Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?

Author Topic: Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?  (Read 7709 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?
« on: February 16, 2011, 08:24:14 pm »
Equality before the law
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Equality before the law or equality under the law or legal egalitarianism is the principle under which each individual is subject to the same laws, with no individual or group having special legal privileges. No one is exempt or included more than another. Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that "All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law."

The phrase "Equality before the law" is the motto of the state of Nebraska and appears on its state seal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_before_the_law

------------------------------------------------------------------

Equal justice under law
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
The front of the Supreme Court Building, including the West Pediment."Equal justice under law" is a phrase engraved on the front of the United States Supreme Court building in Washington D.C. This phrase was apparently first written in 1915 by the architectural firm that designed the building. The phrase appears above the entrance to the courtroom of Waterbury City Hall, for which Cass Gilbert was the architect; Gilbert later designed the Supreme Court building, completed in 1932. The phrase is attributed in Waterbury City Hall to "C. Gilbert". Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes subsequently approved this inscription for the Supreme Court, as did the United States Supreme Court Building Commission which Hughes chaired.[1]

The words "Equal Justice Under Law" apparently paraphrase an earlier expression coined by Chief Justice Melville Fuller.[2] In the case of Caldwell v. Texas in 1891, Fuller wrote about the Fourteenth Amendment as follows:

By the Fourteenth Amendment the powers of the States in dealing with crime within their borders are not limited, but no State can deprive particular persons or classes of persons of equal and impartial justice under the law.[3]

Neither this entire sentence, nor even the last seven words, would have fit on a pediment or architrave of the U.S. Supreme Court building, which explains why the architects would have wanted to shorten them. In the years since Fuller wrote these words, the Supreme Court has decided that the Fourteenth Amendment, and especially its Due Process Clause, do limit the powers of the states in dealing with crime.

[edit] The Funeral Oration of Pericles
 
Bust of Pericles, Roman copy after a Greek original from ca. 431 BC The term "equal justice" dates back at least to the dawn of western civilization. In his funeral oration of 431 BC, the Athenian leader Pericles discussed this concept. Thus, Chief Justice Fuller was by no means writing on a clean slate when he referred to "equal and impartial justice under the law" in Caldwell v. Texas. There are several different English translations of the relevant passage in Pericles' funeral oration, three of which are quoted below.

Here is Pericles discussing "equal justice" according to the English translation by Richard Crawley in 1874:
 
Our constitution does not copy the laws of neighbouring states; we are rather a pattern to others than imitators ourselves. Its administration favours the many instead of the few; this is why it is called a democracy. If we look to the laws, they afford equal justice to all in their private differences; if no social standing, advancement in public life falls to reputation for capacity, class considerations not being allowed to interfere with merit; nor again does poverty bar the way, if a man is able to serve the state, he is not hindered by the obscurity of his condition. [4]

Here is Pericles discussing "equal justice" according to the English translation by Benjamin Jowett in 1881:
 
Our form of government does not enter into rivalry with the institutions of others. We do not copy our neighbours, but are an example to them. It is true that we are called a democracy, for the administration is in the hands of the many and not of the few. But while the law secures equal justice to all alike in their private disputes, the claim of excellence is also recognised; and when a citizen is in any way distinguished, he is preferred to the public service, not as a matter of privilege, but as the reward of merit. Neither is poverty a bar, but a man may benefit his country whatever be the obscurity of his condition.[5]

And here is Pericles discussing "equal justice" according to the English translation by Rex Warner in 1954:

Our form of government does not enter into rivalry with the institutions of others. Our government does not copy our neighbors', but is an example to them. It is true that we are called a democracy, for the administration is in the hands of the many and not of the few. But while there exists equal justice to all and alike in their private disputes, the claim of excellence is also recognized; and when a citizen is in any way distinguished, he is preferred to the public service, not as a matter of privilege, but as the reward of merit. Neither is poverty an obstacle, but a man may benefit his country whatever the obscurity of his condition.[6]

The funeral oration by Pericles was published in Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War, of which there are several other English translations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_justice_under_law

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, while the radical egalitarianism of the socialists and pseudo-socialist fascist-corporatists has undermined our very constitution and the rights an liberties enshrined therein, equal justice before the law is actually a necessary bulwark against the estblishment of hereditary and institutionalized privilege in the United States IMO.

