the unexpired portion of the sheriff’s term
of office
I have no problem with Sheriff South-
wick recommending to the Baker
County Board of Commissioners someone
to fill the unexpired portion of his term,
but I do have a problem with what he did
a few months ago in order to give a par-
ticular deputy the opportunity to take over
and run the Baker County Sheriff’s Office.
Is this one of those “good ol’ boy” type of
promotions?
I think it would be a great idea for the
Baker County Commissioners to carefully
look at any and all potential candidates to
ensure that the appointment is an ethical
one before selecting a new leader of the
Baker County law enforcement team.
Robert Brady
Baker City
Road Closure or Timber?
— Guest Opinion —
Federal
jurisdiction:
fact or
fiction?
By James Iler
Special to The Baker County Press
In a recent issue of The Baker
County Press, I noted at least four
comments by City and County agen-
cies and private associations citing
their concerns that necessary local
laws and practices may be in conflict
with “federal law.”
The simple fact is that the federal
government’s actual constitutional
authority and jurisdiction is limited to
its own employees and the land (“ter-
ritory”) actually owned by it (with
jurisdiction granted by the state over
that deeded land). Article 1, Section
8 of the Constitution of the United
States is very clear, and very restric-
tive. Read it yourselves.
However, the federal government
(US Congress) has the constitutional
power and right to make any laws it
wants for its own territory. See Article
4 Section 3. That territory includes
only Washington D.C. and the mari-
time enclaves (Guam, Puerto Rico,
Virgin Islands, etc.) and the land it ac-
tually owns within the “several States
of the American union.”
And those private internal laws are
not required to recognize any constitu-
tionally-protected rights of any people
found within its territories. Those ac-
tually living in federal territories … or
unknowingly claiming that they live
in this federal territory … are virtual
corporate slaves.
Said Congress lawfully and consti-
tutionally created the IRS and BATF
and USFS and DHS and FEMA and
“Obamacare” and all the other alpha-
bet agencies to operate within their
private territorial jurisdiction and
venue, and are effective only against
their corporate agency employees and
territorial “US citizens” and others
who volunteer to be under their juris-
diction. Get that?
So why are the people of Baker
County so concerned about being
subject to the severely limited federal
authority that is so clearly defined in
the constitutions? If we are living in
one of the “several States,” and not in
Washington D.C. or one of Congress’
maritime territories, how do their un-
restricted (non-constitutional) powers
reach us?
The “United States Government”
is a private Delaware corporation.
It deceptively creates a territorial
“residency” and induces you and me
to enter its territory for the purpose
Submitted Photo
James Iler has studied law and the
constitution for two decades, and is
dedicated to educating others about
their God-given rights. He is an
Oath Keeper living near New Bridge
and Baker City, and his writings are
found on BakerCountySolutions.
com.
of placing us under their far-reaching
non-constitutional authority. It de-
ceptively encourages us to apply
for federal benefits and permissions
and licenses and grants, and to enter
interstate banking relationships and be
“taxpayers” and thereafter be subject
to all its agencies’ administrative and
executive orders … all within their
private, foreign jurisdictional venue
where the People are granted mere
privileges by their corporate masters,
and no rights exist.
“Government agencies” are virtu-
ally all just private corporations. They
are listed on Dun and Bradstreet as
“privately-held companies with fed-
eral TIN and CUSIP numbers. They
act in their sovereign constitutional
capacity only in international affairs.
They are for-profit corporations, like
Safeway and Shell Oil. Their com-
mercial paper is traded on the interna-
tional securities exchanges.
They have no inherent powers over
you unless you are their employee or
“reside” in their very limited federal
territory!
Local governmental agencies that
are concerned about the costs of butt-
ing heads with what they perceive as
“federal law” need only to challenge
the interloping federal agency to
produce admissible evidence that their
conduct or claim of authority is in
harmony with Article 1, Section 8, or
else provide evidence of a lawful and
binding voluntary contract made under
full disclosure.
Sovereign constitutional govern-
ment was created by the people to pro-
tect their inherent God-given rights.
When it strays from this fundamental
purpose, it is not your government.
When its employees act in fraud
against the rights and interests of the
people … and against their solemn
Oath … they commit treason. It is that
simple. Study and know your rights,
then claim your rights … or lose them.
— Contact Us —
The Baker County Press
PO Box 567
Baker City, Ore. 97814
Open Monday-Thursday for calls
9 AM - 4 PM
Open 24/7 for emails
Office location: TBA
Phone: 541.519.0572
TheBakerCountyPress.com
Kerry McQuisten, Publisher
Editor@TheBakerCountyPress.com
Wendee Morrissey, Advertising and Sales
Wendee@TheBakerCountyPress.com
David Conn, Advertising and Sales
David@TheBakerCountyPress.com
Published weekly every Friday.
Subscription rates per year are $29.95 all areas,
e-mail delivery. $39.95 print issue, home delivery,
Baker City city limits only. $49.95 print issue,
mail delivery, outside Baker City city limits only.
Payment in advance.
A division of
Black Lyon Publishing, LLC
Copyright © 2014
YOUR ELECTED
OFFICIALS
President Barack Obama
202.456.1414
202.456.2461 fax
Whitehouse.gov/contact
US Sen. Jeff Merkley
503.326.3386
503.326.2900 fax
Merkley.Senate.gov
US Sen. Ron Wyden
541.962.7691
Wyden.Senate.gov
US Rep. Greg Walden
541.624.2400
541.624.2402 fax
Walden.House.gov
Oregon Gov. Kate
Brown
503.378.3111
Governor.Oregon.gov
State Rep. Cliff Bentz
503.986.1460
State Sen. Ted Ferrioli
541.490.6528
Baker County
Commissioners Bill Harvey;
Mark Bennett; Tim Kerns
541.523.8200
541.523.8201