|
Dan
|
 |
« on: October 13, 2009, 05:56:28 PM » |
|
When did the federal government gain the powers to decide on state policies?
When did they gain the power to force everyone to get health insurance?
When did they gain the power to extend the unemployment benefits of only a few?
When did they gain the power to tax who they want at whatever rate they want?
When did they gain the power to wage a war without declaring a war?
When did they gain the power to remove my freedom of speech?
When did they gain the power to remove my freedom of assembly?
When did they gain the power to take my money?
When did they gain the power to search my house without a warrent?
When did they gain the power to arrest me without charging me?
When did they gain the power to fly me to another country and question me without telling me why or my family where I am?
When did they gain the power to tell the world what they will or will not follow?
When did they gain the power to make the rest of the free world hate us?
When did they gain the power to inject me with a chemical of their choosing?
When did they gain the power to force my children to get injections in order to get an education I am already paying for?
When did they gain the power to take the money my children are going to pay in taxes and give it to corporate executives in hand outs for a job poorly done?
When did they gain the power to levy an illegal tax on the people?
When did they gain the power to decide if a gay can to marry a gay?
When did they gain the power to decide if you can have an abortion regardless of the circumstances?
and most importantly
When did they gain the power to make me afraid to ask these questions?
We, the people, are the rightful masters of both congress and the courts - not to overthrow the constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the constitution. - Abe Lincoln
Dan
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
My freedom is more important than your good idea.
When only cops have guns, it's called a "police state". - Claire Wolfe
You know why there's a Second Amendment? In case the government fails to follow the first one. -Rush Limbaugh
The militia is the dread of tyrants and the guard of freeme
|
|
|
|
PullMyFinger
Guest
|
|
« Reply #1 on: October 13, 2009, 05:58:21 PM » |
|
When we weren't looking  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Freeski
|
|
« Reply #2 on: October 13, 2009, 06:11:25 PM » |
|
When we weren't looking zactly |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
|
|
|
maim
|
|
« Reply #3 on: October 13, 2009, 06:19:19 PM » |
|
they got it when the actual government of america went bankrupt after the civil war. 'the federal government' is the corporation acting as receiver for the defunct united states government. thats why the constitution doesnt apply to anyone. you waived your rights when you register your social security number,drivers liscense,birth certificate, etc. all under the corporation of the federal government. the actual government hasnt existed in 100 years, just the corporation that took over when it went into receivership. you arent citizens of the country of the united states of america, you are employees of the corporation of america. the constitution only applies to citizens of a country, not employees of a corporation.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Freeski
|
|
« Reply #4 on: October 13, 2009, 06:29:43 PM » |
|
they got it when the actual government of america went bankrupt after the civil war. 'the federal government' is the corporation acting as receiver for the defunct united states government. thats why the constitution doesnt apply to anyone. you waived your rights when you register your social security number,drivers liscense,birth certificate, etc. all under the corporation of the federal government. the actual government hasnt existed in 100 years, just the corporation that took over when it went into receivership. you arent citizens of the country of the united states of america, you are employees of the corporation of america. the constitution only applies to citizens of a country, not employees of a corporation.
Then who are citizens of America? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
|
|
|
GhostofTsenzei
|
|
« Reply #5 on: October 13, 2009, 06:32:42 PM » |
|
they got it when the actual government of america went bankrupt after the civil war. 'the federal government' is the corporation acting as receiver for the defunct united states government. thats why the constitution doesnt apply to anyone. you waived your rights when you register your social security number,drivers liscense,birth certificate, etc. all under the corporation of the federal government. the actual government hasnt existed in 100 years, just the corporation that took over when it went into receivership. you arent citizens of the country of the united states of america, you are employees of the corporation of america. the constitution only applies to citizens of a country, not employees of a corporation.
Do you have any documentation showing the current Federal Government being a corporation? I would find that interesting reading. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
There is no "gray" when it comes to what is good or evil, it is always black and white. People have the potential to be as evil as Hitler, or as good as Gandhi or MLK Jr. However, most people are more like zebras.
|
|
|
|
maim
|
|
« Reply #6 on: October 13, 2009, 06:33:20 PM » |
|
there arent any. there is no country to be a citizen of. the corporation, as receiver, has taken possession of all properties, the land, buildings and people.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Freeski
|
|
« Reply #7 on: October 13, 2009, 06:39:10 PM » |
|
there arent any. there is no country to be a citizen of. the corporation, as receiver, has taken possession of all properties, the land, buildings and people.
This is a fascinating topic. I'm sure you're familiar with Menard up in Canada? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
|
|
|
vcif
|
|
« Reply #8 on: October 13, 2009, 06:41:58 PM » |
|
September 17, 1787 http://www.amazon.com/Hologram-Liberty-Constitutions-Shocking-Government/dp/1888766034The Constitution was specifically and purposefully written to centralize power in the general government. Ambiguities and changes in language from the Articles of Confederation were purposely inserted/deleted to allow the unimpeded growth of the central government. If you find these statements distasteful, then you likely have not studied the history. All of this is admitted. Of course, they use fanciful phraseology like "an energetic central government" and "fixing the defects of the Articles". I don't want to start a Lincoln debate. However, Dan, I think you need to do some thinking and reading about Lincoln. For example, was the Constitution a voluntary agreement? If so, then then how is a voluntary union "preserved" though force? Would a man who beats his wife and threatens harm to their children be justified in saying that he is preserving their marriage? That is a nice quote from Lincoln except for the fact that he was the biggest perverter of the rule of law. Got Habeas Corpus? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
aLLyOuRbAsE
|
|
« Reply #10 on: October 13, 2009, 06:48:12 PM » |
|
This is a fascinating topic. I'm sure you're familiar with Menard up in Canada?
http://tpuc.org/ |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Southern Patriot
|
|
« Reply #11 on: October 13, 2009, 06:49:09 PM » |
|
They didn't! The apathetic people of this country did nothing to stop it. Allowing a government to do things like this doesn't mean that they have the power to do it. It would take massive non-compliance on the majority's part. Check out my you-tube channel for ideas.
My house is paid for. I challenge the tax assessment every single year! It is your right even though no one does it.
I get my water from a well.
I am working on making my own electricity. My bill is under $100 a month right now. I heat my house with wood and cool it with fans.
I grow and hunt my own food.
I called my ISP and got my bill cut in half when I saw they were offering a promotion to new customers.