I open it up to debate, though.

Is there really "equality under/before the law" or "equal justice under law" in the United States nowadays?  Why or why not?

Should there be?

What could be done to restore the vitality of that concept within our institutions, government, laws, judiciary etc.?

This is a serious philosophical question, please check all (over-the-top) sarcasm and cynicism (with a small "c") at the door.

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,510
Re: Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?
« Reply #1 on: February 16, 2011, 08:41:38 pm »
   
Obama awarded right to obstruct justice-protect Bush-Cheney from prosecution
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=201383.msg1199010#msg1199010

Good point!


Since when does anyone under our constitution have any "right" to obstruct justice?

Does this also impart to Obama bin Soetoro some "religious" permission to assign his minions rights to hijack and fly silver-painted green airplanes into buildings for his god?

A (valid) President has a "privilege" only to pardon a criminal, freeing him or her from prison or sentence after their conviction for a crime, that is it.

This isn't a judge, it's a joker. I've never read anything so patently and unequivocally wrong in all my life.

These criminals are using the NSA, CIA, FBI, Justice and State Debt Mafias to obstruct justice all over the planet!

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?
« Reply #2 on: February 16, 2011, 09:03:24 pm »
US Judge: Obama has the right to protect Bush-Cheney administration from prosecution for torture

Americans Spent Valentine's Day Thanking Spain for Prosecuting Bush Lawyers

by David Swanson
 
 
Global Research, February 14, 2011
WarIsACrime.org 


 


On Valentine's Day 2011, yet another U.S. judge agreed with yet another claim that President Obama has the right to protect members of the Bush-Cheney administration from prosecution for torture.

But a coalition of human rights groups spent the day visiting the Spanish Embassy in Washington, D.C., and Spanish consulates around the United States to share some love for a country that is working to prosecute former top Bush officials for torture.

The coalition thanking and encouraging Spain to enforce laws when the United States will not has gathered 8,400 signatures on a letter, a love letter of sorts, to the people of Spain, and has raised $6,000 so far for purchasing newspaper and street advertisements in Madrid.

The delegations that presented the letter on Monday to Spain's representatives in the United States reported that their visits seemed to be accepted in the spirit of friendship and gratitude in which they were made. Visits to Spanish diplomatic offices were made in Washington, D.C., New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, Boston, Miami, Dallas, and Phoenix.

Spanish media outlets, and Spanish-language U.S. outlets, are reporting widely on this effort, while the rest of the U.S. media, and even the blogosphere, could hardly be less interested.

At the Embassy of Spain in Washington, D.C., Ray McGovern and Ann Wright led a meeting with a Spanish diplomat, thanking and encouraging Spain to prosecute former Bush officials for torture on behalf of a large coalition. Ron Fisher reports that they gave the embassy personnel Valentine’s Day balloons and cookies.

In New York City, a delegation of a dozen New Yorkers gathered outside the Consulate General of Spain. They went upstairs together to the Consulate and delivered the letter, roses and a box of chocolate. They were interviewed by Univision and EFE.

Terry Rockefeller of September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows made this additional remark to me on the importance of what Spain is doing:

"I would add that in my communications with Iraqis who are working on the Justice for Fallujah campaign, these developments in Spain have been a tremendous inspiration to belief that international law can be a force for positive and nonviolent change."

In Chicago the delegation to the Spanish consulate included two Veterans for Peace, representatives from Psychologists for Social Responsibility, Catholic peace and justice activists, and representatives of Amnesty International and World Can't Wait.

Jay Becker reports:

"The vice consul at the Spanish consulate in Chicago met with us. We presented the 120-page petition with the picture of the billboard in Spanish on the cover and the letter to the Spanish people, signed by all of us.

"Ray Parrish from Vets for Peace read a short letter pointing out that Bradley Manning is being held in conditions amounting to torture (with no charges or conviction), while Wikileaks cables reveal real crimes committed by our government.

