Article Image
News Link • Arizona's Top News

OathKeepers National, Arizona Libertarians March to Home of Slain Marine in Tucson

• Ed Vallejo with a Freedom**Q**s Phoenix EXCLUSIVE!

By Ed Vallejo, Editor


Reporting exclusively for Freedom’s Phoenix



It was a somber and solemn disquiet that blanketed the early morning desert as some of the most dedicated men and women of society – those who would lay down their life for “God, Family, and Country” -  came together from all parts of America to honor and mourn the unnecessary death of a two-tour Iraq Veteran Marine, Jose Guerena of Tucson, and pay their Respects to the grieving Widow and Family on this Memorial Day of 2011.

Many came to let it be known that “enough is enough”.  I know my life has been changed because of this day.  To what extent is yet to be seen.

I commuted the two hour distance with my good friend and Vice-Chairman of the Arizona OathKeepers Gerald Rhoades.  All the way down there I used the opportunity to both bring him up to speed as to everything I had found out researching the available details and to try and get it straight in my mind my initial questions to clear up the holes in the story.  There were so much of both the time went like it was nothing and we were there.

Upon arrival we worked our way through the sizeable crowd to find Founder Stewart Rhodes and Former Graham County Sheriff and OathKeepers Board Member Richard Mack Organizing and making statements to the media.

Looking around I could tell right away that almost everyone there was either current or former military and law enforcement, and well as Family, friends, and coworkers.  Everyone was gravely concerned, and for many reasons.

I knew that there were people from California, Nevada, Utah, and New Mexico headed to attend – but before the day was over I would hear from people who flew in or carpooled from all over, including one gentleman who drove from North Carolina.

I think the predominant thought was “It could have been me or my loved one that this happened to, and I cannot be of good conscience and allow it to happen to anyone else”.  I agreed wholeheartedly with this sentiment because, if nothing else, I had so many things in common with the list of items used by those who would demonize the deceased in the Circus of the LameStream Media – all the way down to a Border Patrol hat (I get a lot of grief being a Libertarian who supports secure borders for our Nation).  Things that have, in my lifetime, been required from the Citizenry ‘for the Security of a Free state’ – namely, the most state-of-the-art weaponry as is individually possible to ‘repel rebellion or invasion’ if necessary.  Look up ‘Yamamoto’s Giant’ sometimes, and I think you’ll see what I mean.

Many factors then and since have compounded greatly my own personal concern, and at this point in time I cannot go into any greater detail here until some very important questions I have get answered. 

For now, I’ll just let the videos speak for itself.  That is the most important part right now – getting it out there in the Public Domain (can’t say it didn’t happen!)  Missing is Founder Stewart Rhodes being interviewed by Tucson Television (that wasn’t aired – fancy that!), and the beginning of the march and the first half of the ceremony, but I am breaking it up into smaller portions so I can get them uploaded ASAP.  Look for them as soon as they are done.

And hold on to your seat – I think we’re in for a RIDE.  MUCH more to come.



(videos not embedding - use links please)

p.s. here is the text of the official Libertarian Party of Arizona statement given me by Chairman Warren Severin:




Warren Severin, Chairman of the Arizona Libertarian Party has this to say to the Oathkeepers at their gathering in Tucson in tribute to Jose Guerena:

“Two hundred and thirty five years ago our forefathers believed that we, the common people, held God-given rights.  Not doled out by Government.  God Given.  Among them, the right to speak our minds, the right to defend ourselves at need, and the right to be secure in our homes.  But, an oppressive and tyrannical Government thought otherwise.  Our forefathers fought and shed their blood and died to secure those rights.  They then guaranteed those rights for future generations in a Constitution, so that government would never take them again.

“Many generations of dedicated Americans like Jose Guerena and many of you have shed their blood, and many have died to defend and preserve those rights.

“Today these God-given rights are again being taken from us by oppressive and tyrannical government.  No longer are we free to speak our minds, defend ourselves at need; nor are we secure in our homes.  America is rapidly becoming a totalitarian-police state.

“Now, once again, an oppressive and tyrannical Government denies us these God-given rights.  We will not passively watch.  We will – I hope by the ballot box – reclaim our God-given rights.  We will remove oppression and tyranny from government.  America WILL NOT be a totalitarian-police state.

“As you have sworn to uphold your pledge as Oathkeepers, the Tucson police and all police forces must also uphold their pledges.