I use a magic jack and pay $19 a year for phone service.
I trade with my neighbors and on Craigslist.
I don't shop at Wal-Mart. f**k WAL-MART!!!!
I only make $700 a month and am comfortable. We do not have all the material bullshit we would like but we are happy.
I feel it is my duty as an American to pay the very least amount of taxes I am legally allowed to do. As a matter of fact, I get a big return every year because I have two kids and I don't make a lot of money.
I take all of my extra cash since I have virtually no bills and buy physical silver bullion.
I prefer to trade in silver when someone agrees to it.
These are the things that everyone must do to bring this corrupt system to its' knees.
I saw a quote from the social viability guy and took it to heart. "Don't fight the system...Replace it!!" I don't agree with his "plan" but I like the statement. I say don't just replace it....Starve it, watch it die, and forget it ever existed. I vote libertarian. Not that I think my vote counts.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
maim
|
|
« Reply #12 on: October 13, 2009, 06:54:49 PM » |
|
America as a Country Doesnt Exist
Saturday, 18 July 2009 21:28
36 Facts about Amerika: And You thought you were fre
« on: Today at 03:28:53 PM »
1. The IRS is not a U.S. Government Agency. It is an Agency of the IMF. (Diversified Metal Products v. IRS et al. CV-93-405E-EJE U.S.D.C.D.I., Public Law 94-564, Senate Report 94-1148 pg. 5967, Reorganization Plan No. 26, Public Law 102-391.)
2. The IMF is an Agency of the UN. (Blacks Law Dictionary 6th Ed. Pg. 816)
3. The U.S. Has not had a Treasury since 1921. (41 Stat. Ch.214 pg. 654)
4. The U.S. Treasury is now the IMF. (Presidential Documents Volume 29-No.4 pg. 113, 22 U.S.C. 285-288)
5. The United States does not have any employees because there is no longer a United States. No more reorganizations. After over 200 years of operating under bankruptcy its finally over. (Executive Order 12803) Do not personate one of the creditors or share holders or you will go to Prison.18 U.S.C. 914
6. The FCC, CIA, FBI, NASA and all of the other alphabet gangs were never part of the United States government. Even though the "US Government" held shares of stock in the various Agencies. (U.S. V. Strang , 254 US 491, Lewis v. US, 680 F.2d, 1239)
7. Social Security Numbers are issued by the UN through the IMF. The Application for a Social Security Number is the SS5 form. The Department of the Treasury (IMF) issues the SS5 not the Social Security Administration. The new SS5 forms do not state who or what publishes them, the earlier SS5 forms state that they are Department of the Treasury forms. You can get a copy of the SS5 you filled out by sending form SSA-L996 to the SS Administration. (20 CFR chapter 111, subpart B 422.103 (b) (2) (2) Read the cites above)
8. There are no Judicial courts in America and there has not been since 1789. Judges do not enforce Statutes and Codes. Executive Administrators enforce Statutes and Codes. (FRC v. GE 281 US 464, Keller v. PE 261 US 428, 1 Stat. 138-178)
9. There have not been any Judges in America since 1789. There have just been Administrators. (FRC v. GE 281 US 464, Keller v. PE 261 US 428 1Stat. 138-178) 10. According to the GATT you must have a Social Security number. House Report (103-826)
11. We have One World Government, One World Law and a One World Monetary System. (Get the Disks)
12. The UN is a One World Super Government. (Get the Disks)
13. No one on this planet has ever been free. This planet is a Slave Colony. There has always been a One World Government. It is just that now it is much better organized and has changed its name as of 1945 to the United Nations. (Get the Disks)
14. New York City is defined in the Federal Regulations as the United Nations. Rudolph Gulliani stated on C-Span that "New York City was the capital of the World" and he was correct. (20 CFR chapter 111, subpart B 422.103 (b) (2) (2)
15. Social Security is not insurance or a contract, nor is there a Trust Fund. (Helvering v. Davis 301 US 619, Steward Co. V. Davis 301 US 548.)
16. Your Social Security check comes directly from the IMF which is an Agency of the UN. (Look at it if you receive one. It should have written on the top left United States Treasury.)
17. You own no property, slaves can't own property. Read the Deed to the property that you think is yours. You are listed as a Tenant. (Senate Document 43, 73rd Congress 1st Session)
18. The most powerful court in America is not the United States Supreme Court but, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. (42 Pa.C.S.A. 502)
19. The Revolutionary War was a fraud. See (22, 23 and 24)
20. The King of England financially backed both sides of the Revolutionary war. (Treaty at Versailles July 16, 1782, Treaty of Peace 8 Stat 80)
21. You can not use the Constitution to defend yourself because you are not a party to it. (Padelford Fay & Co. v. The Mayor and Alderman of The City of Savannah 14 Georgia 438, 520)
22. America is a British Colony. (THE UNITED STATES IS A CORPORATION, NOT A LAND MASS AND IT EXISTED BEFORE THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR AND THE BRITISH TROOPS DID NOT LEAVE UNTIL 1796.) Respublica v. Sweers 1 Dallas 43, Treaty of Commerce 8 Stat 116, The Society for Propagating the Gospel, &c. V. New Haven 8 Wheat 464, Treaty of Peace 8 Stat 80, IRS Publication 6209, Articles of Association October 20, 1774.)
23. Britain is owned by the Vatican. (Treaty of 1213)
24. The Pope can abolish any law in the United States. (Elements of Ecclesiastical Law Vol.1 53-54)
25. A 1040 form is for tribute paid to Britain. (IRS Publication 6209)
26. The Pope claims to own the entire planet through the laws of conquest and discovery. (Papal Bulls of 1455 and 1493)
27. The Pope has ordered the genocide and enslavement of millions of people.(Papal Bulls of 1455 and 1493)
28. The Popes laws are obligatory on everyone. (Bened. XIV., De Syn. Dioec, lib, ix., c. vii., n. 4. Prati, 1844)(Syllabus, prop 28, 29, 44)
29. We are slaves and own absolutely nothing not even what we think are our children.(Tillman v. Roberts 108 So. 62, Van Koten v. Van Koten 154 N.E. 146, Senate Document 43 & 73rd Congress 1st Session, Wynehammer v. People 13 N.Y. REP 378, 481)
30. Military Dictator George Washington divided the States (Estates) into Districts. (Messages and papers of the Presidents Vo 1, pg. 99. Webster's 1828 dictionary for definition of Estate.)