"Michael from PsySR conveyed the seriousness of the material CCR has compiled and urged the Spanish judiciary to take the lead the way they had in pursuing Pinochet of Chile. I read from the letter and underscored that President Obama and Eric Holder had acknowledged that torture has been committed by the US government but failed to prosecute and in fact pressured other countries not to pursue charges, which is a crime under international law.

The vice consul accepted the petition and letter, and flowers and chocolates presented by Chris and Mary Fogarty, Irish-American anti-war and justice activists. He assured us that he will convey them all to the Consul General as soon as he returned to the consulate, and we urged him to convey our appeal to the people of Spain. The vice consul said we were brave to take this action, but we replied that we are asking Spain to be brave and uphold international law and justice in the face of pressure from this government.

"We all felt afterward that we had conveyed the seriousness of the action that needs to be taken now, and this was another important step in developing the political movement that can make these long-overdue prosecutions a reality. I hope we'll have photos shortly, and perhaps more impressions from other participants."

Susan Harman reports from San Francisco:

"Just home from ours in San Francisco. Eleven of us, in the rain. They said they'd heard about the rest of our actions around the country. They weren't allowed to accept the beautiful white roses (peace), and wouldn't let us take pictures of them or inside the lobby, so we made do out in front. Notice (in photo at top of article) Tom, an 80-year-old Korean War vet, and Juanita (with dog), who lives across the street from John Yoo in the Berkeley hills. Felt good to be able to say something nice, for a change!"

Leslie Harris reports from Dallas:

"We visited the Spanish Consulate in Dallas today. We were greeted by Jennifer Zimmer, assistant to the Spanish Consul, Janet Kafka, who welcomed us into the consulate. Holding a banner that read, "Gracias, Espana," we explained that we were there to express our heartfelt thanks for Spain's efforts in upholding the rule of law.

"We took turns reading the letter of thanks, support, and encouragement to the citizens of Spain for their interest in investigating U.S. officials' roles in authorizing torture. We expressed our sincere hopes that they and their judiciary will dispel the notion that any country is above the law.

"We wished everyone a Happy Valentines Day and presented a bouquet of flowers, some heart-shaped balloons, and a hefty stack of papers - a photocopy of a billboard planned to go up in Spain which read, "Por favor, hagan lo que los EEUU no hara - procesar a los torturadores," and a petition, signed by over 8,400 people, asking Spain to do what the U.S. won't: prosecute torture! Ms. Zimmer smiled, thanked us, and agreed to pass on our message.

"Even as we remembered those whose hearts and bodies have been broken by torture and violence, our hearts were warmed at the thought of people around the world working together to uphold justice and restore the rule of law. New friends. Smiles all around. The perfect day for a heartfelt expression of love for humanity."

Sandy Davies of PDA-Miami and the author of "Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq," reports from Miami:

"We delivered the letter, plus chocolates, roses and a vase of flowers from Chip's garden (including "Bleeding Hearts") to Cristina Barrios Almazor, the Spanish Consul General in Miami. I felt that the message was received very much in the spirit in which it was delivered, as a heartfelt thank you from the people of the United States to the people of Spain on an important matter.

"I explained to the Consul General that we represented hundreds of thousands of Americans who belong to the 29 organizations listed as signatories on the letter. I told her that we are embarrassed and ashamed by our country's failure to prosecute these crimes, and that we are grateful that, of all the countries in the world that could prosecute these crimes under universal jurisdiction, Spain has stood up to actually pursue these cases.

"Our delegation included Jim Goodenow, Diane and Ellie (South Florida Impeachment Coalition), Catherine De Leon (PDA), Chip Sullivan (PDA & VFP), Orlando Collado (President, VFP Chapter 032 - not in picture) and me.

In all the work we do, it's rare that I feel I've been part of something as important as this, that what we did today may make a real difference to the prospects for accountability and justice, and thus to deterring such crimes in the future. Peace!"

Sharon Tipton reports from Los Angeles:

"A representative from the Spanish Consulate wrote to me that this issue was not under their jurisdiction but that they would forward the letters to the Spanish Embassy. This did not stop our expression of love for the Spanish people and their wonderful pursuit of international justice! A number of grateful citizens, including Karen and Sharon from the Orange County Peace Coalition; Michael Haas, 2009 Nobel Peace Prize Nominee, and author of "George W. Bush, War Criminal?", and John, Jennifer, and Adela from World Can't Wait visited the Consulate this morning bearing gifts!