“God bless Jose Guerena, and especially his wife Vanessa and children who will have to try to get through this horrible tragedy without him.”



The Arizona Libertarian Party is Arizona’s, and the nation’s, third largest political party.  Libertarians believe in self-ownership, personal responsibility, the ‘Golden Rule’, strong defense, and non-initiation of force.

Contact Warren Severin Chairman AZLP at or phone 480-215-8527.

3 Comments in Response to

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

Attempts to becloud the Guerena killing …These 1,607 words will set you free. Somehow, those were suppressed. I need you to read it. Chances are, you might be able to save yourself and help fight "police thugs".

At Gunpoint Is This Cross-Eyed Look At

Liberty And Freedom Which Is Dangerous


Dear Editor …[]

Let me have this opportunity to save our readers from being blind-sided -- from knowing the right way how to resist arrest, search and seizure under their Fourth Amendment Right [Fourth AR], before any of them is shot dead. We could have saved the life of ex-Marine Jose Guerena ... alive, he could have his only chance to declare himself innocent until proven guilty in the court of law.

The vision is flawed when one starts looking at Fourth AR the way cross-eyed do. If they can see clearly what this constitutional right looks like, they would know when to resist arrest, search and seizure that could save their lives.

The right of every citizen to resist with force or even to "shoot and kill" police officers [in the gun sights of anarcho-libertarian extremists in the physical or philosophical sense], especially SWAT personnel that barged into your home is self-defense under the Fourth AR if the citizen is subjected to an UNLAWFUL ARREST, SEARCH AND SEIZURE. But this Fourth Amendment Right cannot or does not protect that citizen when arrest, search and seizure is lawful or when a warrant was issued based on probable cause to stop an unlawful wrong or to suppress criminal activities.

The problem is when there is an immediate invasion of the Fourth AR by law-enforcement officers, the suspect, whether or not engaged in any unlawful or criminal activity, has no time to find out or determine when such arrest is unlawful or a search and seizure is illegal before the act of self-defense commences. The victim may probably be already injured or fatally shot as in the case of the ex-Marine [Jose Guerena] who was found with an assault weapon on the floor by the side of his dead body.

In this Guerena case, that SWAT team raid conducted with element of surprise under what may be legally viewed as a "sneak and pick" warrant issued by Pima County, there was no time for the ex-Marine to use the weapon he had prepared in handy for self-defense as a matter of right guaranteed to every citizen under the Bill of Rights [the Fourth AR]. This is almost always the case when the raid is necessarily carried out under a shroud of secrecy or conducted by surprise and the victim has a screwed up understanding of his Fourth Amendment Right and do a Rambo like what the guru of violence Larken Rose suggested.

But this constitutional guarantee [Fourth AR] is not essentially collateral to the issue as to whether or not the suspect [the decease Jose Guerena] has the right to self-defense under the circumstances he was gunned down and killed. In fact that right does not exist when the surprise forcible entry was performed pursuant to a legally issued warrant of arrest, search and seizure based on probably cause.

Hence when forcible entry is conducted under a protected warrant of surprise, no one should presume [it would be foolish to assume] that the raiding police officers – persons in authority who are wearing their badges and law enforcement uniforms with bullet-proof vests -- are "thugs" [as Larken Rose call them] who just showed up for the sole purpose of invading your home to take away your Fourth Amendment Right as angry Libertarian extremists think it is. That would be the craziest scenario for one to think of, the stupidest option to make, and the silliest thing to do – unnecessarily exposing your life to danger and that of your family, and anyone inside the house at the time of the arrest, search and seizure that caught you by surprise.

Here are the crucial points I would like certain Libertarian bandits [angry anti-Statist Libertarians who rob you the right to think straight when they throw you under the bus] who look at liberty and freedom as a form of State banditry, to take note of carefully and very seriously: Police officers could kill innocent citizens with impunity – facts. But facts should be differentiated from reality.

The reality is, even a slightest physical contact of aggression by a citizen with a police officer while conducting a lawful arrest, search and seizure, can be prosecuted as "battery on an officer". While in the performance of their duty, the law protects police officers from criminals, not the other way around which State haters are projecting as a suspect’s right until proven guilty.

This is the reality that I am talking about which is separate and different from the prevailing facts.

Libertarian bandits most reasonable Libertarians are up against, shouldn’t insinuate the use of force to resist at this critical point where fully armed law agents with license to kill could fire at will. Those violent-lecturing bandits are not the ones who get killed … the foolish ones who heard and believed them are the ones who catch the bullets.