31." The People" does not include you and me. (Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore. 32 U.S. 243)
32. The United States Government was not founded upon Christianity. (Treaty of Tripoli 8 Stat 154.)
33. It is not the duty of the police to protect you. Their job is to protect the Corporation and arrest code breakers. Sapp v. Tallahasee, 348 So. 2nd. 363, Reiff v. City of Philadelphia, 477 F.Supp. 1262, Lynch v. N.C. Dept of Justice 376 S.E. 2nd. 247.
34. Everything in the "United States" is For Sale: roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, water, prisons airports etc. I wonder who bought Klamath lake. Did anyone take the time to check? (Executive Order 12803)
35. We are Human capital. (Executive Order 13037)
36. The UN has financed the operations of the United States government for over 50 years and now owns every man, women and child in America. The UN also holds all of the Land in America in Fee
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Southern Patriot
|
|
« Reply #13 on: October 13, 2009, 06:58:01 PM » |
|
Thanks for posting that MAIM...I was looking for it and couldn't find it. It got posted here a while back and I have been looking for it since my last post.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
trailhound
|
|
« Reply #14 on: October 13, 2009, 06:58:37 PM » |
|
Freeski wrote Then who are citizens of America? ooh man I know...that cuts  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 "Do not let your hatred of a people incite you to aggression." Qur'an 5:2 At the heart of that Western freedom and democracy is the belief that the individual man, the child of God, is the touchstone of value..." -RFK |
|
|
|
Southern Patriot
|
|
« Reply #15 on: October 13, 2009, 07:05:07 PM » |
|
They didn't! The apathetic people of this country did nothing to stop it. Allowing a government to do things like this doesn't mean that they have the power to do it. It would take massive non-compliance on the majority's part. Check out my you-tube channel for ideas.
My house is paid for. I challenge the tax assessment every single year! It is your right even though no one does it.
I get my water from a well.
I am working on making my own electricity. My bill is under $100 a month right now. I heat my house with wood and cool it with fans.
I grow and hunt my own food.
I called my ISP and got my bill cut in half when I saw they were offering a promotion to new customers.
I use a magic jack and pay $19 a year for phone service.
I trade with my neighbors and on Craigslist.
I don't shop at Wal-Mart. f**k WAL-MART!!!!
I only make $700 a month and am comfortable. We do not have all the material bullshit we would like but we are happy.
I feel it is my duty as an American to pay the very least amount of taxes I am legally allowed to do. As a matter of fact, I get a big return every year because I have two kids and I don't make a lot of money.
I take all of my extra cash since I have virtually no bills and buy physical silver bullion.
I prefer to trade in silver when someone agrees to it.
These are the things that everyone must do to bring this corrupt system to its' knees.
I saw a quote from the social viability guy and took it to heart. "Don't fight the system...Replace it!!" I don't agree with his "plan" but I like the statement. I say don't just replace it....Starve it, watch it die, and forget it ever existed. I vote libertarian. Not that I think my vote counts.
Oh yeah....I don't have a bank account, credit card, line of credit, or loan on anything either. I also don't buy new cars. Why pay for something that won't be worth even half what you paid by the time you pay it off? I don't like to pay interest on anything either. I bought my house on a no interest owner finance contract. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Freeski
|
|
« Reply #16 on: October 13, 2009, 07:13:04 PM » |
|
Very nice site! "The truth is simple, mankind makes it complicated." |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
|
|
|
Freeski
|
|
« Reply #17 on: October 13, 2009, 07:15:20 PM » |
|
They didn't! The apathetic people of this country did nothing to stop it. Allowing a government to do things like this doesn't mean that they have the power to do it. It would take massive non-compliance on the majority's part. Check out my you-tube channel for ideas.
My house is paid for. I challenge the tax assessment every single year! It is your right even though no one does it.
I get my water from a well.
I am working on making my own electricity. My bill is under $100 a month right now. I heat my house with wood and cool it with fans.
I grow and hunt my own food.
I called my ISP and got my bill cut in half when I saw they were offering a promotion to new customers.
I use a magic jack and pay $19 a year for phone service.
I trade with my neighbors and on Craigslist.
I don't shop at Wal-Mart. f**k WAL-MART!!!!
I only make $700 a month and am comfortable. We do not have all the material bullshit we would like but we are happy.
I feel it is my duty as an American to pay the very least amount of taxes I am legally allowed to do. As a matter of fact, I get a big return every year because I have two kids and I don't make a lot of money.
I take all of my extra cash since I have virtually no bills and buy physical silver bullion.
I prefer to trade in silver when someone agrees to it.
These are the things that everyone must do to bring this corrupt system to its' knees.
I saw a quote from the social viability guy and took it to heart. "Don't fight the system...Replace it!!" I don't agree with his "plan" but I like the statement. I say don't just replace it....Starve it, watch it die, and forget it ever existed. I vote libertarian. Not that I think my vote counts.
Amazing stuff! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
|
|
|
maim
|
|
« Reply #18 on: October 13, 2009, 08:34:33 PM » |
|
no one is bound to follow any of the 'laws' which the corporation lays down. its voluntary, just say no. we are all employees of the corporation, just quit. stop applying for licenses, social security. when you register your child for a birth certificate, you are actually transferring ownership of your child to the corporation. you are 'permitted' to raise them, unless of course you break one of the corporations rules, then they cps ya.
when you register for anything, you are voluntaringly waiving your constitutional rights and protections.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Freeski
|
|
« Reply #19 on: October 13, 2009, 08:41:09 PM » |
|
no one is bound to follow any of the 'laws' which the corporation lays down. its voluntary, just say no. we are all employees of the corporation, just quit. stop applying for licenses, social security. when you register your child for a birth certificate, you are actually transferring ownership of your child to the corporation. you are 'permitted' to raise them, unless of course you break one of the corporations rules, then they cps ya.
when you register for anything, you are voluntaringly waiving your constitutional rights and protections.
Voluntarism is the key! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
|
|
|
EarthAngel_2012
|
|
« Reply #20 on: October 13, 2009, 08:45:35 PM » |
|
While we were sleepin, they came and took it all...it was an inside job..they well connected. so suck it up as usual.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The Hegalian Dialect:Control thru duality. Guide and manage a conflict and chaos so both sides have the same destination(order). It symbolizes a pyramid meanig left thesis vs. right thesis =middle thesis. 1 leads to 2 leads to 3.The 3rd is possible because of and NOT insipit of the 2 opposing sides.
|
|
|
|
Lilly Bighorn
|
|
« Reply #21 on: October 13, 2009, 08:47:33 PM » |
|
When did the federal government gain the powers to decide on state policies? 1942, when the supreme court decided wickard v. fillburn, 317 u.s. 111. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Jesus said, "Blessed is the lion which becomes man when consumed by man; and cursed is the man whom the lion consumes, and the lion becomes man."
|
|
|
|
Dan
|
|
« Reply #22 on: October 14, 2009, 06:45:14 AM » |
|
September 17, 1787 http://www.amazon.com/Hologram-Liberty-Constitutions-Shocking-Government/dp/1888766034The Constitution was specifically and purposefully written to centralize power in the general government. Ambiguities and changes in language from the Articles of Confederation were purposely inserted/deleted to allow the unimpeded growth of the central government. If you find these statements distasteful, then you likely have not studied the history. All of this is admitted. Of course, they use fanciful phraseology like "an energetic central government" and "fixing the defects of the Articles". I don't want to start a Lincoln debate. However, Dan, I think you need to do some thinking and reading about Lincoln. For example, was the Constitution a voluntary agreement? If so, then then how is a voluntary union "preserved" though force? Would a man who beats his wife and threatens harm to their children be justified in saying that he is preserving their marriage? That is a nice quote from Lincoln except for the fact that he was the biggest perverter of the rule of law. Got Habeas Corpus? You can easily make the same argument about any person that was ever quoted. No one lives up to the hype that they are lifted to in the history books. The point is that the civil war was more about the protection of the union than forcing the southern states to remain. I read that if the south had left, the spanish army was standing by to overtake it from the south and that the british army was standing by to the north to overtake the northern states. the only way to protect the freedoms of both was to forbid the south from leaving. your right, I have not spent countless hours researching this info, but it sounds feasible from the bankers standpoint and what we know about them in our history. And it also explains, or at least can explain, the stuggles that lincoln had and his murder. remember, most people say that JFK was a great pres, even though he was a cheating husband with corrupt family dating way back. I like the quote though and to me that is what matters most. not the entire life history of the person who said it. my opinion though. Dan |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
My freedom is more important than your good idea.
When only cops have guns, it's called a "police state". - Claire Wolfe
You know why there's a Second Amendment? In case the government fails to follow the first one. -Rush Limbaugh
The militia is the dread of tyrants and the guard of freeme
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nailer
|
|
« Reply #24 on: October 14, 2009, 07:13:08 AM » |
|
when lazy americans were busy watching american idol and sucking the equity $$$$ out of their homes buying the newest flat screen tv or a gadget filled SUV or hummer playing keep up with the neighbor.
I at times am ashamed of our fellow citizens as they will not revolt against tyranny because they are afraid of having to give up the starbucks coffee, fastfood, and face reality.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I am a realist that is slightly conservative yet I have some republican demeanor that can turn democrat when I feel the urge to flip independant.
The truth shall set you free, if not a 45ACP round will do the trick.. HEHE
|
|
|
|
simpson7777
|
|
« Reply #25 on: October 14, 2009, 07:24:07 AM » |
|
America as a Country Doesnt Exist
Saturday, 18 July 2009 21:28
36 Facts about Amerika: And You thought you were fre
« on: Today at 03:28:53 PM »
1. The IRS is not a U.S. Government Agency. It is an Agency of the IMF. (Diversified Metal Products v. IRS et al. CV-93-405E-EJE U.S.D.C.D.I., Public Law 94-564, Senate Report 94-1148 pg. 5967, Reorganization Plan No. 26, Public Law 102-391.)
2. The IMF is an Agency of the UN. (Blacks Law Dictionary 6th Ed. Pg. 816)
3. The U.S. Has not had a Treasury since 1921. (41 Stat. Ch.214 pg. 654)
4. The U.S. Treasury is now the IMF. (Presidential Documents Volume 29-No.4 pg. 113, 22 U.S.C. 285-288)
5. The United States does not have any employees because there is no longer a United States. No more reorganizations. After over 200 years of operating under bankruptcy its finally over. (Executive Order 12803) Do not personate one of the creditors or share holders or you will go to Prison.18 U.S.C. 914
6. The FCC, CIA, FBI, NASA and all of the other alphabet gangs were never part of the United States government. Even though the "US Government" held shares of stock in the various Agencies. (U.S. V. Strang , 254 US 491, Lewis v. US, 680 F.2d, 1239)
7. Social Security Numbers are issued by the UN through the IMF. The Application for a Social Security Number is the SS5 form. The Department of the Treasury (IMF) issues the SS5 not the Social Security Administration. The new SS5 forms do not state who or what publishes them, the earlier SS5 forms state that they are Department of the Treasury forms. You can get a copy of the SS5 you filled out by sending form SSA-L996 to the SS Administration. (20 CFR chapter 111, subpart B 422.103 (b) (2) (2) Read the cites above)
8. There are no Judicial courts in America and there has not been since 1789. Judges do not enforce Statutes and Codes. Executive Administrators enforce Statutes and Codes. (FRC v. GE 281 US 464, Keller v. PE 261 US 428, 1 Stat. 138-178)
9. There have not been any Judges in America since 1789. There have just been Administrators. (FRC v. GE 281 US 464, Keller v. PE 261 US 428 1Stat. 138-178) 10. According to the GATT you must have a Social Security number. House Report (103-826)
11. We have One World Government, One World Law and a One World Monetary System. (Get the Disks)
12. The UN is a One World Super Government. (Get the Disks)
13. No one on this planet has ever been free. This planet is a Slave Colony. There has always been a One World Government. It is just that now it is much better organized and has changed its name as of 1945 to the United Nations. (Get the Disks)
14. New York City is defined in the Federal Regulations as the United Nations. Rudolph Gulliani stated on C-Span that "New York City was the capital of the World" and he was correct. (20 CFR chapter 111, subpart B 422.103 (b) (2) (2)
15. Social Security is not insurance or a contract, nor is there a Trust Fund. (Helvering v. Davis 301 US 619, Steward Co. V. Davis 301 US 548.)
16. Your Social Security check comes directly from the IMF which is an Agency of the UN. (Look at it if you receive one. It should have written on the top left United States Treasury.)
17. You own no property, slaves can't own property. Read the Deed to the property that you think is yours. You are listed as a Tenant. (Senate Document 43, 73rd Congress 1st Session)
18. The most powerful court in America is not the United States Supreme Court but, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. (42 Pa.C.S.A. 502)
19. The Revolutionary War was a fraud. See (22, 23 and 24)
20. The King of England financially backed both sides of the Revolutionary war. (Treaty at Versailles July 16, 1782, Treaty of Peace 8 Stat 80)
21. You can not use the Constitution to defend yourself because you are not a party to it. (Padelford Fay & Co. v. The Mayor and Alderman of The City of Savannah 14 Georgia 438, 520)
22. America is a British Colony. (THE UNITED STATES IS A CORPORATION, NOT A LAND MASS AND IT EXISTED BEFORE THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR AND THE BRITISH TROOPS DID NOT LEAVE UNTIL 1796.) Respublica v. Sweers 1 Dallas 43, Treaty of Commerce 8 Stat 116, The Society for Propagating the Gospel, &c. V. New Haven 8 Wheat 464, Treaty of Peace 8 Stat 80, IRS Publication 6209, Articles of Association October 20, 1774.)
23. Britain is owned by the Vatican. (Treaty of 1213)
24. The Pope can abolish any law in the United States. (Elements of Ecclesiastical Law Vol.1 53-54)
25. A 1040 form is for tribute paid to Britain. (IRS Publication 6209)
26. The Pope claims to own the entire planet through the laws of conquest and discovery. (Papal Bulls of 1455 and 1493)
27. The Pope has ordered the genocide and enslavement of millions of people.(Papal Bulls of 1455 and 1493)
28. The Popes laws are obligatory on everyone. (Bened. XIV., De Syn. Dioec, lib, ix., c. vii., n. 4. Prati, 1844)(Syllabus, prop 28, 29, 44)
29. We are slaves and own absolutely nothing not even what we think are our children.(Tillman v. Roberts 108 So. 62, Van Koten v. Van Koten 154 N.E. 146, Senate Document 43 & 73rd Congress 1st Session, Wynehammer v. People 13 N.Y. REP 378, 481)
30. Military Dictator George Washington divided the States (Estates) into Districts. (Messages and papers of the Presidents Vo 1, pg. 99. Webster's 1828 dictionary for definition of Estate.)
31." The People" does not include you and me. (Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore. 32 U.S. 243)
32. The United States Government was not founded upon Christianity. (Treaty of Tripoli 8 Stat 154.)
33. It is not the duty of the police to protect you. Their job is to protect the Corporation and arrest code breakers. Sapp v. Tallahasee, 348 So. 2nd. 363, Reiff v. City of Philadelphia, 477 F.Supp. 1262, Lynch v. N.C. Dept of Justice 376 S.E. 2nd. 247.
34. Everything in the "United States" is For Sale: roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, water, prisons airports etc. I wonder who bought Klamath lake. Did anyone take the time to check? (Executive Order 12803)
35. We are Human capital. (Executive Order 13037)
36. The UN has financed the operations of the United States government for over 50 years and now owns every man, women and child in America. The UN also holds all of the Land in America in Fee
This is the Info I was wating for thanks Maim for this info |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
rawiron1
|
|
« Reply #26 on: October 14, 2009, 07:39:18 AM » |
|
This is why I don't watch TV. Too distracting.
Jason
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Jason the Fed
|
|
|
|
johnnydeeper
|
|
« Reply #27 on: October 14, 2009, 08:43:25 AM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Shit don't just happen, shit takes time, shit takes effort!" Samuel L. Jackson
|
|
|
|
JTCoyoté
Guest
|
|
« Reply #28 on: December 03, 2009, 04:04:00 PM » |
|
September 17, 1787 http://www.amazon.com/Hologram-Liberty-Constitutions-Shocking-Government/dp/1888766034The Constitution was specifically and purposefully written to centralize power in the general government. Ambiguities and changes in language from the Articles of Confederation were purposely inserted/deleted to allow the unimpeded growth of the central government. If you find these statements distasteful, then you likely have not studied the history. All of this is admitted. Of course, they use fanciful phraseology like "an energetic central government" and "fixing the defects of the Articles". I don't want to start a Lincoln debate. However, Dan, I think you need to do some thinking and reading about Lincoln. For example, was the Constitution a voluntary agreement? If so, then then how is a voluntary union "preserved" though force? Would a man who beats his wife and threatens harm to their children be justified in saying that he is preserving their marriage? That is a nice quote from Lincoln except for the fact that he was the biggest perverter of the rule of law. Got Habeas Corpus? The Constitution For The United States Of America as FULLY RATIFIED on December 15th 1791, protects the people's unalienable Rights, and by the 9th and 10th Amendments, force any federal agent to behave... The Union is held together by contract and all it takes to work perfectly, is for the majority of the people to BE knowledgeably involved... --Oldyoti "If war is the continuation of politics by other means,
terrorism is the continuation of war by other means".
~Pat Buchanan --Where the Right Went Wrong-- |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Freeski
|
|
« Reply #29 on: December 03, 2009, 11:37:33 PM » |
|
The Constitution For The United States Of America as FULLY RATIFIED on December 15th 1791, protects the people's unalienable Rights, and by the 9th and 10th Amendments, force any federal agent to behave... The Union is held together by contract and all it takes to work perfectly, is for the majority of the people to BE knowledgeably involved...
--Oldyoti
"If war is the continuation of politics by other means,
terrorism is the continuation of war by other means".
~Pat Buchanan --Where the Right Went Wrong--
Can you please remind us of the difference between unalienable and inalienable? Thanks in advance. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
|
|
EvadingGrid
Toxophillite
Global Moderator
Member
 Offline
Posts: 10,702
Rat Catcher
|
|
« Reply #30 on: December 31, 2009, 03:48:17 AM » |
|
* EvadingGrid delivers a message UNALIENABLE.
The state of a thing or right which cannot be sold.
Things which are not in commerce, as public roads, are in their nature unalienable. Some things are unalienable, in consequence of particular provisions in the law forbidding their sale or transfer, as pensions granted by the government. The natural rights of life and liberty are UNALIENABLE. Bouviers Law Dictionary 1856 Edition
"Unalienable: incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred." Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1523:
You can not surrender, sell or transfer unalienable rights, they are a gift from the creator to the individual and can not under any circumstances be surrendered or taken. All individual's have unalienable rights.
Inalienable rights: Rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights. Morrison v. State, Mo. App., 252 S.W.2d 97, 101.
You can surrender, sell or transfer inalienable rights if you consent either actually or constructively. Inalienable rights are not inherent in man and can be alienated by government. Persons have inalienable rights. Most state constitutions recognize only inalienable rights.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
Men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,-'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;' and to 'secure,' not grant or create, these rights, governments are instituted. That property which a man has honestly acquired he retains full control of, subject to these limitations: First, that he shall not use it to his neighbor's injury, and that does not mean that he must use it for his neighbor's benefit; second, that if the devotes it to a public use, he gives to the public a right to control that use; and third, that whenever the public needs require, the public may take it upon payment of due compensation. BUDD v. PEOPLE OF STATE OF NEW YORK, 143 U.S. 517 (1892)
Among these unalienable rights, as proclaimed in that great document, is the right of men to pursue their happiness, by which is meant the right to pursue any lawful business or vocation, in any manner not inconsistent with the equal rights of others, which may increase their prosperity or develop their faculties, so as to give to them their highest enjoyment. The common business and callings of life, the ordinary trades and pursuits, which are innocuous in themselves, and have been followed in all communities from time immemorial, must therefore be free in this country to all alike upon the same conditions. The right to pursue them, without let or hinderance, except that which is applied to all persons of the same age, sex, and condition, is a distinguishing privilege of citizens of the United States, and an essential element of that freedom which they claim as their birthright. It has been well said that 'THE PROPERTY WHICH EVERY MAN HAS IN HIS OWN LABOR, AS IT IS THE ORIGINAL FOUNDATION OF ALL OTHER PROPERTY, SO IT IS THE MOST SACRED AND INVIOLABLE. The patrimony of the poor man lies in the strength and dexterity of his own hands, and to hinder his employing this strength and dexterity in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his neighbor, is a plain violation of this most sacred property. It is a manifest encroachment upon the just liberty both of the workman and of those who might be disposed to employ him. . . The right to follow any of the common occupations of life is an inalienable right, it was formulated as such under the phrase 'pursuit of happiness' in the declaration of independence, which commenced with the fundamental proposition that 'all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.' This right is a large ingredient in the civil liberty of the citizen. To deny it to all but a few favored individuals, by investing the latter with a monopoly, is to invade one of the fundamental privileges of the citizen, contrary not only to common right, but, as I think, to the express words of the constitution. It is what no legislature has a right to do; and no contract to that end can be binding on subsequent legislatures. . . BUTCHERS' UNION CO. v. CRESCENT CITY CO., 111 U.S. 746 (1884)
"Burlamaqui (Politic c. #, . 15) defines natural liberty as "the right which nature gives to all mankind of disposing of their persons and property after the manner they may judge most consonant to their happiness, on condition of their acting within the limits of the law of nature, and so as not to interfere with an equal exercise of the same rights by other men;" and therefore it has been justly said, that "absolute rights of individuals may be resolved into the right of personal security--the right of personal liberty--and the right to acquire and enjoy property. These rights have been justly considered and frequently declared by the people of this country to be natural, inherent, and unalienable." Potter's Dwarris, ch. 13, p. 429.
From these passages it is evident; that the right of acquiring and possessing property, and having it protected, is one of the natural, inherent, and unalienable rights of man. Men have a sense of property: Property is necessary to their subsistence, and correspondent to their natural wants and desires; its security was one of the objects, that induced them to unite in society. No man would become a member of a community, in which he could not enjoy the fruits of his honest labour and industry. . . The constitution expressly declares, that the right of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property is natural, inherent, and unalienable. It is a right not ex gratia from the legislature, but ex debito from the constitution. . . Where is the security, where the inviolability of property, if the legislature, by a private act, affecting particular persons ONLY, can take land from one citizen, who acquired it legally, and vest it in another? VANHORNE'S LESSEE v. DORRANCE, 2 U.S. 304 (1795)
("[T]he Due Process Clause protects [the unalienable liberty recognized in the Declaration of Independence] rather than the particular rights or privileges conferred by specific laws or regulations." SANDIN v. CONNER, ___ U.S. ___ (1995)
In the second article of the Declaration of Rights, which was made part of the late Constitution of Pennsylvania, it is declared: 'That all men have a natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God, according to the dictates of their own consciences and understanding; and that no man ought or of right can be compelled, to attend any religious worship, or erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any ministry, contrary to, or against, his own free will and consent; nor can any man, who acknowledges the being of a God, be justly deprived or abridged of any civil right as a citizen, on account of his religious sentiments, or peculiar mode of religious worship; and that no authority can, or ought to be, vested in, or assumed, by any power whatever, that shall, in any case, interfere with, or in any manner controul, the right of conscience in the free exercise of religious worship.' (Dec. of Rights, Art. 2.). . . (The Judge then read the 1st. 8th. and 11th articles of the Declaration of Rights; and the 9th. and 46th sections of the Constitution of Pennsylvania. See 1 Vol. Dall. Edit. Penn. Laws p. 55. 6. 60. in the Appendix.) From these passages it is evident; that the right of acquiring and possessing property, and having it protected, is one of the natural, inherent, and unalienable rights of man. Men have a sense of property: Property is necessary to their subsistence, and correspondent to their natural wants and desires; its security was one of the objects, that induced them to unite in society. No man would become a member of a community, in which he could not enjoy the fruits of his honest labour and industry. The preservation of property then is a primary object of the social compact, and, by the late Constitution of Pennsylvania, was made a fundamental law. . . The constitution expressly declares, that the right of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property is natural, inherent, and unalienable. It is a right not ex gratia from the legislature, but ex debito from the constitution. VANHORNE'S LESSEE v. DORRANCE, 2 U.S. 304 (1795)
I had thought it self-evident that all men were endowed by their Creator with liberty as one of the cardinal unalienable rights. It is that basic freedom which the Due Process Clause protects, rather than the particular rights or privileges conferred by specific laws or regulations. . . It demeans the holding in Morrissey - more importantly it demeans the concept of liberty itself - to ascribe to that holding nothing more than a protection of an interest that the State has created through its own prison regulations. For if the inmate's protected liberty interests are no greater than the State chooses to allow, he is really little more than the slave described in the 19th century cases. I think it clear that even the inmate retains an unalienable interest in liberty - at the very minimum the right to be treated with dignity - which the Constitution may never ignore. MEACHUM v. FANO, 427 U.S. 215 (1976)