"We told the Consulate representative who greeted us behind a pane of glass why we were there and that we had a gift for the Spanish people! She graciously came out to us and accepted our flowers and letters, but seemed a little uncomfortable being in our video and photos!

"Mike Haas spoke to us afterward and shared a great analysis of the state of U.S. torture accountability (which I have on video). In part he shared that the US won't prosecute torture - but that when one of these cases against a prominent American wins, it will finally get the attention of the American people. So, Spain's judges and people give us Hope! Gracias Gente de Espana!"
 
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23229

That one cheesed me off, too, as you can see.

Yes, the President has become a law unto himslef at this point.  We have made that office godlike, way beyond kingly.  We have granted them unlimited warmaking powers and even the powers to kill their political enemies .We have given them the right to hold their political enemies indefinitely without trial or simply assassinate them.  It is completely insane.

Perfect case in point.

Now, to what extent have we created an over-class insititutionalized in law of out other "public servants" such as congressmen and judges, or other executive branch officers and employees -- or the military for that matter?

I don't think it is just the president.

Offline Real Pilgrim

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 101
Re: Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?
« Reply #3 on: February 17, 2011, 02:04:45 am »
While I am a firm believer in equality and equal justice which was the obvious intent of our Constitution and Bill of Rights, to try to define it as “equal justice under the law” is a misnomer based upon semantics and legalese.

Let’s be real about it. Absolutely none of us have the vaguest clue what has been passed into “the law” these days. As an example, how many of us have taken the time to read every single word of the Food Safety Bill recently passed by “unanimous consent”… all 1900 pages of it? Obviously, not even the senators read that bill or understood what was actually written into it.

Over the last fifty years alone, there have probably been thousands of laws passed undermining equality and equal justice “under the law” that have escaped the notice of all of us. And that’s because the language of law as it is contrived by the lawyers who actually write the bills is fundamentally covert, obscure and meant to mislead people into thinking one thing, when generally just the opposite is true.

In truth, I suspect that every pretense towards equality and equal justice has already been legally written out of the law and passed by an unsuspecting congress who has no more idea how to translate “legalese” than the average Joe trying to figure out what the IRS code is talking about.

Thus I conclude that “equality and equal justice under the law” is a joke, because most of us haven’t a clue what the laws actually say, much less any idea of how to interpret those laws.

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?
« Reply #4 on: February 17, 2011, 04:48:19 am »
While I am a firm believer in equality and equal justice which was the obvious intent of our Constitution and Bill of Rights, to try to define it as “equal justice under the law” is a misnomer based upon semantics and legalese.

Let’s be real about it. Absolutely none of us have the vaguest clue what has been passed into “the law” these days. As an example, how many of us have taken the time to read every single word of the Food Safety Bill recently passed by “unanimous consent”… all 1900 pages of it? Obviously, not even the senators read that bill or understood what was actually written into it.

Over the last fifty years alone, there have probably been thousands of laws passed undermining equality and equal justice “under the law” that have escaped the notice of all of us. And that’s because the language of law as it is contrived by the lawyers who actually write the bills is fundamentally covert, obscure and meant to mislead people into thinking one thing, when generally just the opposite is true.

Exactly, that is the very reason I created this thread was to begin discussing the multitudinous ways laws have been written which violate this principle in recent years and innumerable policies put in place by the executive, and countless decisions and precedents on thpart of the judiciary, which also run counter to this long-standing priciple in western civilization.

What I really want to do is to get into specifics.  If it's not for you, cool.  But if you can think of some good examples to examine, that is precisely what I aim to do here, and I'd really like to hear everyone's input -- honestly.  I think it could be a very fruitful departure point for a conversation on basic values whihc may help to inform the anti-globalist and truther movements.

Quote
In truth, I suspect that every pretense towards equality and equal justice has already been legally written out of the law and passed by an unsuspecting congress who has no more idea how to translate “legalese” than the average Joe trying to figure out what the IRS code is talking about.