In one case, the Court ruled that a suspect wielding a "flyswatter" during a police raid was planning a "felonious assault’ on a policeman." The assault rifle found beside the ex-Marine’s dead body was more than just a flyswatter. It was obvious to the raiding police officers, that the Fourth AR doesn’t state they should wait for the ex-Marine who was holding a riffle whether the weapon was loaded or not, or whether the safety pin is off or on, to fire at them first before they could shoot him dead.

This kind of judicial interpretation showing how strict is the prohibition that to resist arrest, search and seizure is against public policy [the Indiana Court ruling which Larken Rose attacked as "Full Frontal Fascism", 05-13-2011 ] fuel the "growing public outrage". Public instigators the likes of Larken Rose and Co. simply throw gasoline into this raging emotional conflagration. The time has come that the need to save the public from this philosophically-induced killing madness is now so real than just apparent, and to take action against it has become critically urgent before the number of killings grow to an uncontrollable or epidemic proportion.

If you want to survive this unfortunate incident that came to your life like a thief in the night, don’t listen to those knee-jerk, anti-State Libertarian extremists who urge you, right or wrong, to resist and shoot it out because they tell you that police in uniform are jackboots "thugs" that are good only when they are shot dead.

Those angry preachers who spread the gospel of violence in fact fit the descriptions of what they really are – violent hoodlums or "thugs"… and their handiwork of "thuggery". The description does not fit police officers that took their oath to perform their police duty to protect the public from criminals, which those philosophical ruffians incredibly ostracize. These angry R3volutionaries are but just a lost command composed of libertarian mavericks who want you to forfeit your life under this delusional claim that you should value freedom and liberty more than your life. This kind of thinking is not only fundamentally wrong but also poisonous and dangerous to the public; and in an open public debate its stupidity is beyond reproach … just as its impeccable foolhardiness and idiocy are beyond anyone’s comprehension.

So by order of exigent priority, survival first, before you decide to resist arrest, search and seizure with force that would land you six feet below the ground. It is in the court of law that you resist UNLAWFUL ARREST, SEARCH AND SEIZURE – not in the scene of the crime where law enforcement officers had turned themselves into criminals. It does not mean that by not resisting arrest, search and seizure at the scene of the crime, you forfeit your liberty and freedom. It is just NOT like acting stupid. In fact it is just acting smart so that when you are alive you can fight for your liberty and freedom at the right place [court of law] at the right time [when resisting arrest, search and seizure with the stronger force of law, are filed in a criminal or civil court proceeding].

Generally, this right of legal challenge under the Fourth AR applies only to UNLAWFUL arrest, search and seizure. It means that the challenge in court under the Fourth AR may meet tremendous difficulties and may not succeed if the action proceeds from a lawful arrest, search and seizure.

But here are some of the legal options or "tricks" employed by lawyers they learned from their several years of practice of law: In the legal battle, I always look at the windows of opportunity that are available in a case to case basis on how to challenge a legally issued warrant that infringed on the rights of clients:

[1] When the police affidavit was recklessly prepared in seeking the issuance of warrant or when there was fraud or dishonesty involved.

[2] When the Judge or Magistrate was blatantly biased or prejudiced in the issuance of warrant of which he/she should have been inhibited.

[3] When the warrant itself shows fatal defects, i.e. lack particularity, etc.

But overall, don’t react to this Guerena tragedy like a headless chicken. Know what your rights are under the Fourth AR. Better still, don’t try to hoodwink the public with your R3volutionary fervor. You are not going anywhere.

If you stop bawling and cease throwing punches in the air like what Larken Rose and his look-a-likes are doing, you will not only survive but chances are you will also know when and how to "kill"— in self-defense – those ugly law enforcers who went overboard … without even firing a single shot.



Comment by Ryan Masters
Entered on:

Hope everyone  has now seen the information just released by PCSD revealing what kind of scum Guerena really was. You sure hitched your mule to the wrong wagon.

There's much more to be revealed about Jose's (and his family's) criminal ring, and his wife's lies will be exposed, too.

Bon voyage, amigos.



Comment by Ed Vallejo
Entered on:

Latest addition - OathKeeper Founder Stewart Rhodes is interviewed by Tucson TV just before the March:


Join us on our Social Networks:


Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network: