Archive for the ‘Civil Liberties’ Category
When this site was started, there was enthusiasm. The plan, as indicated by our name, was to Restore the Republic.
Through the trials of what took place afterwards we held to the notion that there was power in the words, people would respond and take action if nothing more than to comment and post in the forum letting us know that there was hope.
Our readership began to pick-up, but we were hacked to the point that the site had to come down for some time, and be rebuilt. That didn’t deter our enthusiasm, and we held to our beliefs. The site was hacked again, and rebuilt. I kept writing, and the site was improved by the team.
If we are nothing else, we are people who subscribe to the idea that humans are thinking mammals capable of realizing when action was needed, and what that action should be. I have learned over the years that this may not be the case.
The general population doesn’t come to sites such as this for knowledge; they want to be entertained. The more outlandish the commentary the more likely they are to return day after day. That is what we received from the president in his latest state of the union; pure unadulterated gibberish, conflicting statements, and illogical proposed solutions.
The state of the union was meant to be a detailed assessment of the progress of the nation as given to the president by the congress. Congress makes the laws, and the executive carries those laws out; provided the acts adhere to the Constitution.
Instead what we now hear are long term plans on how the government will interfere in our lives, supposedly rebuild the economy, and inspire the citizenry to work on. As generally expected, the speech was pure non-sense that has nothing at all to do with the enumerated powers of the government.
We now have a head-of-state, who as far as I can tell never held a job outside of government or a non-profit organization. He has spent his entire adult life in direct opposition to the concepts of liberty, and justice, but there he sits in the oval office plotting our demise.
Now we find out that the governor of Hawaii who was going to lay the birth certificate issue to rest, can’t find any evidence of records that would show Obama to have been born in that state. But wait there is more to this story, and if you love a good novel with twists, turns, and lies you have to read on.
Mike Evans, the man who claimed that he had spoken to the governor about the birth certificate, now claims that he has not spoken to Governor Abercrombe since he took office. Well I’m confused to say the least, and if you clicked on the birth certificate link, read the story, and listened to the interview, you would surely be as lost as I am.
However, this goes right along with the rest of this presidency; non-sense, non-sense, and more non-sense, which is what we get each and every time Obama opens his mouth.
During the campaign for president he claimed we would have our troop’s home by 2009. He told us Guantanamo would be closed as a detention center for terrorists. He claimed to be for the poor, and middle class, but has done nothing but enhance the wealth of the very few at the top. The bankers are raping America. Need I go on?
Whatever your beliefs are, the man has lied to us, as most politicians surely do in order to hold that all important seat at the big-game. His lies have been blatant, akin to “WMD’s”, but he seems to remain the darling of the mainstream media. His lies have cost us thousands more lives of our young men according to the Veterans Administration. That’s right all you who cling to hope, the number of deaths are staggering, and of course lied about, and sworn to by the criminals in the media.
Recent numbers indicate that as much as 47% of the eligible working population should be considered unemployed. What you ask? That can’t be, I have a nice job, and I’m doing fine. That seems to be the sum total of our sphere of understanding; I’m ok, so it can’t be bad.
Let us not forget these facts. In November of 2009, Bloomberg News filed a FOIA request to find out what happened to the Two Trillion Dollars that the FED handed out to who knows who. Over this last summer it was discovered that the FED had given Trillions of Dollars to foreign banks, and institutions for which the American citizen is ultimately responsible.
While the FED was handing out Trillions our country was coming apart. The city of Detroit, which at one time had the highest per capita middle class in the nation, is a dying city where houses are being sold for a dollar, and the mayor wants to bulldoze about 20% of the area.
Granted we were leading up to this so we can’t blame it all on Barack Obama. However, he is the man that was elected for change, and all we got was more of the same old rhetoric, with political double-speak, and politicians pulling out the same old tired recipes for ruin.
So who is actually to blame for all of this? Go take a good look in the mirror folks because we are the culprits here. We’re in it up to our ears, and the road ahead is not pretty no matter how the talking heads paint a picture of green-shoots.
Our jobs continue to be outsourced. Under the present administration there has been no let up in issuing work visas while so many Americans collect unemployment, and food stamps.
The Chinese continue to flood our shelves with their products, thereby building wealth for themselves and debt for our countrymen. And with the wealth the Chinese are accumulating they are buying tangible assets while we continue to fight over the latest toy insanity for Christmas, overpriced tickets for some concert, and ...
4 Comments »
It has been some time since I decided to write an article. There are reasons for that, but suffice it to say that my enthusiasm for restoring the republic to its original design, or should I say hope of those who sacrificed to create this great experiment is waning.
In order to fight a successful battle you must first recognize your goal. In the case of our very own revolution it was to separate from Great Britain, create a nation free from persecution, and allow the common man his right to freedom, and prosperity.
Those ideas began to erode almost immediately as ‘special interests’ lied, schemed, and conjured methods of destroying the Republic. Most notably was, and still to this day is the legal profession that encompasses the entire justice system including the private sector. Thousands of lawyers that swear an oath to disavow the Constitution, and lay homage to the black robe administrators who see themselves as gods have destroyed our common law.
What has the legal profession done? First and foremost it has created a complete misunderstanding of the rule of law in this country. We, you and I, are sovereign citizens. A sovereign is not subject to the law as it is the creator of the law. It sounds simple, but what does it mean?
The state, which can only operate by the actions of the people, is an abstract creation without rights, and without powers other than what we the people enumerate. The state cannot make rules, and regulations that impose a liability upon the citizen to which the citizen has no obligation. “There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.” – Federalist 78, Alexander Hamilton
Hamilton, along with John Jay, and James Madison go on to explain the purpose of a government designed with enumerated powers, and separations in order to prevent the destruction of original intent. This seems so obvious to me, but has been lost on the American public.
The Constitution, as the fundamental doctrine of law, is a limitation placed upon the government. The construction of the Bill of Rights reinforces this as it begins by stating “Congress shall make no law…,” and ends by declaring “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
It does not say that from time to time the judiciary may interpret the Constitution to mean something other than what it says, nor does it say that the States, which created the union, may run off in directions that infringe upon the inalienable rights of its own citizens, or that of another state. It logically follows that since the states created the union with a limited form of government that they would adhere to the principles for themselves and protect the citizen from any and all abuses. Our government was formed by men, and is beholding to man for the limited and temporary powers we might at some time recall.
In order to fight the battle, and it is most certainly a struggle, to maintain a free state we must be aware at all times that those who seek the office of government more than likely do so because they seek power. If it were otherwise, there would not be legislators who spend their entire lives plotting their next re-election campaign rather than standing their ground and voting against those acts to which the government has no authority to impose upon the constituent.
I received an e-mail not to long ago, from the Second Amendment Foundation, asking for donations to fight against ACORN's interference in Jersey City, New Jersey on the issue of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
ACORN, as you may know, is a virulent enterprise that works diligently to move this nation to the ultimate end of a totalitarian state. Let’s not debate the issue here, because if we must then we are certainly well on our way to ACORN’s, and many other similar organizations goal.
It is clear as the nose on your face, as the saying goes, for some, but the majority is blinded with so much rhetoric from the major media that they barely have time to watch their reality TV shows, let alone read and learn about the factual nature of gun control.
We are in a true fight for liberty. Some may take to the pen, but it becomes more certain by the day that while the government takes to the sword, we will sit on our couches waiting for the knock on the door by some government agents who will bring us to a FEMA internment camp.
At one time I contributed thousands to the effort to fight gun control. I gave to the NRA every time they asked, and I was a plank-holder of the American Eagles. Now I give nothing. I give nothing because when you are fighting the battle 100 miles from the battlefield there is no point in expending ammunition.