Thus I conclude that “equality and equal justice under the law” is a joke, because most of us haven’t a clue what the laws actually say, much less any idea of how to interpret those laws.

Quote

All the more good reason to begin looking at some.  The alternative is defeatism.


Offline Real Pilgrim

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 101
Re: Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?
« Reply #5 on: February 17, 2011, 05:07:28 am »

Quote
What I really want to do is to get into specifics.

Atta guy!Here ya' go...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buUKGdTx5YI

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?
« Reply #6 on: February 17, 2011, 05:33:35 am »
Lots of good examples in there.

Yeah, that's a start.

Offline Real Pilgrim

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 101
Re: Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?
« Reply #7 on: February 17, 2011, 08:13:25 am »
Personally, I think “getting specific” is probably way out of our league, simply because we don’t have the where-with-all to do the research. But I do know this: today all our laws are basically written to comply with Maritime or Admiralty Law, which accounts for all the impossibly convoluted “legalese” that gets written into the laws these days.

Maritime or Admiralty Law is “the law of the seas” as it applies to commercial trade among widely differing nations. How or when Maritime Law came to be applied to “the laws of the land,” i.e. the land of a single nation, and specifically our nation, the USA, I honestly don’t know. But I do know that by applying Maritime or Admiralty law to what happens in America, “the laws of the land”, i.e. the Constitution and our Bill of Rights have been totally circumvented.

By writing our laws using the language of Admiralty Law or Maritime Law, congress has pretty much acquiesced and agreed to using (whether they are aware of it or not) the same law code that governs the United Nations, commercial trade between nations, and ultimately, it’s the legal language used in Maritime Law that is the foundation of how the New World Order boys have moved in and stolen America right out from under the feet of the people.

No matter how good an idea presented before congress starts out being, once the concepts behind that idea are converted into the legalese of Maritime Law, it’s been converted into a language that applies to the “law of the seas” rather than the laws of our nation. And at that point, the new law has been written into a language that plays right into the hands of the fascist corporate and banking powers that are obviously very intent on creating a one world government.

If we would be free and return to the roots of our Constitution and Bill of Rights, the single most important thing we could possibly do is demand that absolutely no law  written henceforth, ever be written according to the language of Maritime Law.

What’s happening in our great country is not necessarily the fault of Congressmen and Senators out to get you. What’s happening to our nation is being cooked up in murky backrooms filled with a cabal of international lawyers who have no allegiance to our nation what-so-ever and could give a crap what happens to our people.

We, the people, don’t stand a rat’s chance in hell until we get rid of the international lawyers who are writing the laws and demand that henceforth, all laws be written in the common language of man, according to “the laws of the land” rather than “the laws of the sea.”

It's complicated to try to understand, but until we understand that Maritime law is what is destroying this great nation, our goose is cooked.

I'll try to do some more research on it today to see if I can't come up with something more concrete for you.

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?
« Reply #8 on: February 17, 2011, 07:17:20 pm »
So, an entrepeneur wants to start a business in America for whatever reason, but he finds he has to provide healthcare to his empolyees of face steep fines and penalties.  It is too expensive, so he passes.

Elsewhere one of our many oligarchical families, let's call them the Waltons, gets a special exemption, one of hundreds.

There is no rhyme or reason given by the administration why they were eligible and the entrepeneur was not.

That is the kind of thing I am really getting at, but -- for sure -- there are hundreds or thousands of other such examples one could provide.  This is merely one of the more timely ones.

The principle of equality before the law is so eroded that the Executive no longer even feels it is incumbent on it to explain why apparent abrogations of that principle are anything other than what they are.

It is in-your-face.

I guess that is the sort of thing that really got me thinking about this.

And I think it stems from a very heirarchical mentality that has entrenched itself in our government from secret organizations, and that is the axe I am truly grinding here.

Our enemies, and I think we have some, feign egalitarianism overtly but inwardly do not even respect one of the bedrock principles of our law -- or what was one of the bedrock principles -- one deeply rooted in the civiization from which our country sprang: equal justice before the law.

It is one of two principles, in my point-of-view that really distinguish the "PTB" from those with whom I feel a political affinity: "Equal Justice Before the Law" AND "The Ends Do Not Jusitfy the Means".

