No products in the cart.


Three Percenters Founder Mike Vanderboegh Supports Oath Keepers At Bundy Ranch

This is to point our readers to Mike Vanderboegh’s website, known widely as “Sipsey Street Irregulars“. I will place just a bit of his article below to urge readers to go ahead and read what Mike has to say about the Oath Keepers and the Bundy Ranch situation.

Mike and I chanced to be at the Bundy Ranch at the same time, and we both spoke on that stage in the shade on the afternoon of April 19, 2014. Mike gave his “Wolverine” speech to mark the anniversary of his “Smuggle” speech back on April 19/20, 2013, at West Springfield, Massachusetts, and Hartford, Connecticut, respectively. As I did on April 19, 2013, in Lexington, Massachusetts with Mike present, I gave an Oath ceremony this recent April 19 2014 at the Bundy Ranch, while celebrating Oath Keepers’ fifth anniversary.

I mention that because I need to give some of the more concerned true Red White And Blue patriots who have fretted grandly and with fanfare of emphasis over the alleged rumor that in light of a possible drone strike at the Bundy Ranch over this past weekend (April 25-27, 2014) the Oath Keepers may have with cold-hearted intent abandoned their posts to save their own hides.  The righteous indignation with which so many ardent defenders of liberty have belched forth their heaped criticisms of Oath Keepers leadership for daring depart before a missile could be inserted up their collective wazzoo, has inspired me to dash to the assistance of every laboring soul who struggles now with the full effect and revelation of such rumor and its impact on the whole wide world.

What I have for you is a new diversion, something to overshadow and render impotent the previous rumors which were graciously offered you for unquestioning assumption by the very people who could not stand for the Bundy family to actually achieve popular support for their States’ Rights issue with the BLM. What the heck, eh? Let the proletariat swelter and swarm and sweat in the horrific damnations which surround Oath Keepers demise in cowardly shame over that rumor that Oath Keepers deserted their posts over a mere threat of some silly little missile which any good militia leader could snatch right out of the air with his bare teeth, spitting it all the way to Peking where it could be safely de-activated, any time those danged fedgov forces might send in a drone or three – we have a new puzzle in all of this, something to get one’s teeth into, and you may be able to help us solve our dilemma. Just remember: you found it first right here at Oath Keepers.

Here is the Intel: Mike Vanderboegh mysteriously showed up at the Bundy Ranch at about the same time Elias Alias did. It is rumored that Elias arrived by automobile with two cats, Opie and Black Alias.Opie_BlackAlias_Memphis2013

We are told that Mike Vanderboegh arrived by airplane and was transported to the Ranch by Stewart Rhodes himself. Note: Stewart cannot cop a plea of ignorance on that, for Mike himself has already verified it. By Friday April 19, 2014, both Mike Vanderboegh, founder of the Three Percenter Movement, and Elias Alias, founder of The Mental Militia, were seen cavorting about recklessly with Stewart Rhodes, founder of Oath Keepers.

The first part of our question has to do with whether all three, Stewart, Mike, and Elias, can wear the same hat. Mike has testified that he is not an Oath Keeper, and Elias has testified that he is not a Three Percenter, and not one “leader” on the ground at the Ranch has brought up any suspicions relative to both of them spying their way about the grounds of the Virgin River bridge and back-stage at for-public-consumption events down by the bridge on the road where public participation mixes with media and militia.

Mike Vanderboegh Magic Hat Bundy Ranch April 19 2013Although that has little to do with who can wear the same hat, here in raw pictures taken clandestinely by an unidentified infiltrator posing as an Oath Keeper is a shot of Mike Vanderboegh with his hat.







But, my goodness! Here is a secret pic of Elias Alias with the same hat! Inquiring minds want to know: What’s with the hat?Bundy Ranch Elias Alias

Why have Mike Vanderboegh and Elias Alias both been pictured at the same event at the Bundy Ranch with the same hat on the same day? How can that be? What happened to the security on the grounds, eh? This is blatant evidence that both of them were playing magic hat tricks right out there in front of God and everybody, including the alleged “militia leaders”.

But while that is a burning question, the grand-daddy of all conspiracy theories screams for an answer to this unhinged question – Is Elias wearing Mike’s hat, or is Mike wearing Elias’ hat? That is the question! This is what we should be focusing on in sorting out the cloudlike obfuscations adrift all around the Bundy Ranch success story, which is being veiled even now by rumor and accusation and name-calling and in-fighting – all the things which Agents Provocateur are trained to induce when the “enemy” (which is we the people lately) is becoming too successful in their fight for liberty; and which is, we remind readers once again, that the Cowboys rode into the face of the BLM’s soldiers who had been brought out to oppress the Ranchers, and they forced the commanders of the government’s theft mechanism called BLM to withdraw their troops before all hell could break through.  My my my. Looky who is doing all that. Notice that the leaders who are doing that wickedness, the liars who are tossing slings and arrows at Oath Keepers, are not saying one word about whether Mike is wearing Elias’ hat, or whether Elias is wearing Mike’s hat. So that is the question, and the petty lies and accusations of desertion etc etc may now be retired to the small print behind the sports page in next month’s newspapers.