All commissions (regardless of their form, or by whom issued) contain, impliedly, the constitutional reservation, that the people at any time have the right, through their representatives, to alter, reform, or abolish the office, as they may alter, if they choose, the whole form of government. In our magna charta it is proclaimed (2d section of the Bill of Rights, under the 9th Article of the Constitution of Pennsylvania), that 'all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; for the advancement of these ends they have at all times an unalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform, or abolish their government, in such manner as they may think proper.' It has been well said, by one of the ablest judges of the age, that 'a constitution is not to receive a technical construction, like a common law instrument or a statute. It is to be interpreted so as to carry out the great principles of the government, not to defeat them.' Per Gibson, C. J., in Commonwealth v. Clark, 7 Watts & S. (Pa.), 133. BUTLER v. COM. OF PENNSYLVANIA, 51 U.S. 402 (1850)
The rights of life and personal liberty are natural rights of man. 'To secure these rights,' says the Declaration of Independence, 'governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.' The very highest duty of the States, when they entered into the Union under the Constitution, was to protect all persons within their boundaries in the enjoyment of these 'unalienable rights with which they were endowed by their Creator.' Sovereignty, for this purpose, rests alone with the States. It is no more the duty or within the power of the United States to punish for a conspiracy to falsely imprison or murder within a State, than it would be to punish for false imprisonment or murder itself. U S v. CRUIKSHANK, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)
". . . The question presented is not whether the United States has the power to condemn and appropriate this property of the Monongahela Company, for that is conceded, but how much it must pay as compensation therefor. Obviously, this question, as all others which run along the line of the extent of the protection the individual has under the Constitution against the demands of the government, is of importance; for in any society the fulness and sufficiency of the securities which surround the individual in the use and enjoyment of his property constitute one of the most certain tests of the character and value of the government. The first ten amendments to the Constitution, adopted as they were soon after the adoption of the Constitution, are in the nature of a bill of rights, and were adopted in order to quiet the apprehension of many, that without some such declaration of rights the government would assume, and might be held to possess, the power to trespass upon those rights of persons and property which by the Declaration of Independence were affirmed to be unalienable rights. UNITED STATES v. TWIN CITY POWER CO., 350 U.S. 222 (1956)
'By the common law, the king as parens patriae owned the soil under all the waters of all navigable rivers or arms of the sea where the tide regularly ebbs and flows, including the shore or bank to high- water mark. ... He held these rights, not for his own benefit, but for the benefit of his subjects at large, who were entitled to the free use of the sea, and all tide waters, for the purposes of navigation, fishing, etc., subject to such regulations and restrictions as the crown or the Parliament might prescribe. By Magna Charta, and many subsequent statutes, the powers of the king are limited, and he cannot now deprive his subjects of these rights by granting the public navigable waters to individuals. But there can be no doubt of the right of Parliament in England, or the Legislature of this state, to make such grants, when they do not interfere with the vested rights of particular individuals. The right to navigate the public waters of the state and to fish therein, and the right to use the public highways, are all public rights belonging to the people at large. They are not the private unalienable rights of each individual. Hence the Legislature as the representatives of the public may restrict and regulate the exercise of those rights in such manner as may be deemed most beneficial to the public at large: Provided they do not interfere with vested rights which have been granted to individuals.' APPLEBY v. CITY OF NEW YORK, 271 U.S. 364 (1926)
I Elliot's Debates on the Federal Constitution (1876) 319 et seq. In ratifying the Constitution the following
declarations were made: New Hampshire, p. 326, 'XI. Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or to infringe the rights of conscience.' Virginia, p. 327, '... no right, of any denomination, can be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified, by the Congress, by the Senate or House of Representatives, acting in any capacity, by the President, or any department or officer of the United States, except in those instances in which power is given by the Constitution for those purposes; and that among other essential rights, the liberty of conscience, and of the press, cannot be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified, by any authority of the United States.' New York, p. 328, 'That the freedom of the press ought not to be violated or restrained.' After the submission of the amendments, Rhode Island ratified and declared, pp. 334, 335, 'IV. That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, and not by force and violence; and therefore all men have a natural, equal, and unalienable right to the exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience; and that no particular religious sect or society ought to be favored or established, by law, in preference to others. ... XVI. That the people have a right to freedom of speech, and of writing and publishing their sentiments. That freedom of the press is one of the greatest bulwarks of liberty, and ought not to be violated.' JONES v. CITY OF OPELIKA, 319 U.S. 105 (1943)
As to the objections made on the other side to our interpretation of the compact, that it impugns the right to the pursuit of happiness, which is inherent in every society of men, and is incompatible with these unalienable rights of sovereignty and of self-government, which every independent State must possess, the answer is obvious: that no people has a right to pursue its own happiness to the injury of others, for whose protection solemn compacts, like the present, have been made. It is a trite maxim, that man gives up a part of his natural liberty when he enters into civil society, as the price of the blessings of that state: and it may be said, with truth, this liberty is well exchanged for the advantages which flow from law and justice. GREEN v. BIDDLE, 21 U.S. 1 (1821)
This court said, in the case of The Bank of Columbia v. Okely (4 Wheat. 235), in speaking of a summary proceeding given by the charter of that bank for the collection of its debts: 'It is the remedy, and not the right, and as such we have no doubt of its being subject to the will of Congress. The forms of administering justice, and the duties and powers of courts as incident to the exercise of a branch of sovereign power, must ever be subject to legislative will, and the power over them is unalienable, so as to bind subsequent legislatures.' And in Young v. The Bank of Alexandria (4 Cranch, 397), Mr. Chief Justice Marshall says: 'There is a difference between those rights on which the validity of the transactions of the corporation depends, which must adhere to those transactions everywhere, and those peculiar remedies which may be bestowed on it. The first are of general obligation; the last, from their nature, can only be exercised in those courts which the power making the grant can regulate.' See also The Commonwealth v. The Delaware & Hudson Canal Co. et al., 43 Pa. St. 227; State of Maryland v. Northern Central Railroad Co., 18 Md. 193; Colby v. Dennis, 36 Me. 1; Gowan v. Penobscot Railroad Co., 44 id. 140. U.S. v. UNION PAC. R. CO., 98 U.S. 569 (1878)