Anyone that holds to those two bedrock principles is my ally, IMO, and anyone that does not, even if they are not working for the globalists may as well be.

They are philosophical "lines in the sand" as far as I am concerned.  All of the ideologies created since the nineteenth century or before that have worked against the very nature of our consitutional republic are guilty of employing the opposite corrolaries: Systematic and Institutionalized Inequality/Heirarchy and Machiavellianism.

This is what seprates us from the tools -- or not.  That is the reason I am so passionate about it.

And Real Pilgrim, I do want to learn more about the institutionalism of Maritime Law, if it is what you suggest. I see it as possibly another under-the-table means to bring in the same institutionalized heirarchy into our republic.  I have to learn more about it, but I am willing to hear it out at this point, and I would like to compare notes eventually with my mother who was a lawyer and judge one day when I am truly better prepared to see if there really is substance to this.

Please post more information on it.  I would definitely like to hear you out, even if it isn't necessarily where I was going with this.

Offline Real Pilgrim

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 101
Re: Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?
« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2011, 12:38:21 am »
Quote
It is one of two principles, in my point-of-view that really distinguish the "PTB" from those with whom I feel a political affinity: "Equal Justice Before the Law" AND "The Ends Do Not Jusitfy the Means".

Anyone that holds to those two bedrock principles is my ally, IMO, and anyone that does not, even if they are not working for the globalists may as well be.

They are philosophical "lines in the sand" as far as I am concerned.  All of the ideologies created since the nineteenth century or before that have worked against the very nature of our constructional republic are guilty of employing the opposite corollaries: Systematic and Institutionalized Inequality/Hierarchy and Machiavellianism.
 

I think we are in total agreement here. But for me there is no greater sign of inequality before the law, than the fact that our government has been willing to spend 4.6 trillion dollars to date in order to bail out Wall Street and the banksters who are among the filthy rich:

http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010041301/comprehensive-bailout-tally-46-trillion-spent-bailout-date

But now plans to axe 1.1 trillion in spending cuts to Social Security, Medicare and heating programs for the poor:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/14/us-usa-budget-obama-idUSTRE71B1QU20110214

For me, that simply says it all.

As to my concern over the fact that our laws today are written in the “Legalese” of Maritime Admiralty Law, which is covertly being used to undermine the principals behind our Constitution and Bill of Rights, this first came to my attention way back in the spring of 1986 and it’s really quite a story.

I’d become acquainted with an International Lawyer; let’s call him “Fred”, who was a graduate of Oxford University and a man of dual French-American citizenship. This fellow also claimed he owned the controlling shares in First International Bank which has now become Wells Fargo through various mergers. Fred also claimed that he owned Guardian Royal Assurance, a London based insurance company that I’d never even heard of but later discovered was deeply implicated in being among the movers and shakers connected with the mysterious and very covert secret society known as the Priory de Sion. (The Messianic Legacy,  Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh & Henry Lincoln, Delta Books, 1986, pp. 260-263) Through later research, I would also find out that Guardian Royal and its subsidiary, Sun Alliance and subsidiaries, were among the world’s largest insurers of the Maritime industry.

The man in question also wrote the oil contracts for the Saudis when I knew him, a fact that was later confirmed to me by several people who had actually seen some of those contracts in his possession. Earlier in his career, back in the 70’s, Fred had also written the oil contracts for OPEC and was among those who were involved in the price fixing scam that created the first “gas crunch” of the early 70’s. Because of this, one day when Fred landed at Kennedy International Airport on a business trip, he was “taken into protective custody” by the FBI, and forced to testify before a Senate investigative committee as to his own role in fixing the price of oil. This in turn “blew his cover” with OPEC who had no idea that Fred also possessed American citizenship; they’d always assumed him to simply be a citizen of France.

As a result of his testimony, not only was he blackballed by OPEC which cost him billions, it incited the rage of one Ayatollah Khomeini who actually put a price on Fred’s head. To hear him tell it, he’d had half the militant Islamics of Iran  chasing him down. According to Fred, Khomeini and his goon squad actually followed him to France and chased him through Europe. The only way he escaped was by radical cosmetic surgery, assuming a new identity, and faking his own death. He was evidently eventually put in a Federal Witness Protection program, and that’s why he was living under cover in America. And I confess, I never really knew his real name. I only knew him by the name of his assumed identity.