I will continue to take the stance of penning my fight, and ignoring the calls for contributions until the pro-gun community learns to fight the fight according to the rule of law. That law starts in the Constitution at Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15&16, and culminates in the Second Amendment.
The Second Amendment has a specific meaning in conjunction with maintaining a free state, which it proudly announces, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep ...
2 Comments »
I want to start by pointing out that I am a big fan of the author of this article, Becky Akers. She is straightforward, and writes in a strong, and clear manner that which should concern us all.
This article is reprinted with the permission of Becky, and the generous FREEMAN. Please visit the site if you are concerned with the course of the nation.
by Becky Akers
Boston lies under a foot of snow this Monday March evening in 1770, so icy and cold that anyone who can huddle at home on the hearth should. Instead, much of the town is abroad and abuzz like an angry hive. Bostonians are infuriated at something their descendants will take for granted, indeed, will prize so highly they’ll pay for it: police are patrolling their city.
And have been for many months. In September 1768 a thousand British Redcoats disembarked at the town’s wharves. From there they “marched sword in hand through the principal streets of [Boston], then in profound peace.”1 Their purpose was not to protect the 15,000 inhabitants but to keep them in line, much as police presently do. And, again like modern officers, they will collect money for the government, though rather than writing traffic tickets, they will enforce customs duties.
The colonists do not share their descendants’ idealism that the police “protect and serve,” nor do they mistake the Redcoats for “Boston’s Finest.” They see the soldiers stalking among them as the government’s bullyboys, and they despise them for it. Tonight, that antagonism will explode, becoming famous as a Massacre for killing five civilians and wounding others.
Historians offer a bevy of explanations and excuses for that calamitous confrontation: Americans resented the British as an occupying force; off-duty soldiers worked at odd jobs for low pay, stealing opportunities from Boston’s day laborers and provoking more resentment; the Redcoats were naturally arrogant, the colonists naturally touchy. But behind it all lies the simple fact that the soldiers were policing Boston. They marched through the city searching for contraband, infractions of the government’s rules, and anyone the administration deemed suspicious.
They also reintroduced His Majesty’s customs officers at the point of their bayonets. Prior to the Redcoats’ advent in 1768, Bostonians had so intimidated these officials that they fled the city. Ann Hulton was sister to one; she wrote, “Every officer of the Crown that does his duty is become obnoxious & they must either fly or be sacrificed. . . .” Ann flew with her brother and others to Castle Island, now part of the mainland but then a fort lying at a safe distance in Boston Harbor. From there, Miss Hulton continued her account of the colonists’ cowing of Customs: “These Sons of Violence after attacking Houses, breaking Windows, beating, Stoning & bruizing several gentlemen belong’g to the Customs, the Collector mortally & burning his boat.”2 Only when the Redcoats could ensure their safety did the officers return to Boston. They remained for the next 18 months, retreating again with the troops after the Massacre: “The inhabitants of the town assembled in Faneuil Hall . . . unanimously resolved, that no armed force should be suffered longer to reside in the capital . . . . [T]he people, inflexible in their demands, insisted that not one British soldier should be left within the town . . . . [W]ithin four days the whole army decamped. . . . The commissioners of the customs and several other obnoxious characters retired with the army” to the fortified Castle Island.3
Could we whisk the army from their eighteenth-century fort to a modern precinct, the Redcoats would likely agree that their policing differed little from today’s—except in one remarkable detail. They would be astounded at the enormous authority most Americans grant the police and at the enormous respect, even glorification, following from that.