We may never know whose hat it was, or even if it was Stewart Rhodes’ hat and he had possibly put each of them up to wearing a magic hat for some nefarious but classified reason of his own. When asked by this journalist, each culprit simply grinned and sluffed-off the question, changing the subject to a new paradigm scenario – they each questioned the journalist right back, asking what the journalist would tell his readership about a couple thousand libertarian Mental Militia people joining forces with over forty thousand Constitutionalist Oath Keepers members and over nine million “No More Free Wacos!” Threepers!  Is that a tip-of-the-iceberg hint from Fate, or is it a bit of mis-info found in a beer-wrapped vision from south of the border where mushrooms grow in magic? What a concept! People everywhere are now  going to focus on solving these mysteries, so we would like to see your comments, clues, and chuckles.

Mike has the critical eye of experience and the wisdom of one who has learned well from his experience. And Mike knows the history of our nation’s founding culture pretty doggone well also. Mike is an unabashed  observer and commentator on current events in the patriot movement, the liberty movement, the Constitution movement. As founder of the III%ers, he has established himself with solid aim and sure-fingered accuracy as a staunch defender of the Constitution. That has much to do with his patience during Oath Keepers’ early years, and it also shows much about the man’s character, about his vision of successful strategy in talking down an arrogant government which routinely sends its provocateurs into all sorts of social situations for wicked purposes. Oath Keepers notices at rallies and events across the nation that Mike’s Three Percenter flags are flying above crowds of patriots, and we particularly enjoy it when we see those Three Percenter flags flying alongside the gold and black Oath Keepers flag.

But enough of that. Mike has written quite a bit about the Bundy ranch situation. Yesterday we sent him our video in which Stewart and company debriefed on camera for all viewers and readers. That video is now embedded in Mike’s newest article, fresh off the presses this morning, and I’m sure every Oath Keeper on the map will want to read Mike’s article today. When watching the video itself, and when following that viewing by reading Mike’s article, one finally begins to see the complexities and sensitive nuances which came into play over the weekend of April 25-27, 2014 as Stewart Rhodes and the Oath Keepers fought to stay atop a multi-pronged assault inserted first by a piece of bogus “info” regarding an alleged possible drone strike by the US Federal government on the ranch of Cliven and Carol Bundy. Using that as the catalyst, some very suspiciously-acting alleged “militia leaders” delivered the second round of explosions by making wild accusations about Oath Keepers and pushing those accusations all over the Internet, knowing that they were lies.Oath Keepers will have much more to say about that in coming times.

(Allow me please to make this very clear – Oath Keepers is proud of the many militiamen and militiawomen who have volunteered and sacrificed their time and energy and expenses to stand guard for the Bundy family against a damned-by-God government that has already pointed sniper rifles at the Bundy family’s children and has threatened to fire on cowboys who live in the area and have joined the Bundy family in defying the BLM’s non-existent authority.  You are the militia, and you are the People. But we now must ask you to take a second look at several of your alleged “leaders” and re-evaluate your allegiance to a few of them. We say that because some of your so-called “leaders” are acting totally out of character for the American militia, and we suspect foul play by those few. Be advised, eh? To learn more about this, please view the video at Mike Vanderboegh’s website, linked –  here. )

Teasers from Mike’s new article at Sipsey Street Irregulars, home of the Three Percenters:

(Quoting Mike Vanderboegh)

Further, it is important to remember that I am not a member of Oath Keepers, although I have always believed that their work reminding folks of the ramifications of the oath they took to be among the most important of tasks. There are Three Percenters who belong to Oath Keepers and Oath Keepers who are Three Percenters. That is a given. But I decided from the first that it was inappropriate of me to join the organization, having staked out a different area of operations as it were in the fight to defend the Founders’ Republic.


It is also important to recall that Stewart Rhodes, the Oath Keepers board and I have not always seen eye to eye on some things. You may recall that OK at first committed to support, and then pulled out of, the armed march in Northern Virginia back in 2010. At the time there were those who wanted me to — no, URGED me to — loudly denounce Oath Keepers in general and Stewart Rhodes in particular for that decision. I did not not do so. I have long had a policy, dating from my work with the constitutional militia in the 90s, that I do not shoot my own side’s wounded. I’m glad I had that policy, for Stewart Rhodes has come a long way since those days as a leader and the Oath Keepers are a valuable force in the fight for liberty. Those who accused Stewart then of being a coward did not see him later risk arrest last year at the hands of the Lexington, MA, police force when he refused their order to stay off the green and told them they would have to arrest him to stop him from administering the oath ceremony there. The Lexington PD, gritted their teeth and blinked, allowing the ceremony to go forward. That was entirely Stewart’s doing. No, in my experience, Stewart Rhodes is no coward.