This guy once bragged to me that he’d “had more bills passed by congress than any president or senator that ever lived.” At the time, I was naïve enough as to how things really work in Washington DC, that I actually called him a liar. (You’ve got to remember that this was in the pre-internet days when most Americans had no clue how bad things really were.) Fred just laughed at me and said that he and his “working group” (I must assume the Priory) hired the lawyers that wrote America’s laws, that the laws were being written in Maritime Legalese and furthermore, he emphatically informed me that it was his intent and the intent of his “group” to use those laws “to destroy America.” Since this same man regularly mentioned Rothschild, Armand Hammer and King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, and spoke of them as if they were all close friends, you can’t really blame me for assuming I’d run into a whack job.

At the time, I really didn’t believe a word he said and I repeatedly told him as much. Again, he laughed in my face and remarked that all he had to do was wait until the Senate was voting on a bill that was sure to pass, attach a rider to it, and bada bing! His law was passed! He then said, “We might not ever need to actually use those laws, but we know it is there. Whenever America steps out of line, we’ll bring those laws down on you, and you’d better believe it.” But like I said, at the time I really didn’t believe it; I thought I’d run into a nutcase, albeit a very brilliant nutcase. He once stated his low IQ score was 180 and his highest score topped 200. I believed that. My IQ is around 135, and Fred made me look like a dummy. Trust me; I was way out of my league in the smarts department.

Then in late spring of 1986, I noticed Fred was simply overjoyed about something, so much so that he could barely contain his glee. So I asked him what was up? And he replied, “We just set up Ollie North. We’re going to make your government look like fools.” I honestly didn’t have a clue what he was talking about. But then, when the Iran/Contra affair broke press in November of 1987, trust me, it hit home, big time! That was the moment that I knew, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that I’d run into the real deal. And that’s when I decided it was a very good time for me to change my identity, move some place far away and fade into the woodwork, which I did.

So that’s a brief outline of why I am concerned about the fact that America’s laws are being written in Maritime Legalese. I guess you could say my interest is up close and personal…

True story. Shit happens.





Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?
« Reply #10 on: February 18, 2011, 01:20:30 am »
I think we are in total agreement here. But for me there is no greater sign of inequality before the law, than the fact that our government has been willing to spend 4.6 trillion dollars to date in order to bail out Wall Street and the banksters who are among the filthy rich:





Absolutely.

+1,000,000

Offline Real Pilgrim

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 101
Re: Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?
« Reply #11 on: February 18, 2011, 03:54:12 am »
CitizenX? If you are serious about learning more about the ways the laws are being written, just go to VideoGoggle or YouTube and do a search on “Maritime Admiralty Law.” You’ll find plenty. Some of the videos stress the way “the law of the sea” plays into the International Law being promoted by the New World Order gulag. Other videos concentrate more on the way these laws effect the individual human being and what we can do about it.

One guy in particular, a fellow named Robert A. Menard from Canada, has produced some very interesting in-depth videos about his grassroots endeavor to teach others how to become “free men” under the law. He’s not only very entertaining and funny, he’s very up on how to legally use the laws to our own advantage, rather than be enslaved by them.  I think you’ll like him.

His two main videos, “Bursting the Bubbles of Government Deception” and “The Magnificent Deception” can be viewed on either VideoGoogle, YouTube or at his own site:
 
http://www.thinkfree.ca/

Offline ryanwv

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 284
    • The Ghost of Liberty
Re: Equality Under the Law in America? Do We Have It? Should We?
« Reply #12 on: February 26, 2011, 06:37:33 am »
For the most part the United States does in fact have equality before the law. Things get tricky when you add common law into the mix. Common law can blur equality before law with changing interpretation of the law itself. It is much easier, by way of trail debates in real cases, to twist the meaning of a law in favor of certain agendas. Under common law it would seem that `equality before law` is a relative term.   
The gentlemen from Tokyo MR. Ryan D. Smith