It is significant that the guarantee of freedom of speech and press falls between the religious guarantees and the guarantee of the right to petition for redress of grievances in the text of the First Amendment, the principles of which are carried to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment. It partakes of the nature of both, for it is as much a guarantee to individuals of their personal right to make their thoughts public and put them before the community, see Holt, Of the Liberty of the Press, in Nelson, Freedom of the Press from Hamilton to the Warren Court 18-19, as it is a social necessity required for the "maintenance of our political system and an open society." Time, Inc. v. Hill, supra, at 389. It is because of the personal nature
of this right that we have rejected all manner of prior restraint on publication, Near v. Minnesota, 283 U.S. 697, despite strong arguments that if the material was unprotected the time of suppression was immaterial. Pound, Equitable Relief Against Defamation and Injuries to Personality, 29 Harv. L. Rev. 640. The dissemination of the individual's opinions on matters of public interest is for us, in the historic words of the Declaration of Independence, an "unalienable right" that "governments are instituted among men to secure." History shows us that the Founders were not always convinced that unlimited discussion of public issues would be "for the benefit of all of us"13 but that they firmly adhered to the proposition that the "true liberty of the press" permitted "every man to publish his opinion." Respublica v. Oswald, 1 Dall. 319, 325 (Pa.). CURTIS PUBLISHING CO. v. BUTTS, 388 U.S. 130 (1967)
While the "meaning and scope of the First Amendment" must be read "in light of its history and the evils it was designed forever to suppress," Everson v. Board of Education, supra, at 14-15, this Court has also recognized that "this Nation's history has not been one of entirely sanitized separation between Church and State." Committee for Public Education & Religious Liberty v. Nyquist, supra, at 760. "The fact that the Founding Fathers believed devotedly that there was a God and that the unalienable rights of man were rooted in Him is clearly evidenced in their writings, from the Mayflower Compact to the Constitution itself." Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 213 (1963).5 The Court properly has noted "an unbroken history of official acknowledgment . . . of the role of religion in American life." Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S., at 674, and has recognized that these references to "our religious heritage" are constitutionally acceptable. Id., at 677. EDWARDS v. AGUILLARD, 482 U.S. 578 (1987)
When the First Congress was debating the Bill of Rights, it was contended that there was no need separately to assert the right of assembly because it was subsumed in freedom of speech. Mr. Sedgwick of Massachusetts argued that inclusion of "assembly" among the enumerated rights would tend to make the Congress "appear trifling in the eyes of their constituents. . . ." If people freely converse together, they must assemble for that purpose; it is a self-evident, unalienable right which the people possess; it is certainly a thing that never would be called in question . . . ." 1 Annals of Cong. 731 (1789). Since the right existed independent of any written guarantee, Sedgwick went on to argue that if it were the drafting committee's purpose to protect all inherent rights of the people by listing them, "they might have gone into a very lengthy enumeration of rights," but this was unnecessary, he said, "in a Government where none of them were intended to be infringed." Id., at 732. Mr. Page of Virginia responded, however, that at times "such rights have been opposed," and that "people have . . . been prevented from assembling together on their lawful occasions": "[T]herefore it is well to guard against such stretches of authority, by inserting the privilege in the declaration of rights. If the people could be deprived of the power of assembling under any pretext whatsoever, they might be deprived of every other privilege contained in the clause." Ibid. The motion to strike "assembly" was defeated. Id., at 733. RICHMOND NEWSPAPERS, INC. v. VIRGINIA, 448 U.S. 555 (1980)
"Gentlemen, I have insisted, at great length, upon the origin of governments, and detailed the authorities which you have heard upon the subject, because I consider it to be not only an essential support, but the very foundation of the liberty of the press. If Mr. Burke be right in his principles of government, I admit that the press, in my sense of its freedom, ought not to be free, nor free in any sense at all; and that all addresses to the people upon the subjects of government, and all speculations of amendment, of what kind or nature soever, are illegal and criminal; since if the people have, with out possible re-call, delegated all their authorities, they have no jurisdiction to act, and therefore none to think or write upon such subjects; and it would be a libel to arraign government or any of its acts, before those who have no jurisdiction to correct them. But on the other hand . . . no legal argument can shake the freedom of the press in my sense of it, if I am supported in my doctrines concerning the great unalienable right of the people, to reform or to change their governments. It is because the liberty of the press resolves itself into this great issue, that it has been in every country the last liberty which subjects have been able to wrest from power. Other liberties are held under governments, but the liberty of opinion keeps governments themselves in due subjection to their duties." 1 Speeches of Lord Erskine 524-525 (J. High ed. 1876). HERBERT v. LANDO, 441 U.S. 153 (1979)
The denial of human rights was etched into the American Colonies' first attempts at establishing self-government. When the colonists determined to seek their independence from England, they drafted a unique document cataloguing their grievances against the King and proclaiming as "self-evident" that "all men are created equal" and are endowed "with certain unalienable Rights," including those to "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." The self-evident truths and the unalienable rights were intended, however, to apply only to white men. An earlier draft of the Declaration of Independence, submitted by Thomas Jefferson to the Continental Congress, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA REGENTS v. BAKKE, 438 U.S. 265 (1978)
The Declaration of Independence states the American creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." This ideal was not fully achieved with the adoption of our Constitution because of the hard and tragic reality of Negro slavery. The Constitution of the new Nation, while heralding liberty, in effect declared all men to be free and equal - except black men who were to be neither free nor equal. This inconsistency reflected a fundamental departure from the American creed, a departure which it took a tragic civil war to set right. With the adoption, however, of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution, freedom and equality were guaranteed expressly to all regardless "of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."1 United States v. Reese, 92 U.S. 214, 218. BELL v. MARYLAND, 378 U.S. 226 (1964)JT |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
KUHL
|
|
« Reply #31 on: December 31, 2009, 04:55:31 AM » |
|
--Oldyoti
Miss you, Brother!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
EvadingGrid
Toxophillite
Global Moderator
Member
Offline
Posts: 10,702
Rat Catcher
|
|
« Reply #32 on: December 31, 2009, 04:57:42 AM » |
|
--Oldyoti
Miss you, Brother!
He is busy at : http://propagandamatrix.com/forum/Come across and visit, the site is owned by The Watsons who write many of the Prison Planet Articles. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