(End quote)

Please enjoy reading the whole thing here:






  1. Nice work, gentlemen.

    Sometimes you just have to laugh some stuff off. The heart remains pure.

    Hooyah & God Bless…I’ll see some of you soon down there.

  2. We at Oath Keepers have been put on the defensive. But, that is OK. We are a defending organization. Defending the Constitution that our country was founded upon. NO fundamental transformation here, on our watch !

  3. Elias; I am one of the OKs who helped face down the BLM on April 12th. At Carol Bundy’s request I wish to file a criminal complaint against BLM for their actions on that day. My question is,will I need to file the complaint in person at the Clark Co. Sheriff’s office? I hope not, because this will severely limit the # of us who can go there and file. How about having a Vegas attorney receive the complaints and file them?

  4. Cats and Magic Hats. Really? I’m all about a bit of humor now and again to ease tensions. Truly, I am. Getting past Stewart’s rambling video debrief was painful. Dammit, man! Get some sleep! Stay with the agenda in front of you on the table, if that’s what it -hopefully- was!
    Point is, we need -within the bounds of OPSEC, of course- info! Thanks for the link to Mike’s own observations but can we please at least be assured that Stewart & Co. are making some sort of attempt to bring the CoC Charlie Foxtrot at the ranch under control?
    We (me) are sweating bullets that this operation has a better than 50/50 chance of success. Reports to date do not encourage.
    (Hmmm. Sweating bullets. Maybe a few more 45’s this batch?…*humor*)
    Thanks, folks. Very grateful.

  5. Excellent piece and my hats off to OK’s, CSPOA, militia members and citizen patriots that have acted honorably and with integrity. As Mr.Rhodes said in the video, OK was not there to be in command and the principal reason of the organization is to inform those that have taken the oath to think hard about that oath. Also, the informed citizen can hold accountable the oath breaking politicians that have been willfully participating in the destruction of our nation. Watching the video, Mr. Casillas makes a strong argument about certain individuals. In any case, there will be many “armchair commanders” that will denounce & detract, many who will continue the lies & dis-info and all it will accomplish is chaos. Hotheads & testosterone ogre’s need not apply, cool heads will prevail. Kudos to OK & III’ers for the valuable info brought out to light for many to see. An informed citizenry with the truth is a powerful thing against those that seek to destroy our freedoms. Thank you Stewart, Elias, Mike, Sheriff Mack, and many more that are at the front in fighting a rogue government. Stay vigilant and pray for wisdom & guidance.
    Semper Fi, Do or Die

  6. I think this helps with the case against the BLM.
    Hage v. U.S. property rights

    Monday, 19 November 2012
    In a June 6 bench statement, Judge Jones charged federal officials of the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) with violating previous court judgments and engaging in a decades-long conspiracy against Nevada rancher Wayne Hage and his family. Judge Jones described the agencies’ actions against the Hages as “abhorrent,” and also noted that he had asked the local U.S. attorney to attend the hearing for consideration of criminal prosecution of BLM field manager Tom Seley and USFS ranger Steve Williams for contempt of court. However, the judge suggested that it may be necessary for the Department of Justice to appoint an outside prosecutor, since the local U.S. attorney may already be compromised. He instructed the U.S. Attorney’s office: “I will require them to account back to me in six months — within six months, as to any action they’ve taken.”

    On August 31, following a weeklong show-cause hearing for contempt charges, Judge Jones issued a blistering bench statement accusing USFS officials of lying to the court, attempting to mislead the court, abusing agency regulatory powers, and engaging in a pattern of threats and intimidation to coerce witnesses. The judge charged that Seley and Williams had used illegal means in an attempt “to kill the business of Mr. Hage.” Judge Jones, in effect, “fired” Seley and Williams. “Mr. Seley can no longer be an administrator in this BLM district. I don’t trust him to be unbiased. Nor can he supervise anybody in this district,” the judge stated in his order from the bench.

    First, back to Judge Jones’ June 6 bench ruling. “So I’m finding and concluding as a matter of law,” said the judge, “that the government and the agents of the government in that locale, sometime in the ’70s and ’80s, entered into a conspiracy, a literal, intentional conspiracy, to deprive the Hages of not only their permit grazing rights, for whatever reason, but also to deprive them of their vested property rights under the takings clause, and I find that that’s a sufficient basis to hold that there is irreparable harm if I don’t — and it’s in the public interest, if I don’t restrain the government from continuing in that conduct.

    Seley and Williams attempted to extort money out of third-party ranchers who had leased cattle to Wayne N. Hage. They issued trespass notices for which they demanded payments, and in one instance coerced a $15,000 settlement.

    “Especially the collection from innocent others of thousands of dollars for trespass notices is abhorrent to the Court,” the judge stated, “and I express on the record my offense of my own conscience in that conduct. That’s not just simply following the law and pursuing your management right, it evidences an actual intent to destroy their water rights.”

    In fact, Judge Jones accused the federal bureaucrats of “racketeering” under the federal RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corruption Organizations) statute, extortion, mail fraud, and fraud.

    The August show-cause hearing gave further evidence the abuses that so offended the court were not limited to localized actions by Seley and Williams. The USFS and BLM sent a high-powered lineup of officials from Washington, D.C., and state and regional offices to defend their policies, practices, and employees. But Judge Jones was not buffaloed. He subjected them to intense questioning and made witness credibility findings in which USFS Region 4 Director Harv Forsgren was found to be lying to the court, and the Nevada head of the USFS, Jeanne Higgins, was found not entirely truthful. After those findings, several other named federal officials did not testify. Judge Jones also let it be known that some of the named officials — particularly Seley and Williams — may be personally liable for thousands of dollars in fines and damages.


    Unfortunately they both died.

    The case was the first federal lands grazing case to be filed in this Court. For the first time in the history of western land disputes, Wayne and Jean were determined to resolve whether or not they held property rights on the federal lands and whether or not the federal government could regulate them out of business without compensation.

    Jean died in 1996, with the case still unresolved, but knowing they were on their way to vindication as the Court had made some early key decisions in their favor.

    However, it wasn’t until 2002 that the Court issued the first truly landmark ruling in the case. The Court determined that despite the government’s argument that the Hage’s had no property rights in the federal lands, the Court found they owned the water on the federal lands that flowed to their private lands, they owned the ditch rights-of-way that transported that water (and 50 feet on either side), and the range improvements. The decision had a chilling effect on the federal agencies.

    Wayne died in 2006 knowing he and Jean had won big for western ranchers, but still without seeing any of the awards.

    In 2008, the Claims Court issued a second landmark ruling by finding that the actions of the government agencies to prevent the Hage’s from using their property was a taking under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Ultimately, they were awarded $14.4 million, plus attorney fees.

    In the interim, the government brought trespass charges against Wayne Hage, Jr. and the Estate of Wayne and Jean Hage for having cattle on the federal allotments. The dispute ended up in District Court, separate and apart from the Takings case. This court issued the third historic ruling in the Hage saga, ordering the federal agencies to reinstate the Hage’s grazing permit and ordering Wayne Hage, Jr. to sign the permit. In making this decision the court admonished the federal agencies for using the power of the federal government to target and attempt to destroy what was left of the Hage’s livestock operation.

  8. As far as the FBI investigating the supporters, I heard on the news that it is illegal to point a loaded weapon at the cops and feds by the militia. The FBI does not know if their weapons were loaded or not, just because there are clips in them does not mean they are loaded or one in the chamber. The fed snipers were pointing their guns at the people/ civilians ! And second how do you determine if a person is pointing their gun at a person and not 10 feet away from them? Unless they can prove the angles of the barrells or if they were pointing at the bodies of the feds they do not have a case. If a sniper is pointing at me, I will point at them!

  9. I was not there when the confrontation took place at the Bridge, but if the government made the statement “We will fire on you” that needs to be investigated. They had no right to make that statement and that is a threat to peoples lives. People have a right to defend their life. The person that made that statement…needs to be charged with criminal threatening and trying to incite a violent reaction.

  10. Article I, section 8, next to the last paragraph of the Constitution states: “…to exercise like authority over all places PURCHASED BY THE CONSENT OF THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE in which same shall be, FOR THE ERECTION OF FORTS, MAGAZINES, ARSENALS, DOCK YARDS AND OTHER NEEDFUL BUILDINGS;” (emphasis added)
    The Federal Government can own land ONLY if three conditions are met:
    1) The land must be purchased from the state,
    2) the legislature of the state must consent to the sale,
    3) such land must be used for “forts, magazines, arsenals, dock yards and other needful buildings”
    If even one of the above conditions was not met, then the BLM has engaged in criminal conduct at the Bundy ranch. All individuals involved in said conduct, should be prosecuted both criminally and civilly.
    “Just following orders” is no excuse, it wasn’t an acceptable defense at Nuremburg and it is not acceptable here.

Comments are closed.