Both are centuries removed from the ridicule and revulsion red-coated police rated in eighteenth-century Boston. Perhaps the difference in attitude arises partly from our powerlessness against a force armed far beyond what most of us can manage. The Bostonians milling about the freezing streets that night carried pistols and swords every bit the equal of muskets and bayonets. If a man didn’t own a gun or blade, he hastened toward the coming showdown with the “invaders” and “foreign enemies” openly bearing a wooden stave or club, a knife, a hatchet, even a chunk of ice scooped off the street.4
Their weapons rendered the colonists boisterous and aggressive when standing up to the Redcoats. British General Thomas Gage reported that “The people were as Lawless and Licentious after the Troops arrived, as they were before. The Troops . . . seemed only offered to abuse and Ruin . . . to suffer ill usage and even assaults upon their Persons till their Lives were in Danger. . . .”5
That “lawlessness” bedeviled the Redcoats from their first moments in Boston, when they began hunting barracks. Thomas Hutchinson, Massachusetts’s royally appointed governor, offered a large public building to the soldiers, ignoring the “outcasts of the Workhouse and the scum of the Town”6 already renting rooms there. The “scum” objected to the governor’s exercise of eminent domain as much as Hutchinson would have had they offered the Redcoats his mansion. They promptly barricaded themselves inside the building.
Boston’s sheriff, backed by some soldiers, soon arrived. He discovered an unlocked window, climbed into the building, and ordered the “outcasts” out. They promptly barricaded him inside, too.
Meanwhile, the sheriff’s martial escort stood helpless, unable to rescue him, because the scowling, muttering townspeople surrounding the place heavily outnumbered the soldiers. This standoff continued for two days after Boston’s Council sided with the “scum” and refused to authorize their eviction.
Nor did the colonists’ “ill usage” abate over the next year and a half. Before the shooting began on the night of the Massacre a citizen scolded a group of British officers: “Why don’t you keep your soldiers in the barracks? . . . Are the inhabitants to be knocked down in the streets? Are they to be ...
No Comments »
I have become an avid reader of Mr. Grigg’s column on the Lew Rockwell site. I recently wrote to Mr. Grigg because I particularly enjoyed this column, and I asked for permission to post it here. http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w148.html
As a note here, Mr. Grigg uses the original quote from the 12th Century Crusade that gave us “Kill them all. Let God sort them out.”
by William Norman Grigg
Recently by William Norman Grigg: The Death of Aiyana Jones: 'Showtime Syndrome' Claims a Child
Kevin Weeks was a career criminal employed as a Mob hit man, but even he possessed sufficient good judgment and self-restraint to avoid risking the life of a seven-year-old girl.
In Brutal, his aptly titled memoir of the years he spent working for Boston Mob boss – and protected FBI asset – James "Whitey" Bulger, Weeks describes how he was given an order to assassinate Boston Herald columnist Howie Carr, who relentlessly tormented Bulger in print. Weeks set up a sniper nest near Carr's home. He had the target set up for the kill, but didn't pull the trigger because Carr's daughter, "a little girl, like seven-years-old or so," was walking hand-in-hand with her father.
"I couldn't take a chance of the bullet fragmenting and ricocheting or hitting her or just killing her father in front of her," recounts Weeks.
This episode, admittedly, is retold from the self-serving perspective of a convicted murderer. Ironically, Carr himself, in his valuable book The Brothers Bulger, relates a somewhat similar story of a proposed contract hit that was vetoed by former Boston Mob boss Raymond Patriarca.
Joe Barboza, a hitman employed by Patriarca, pointed out that the hoodlum targeted by the contract lived in a three-story house in Boston. Barboza suggested that he could "break into the basement and pour gasoline all around and torch the place, after which I either get him with the smoke inhalation or I pick him off when he's climbing out the window."
"Barboza had worked out a plan for every contingency," notes Carr. "He would bring three shooters with him, to watch each side of the house. They would cut the telephone lines to the houses, so that the victim couldn't call the fire department. And just in case one of the neighbors called, before setting the house on fire Barboza planned to phone in false alarms across the city to tie up every fire company."
Patriarca, who had few compunctions about killing when it suited him, wasn't keen on Barboza's plan, in large measure because of the potential harm to non-combatants.
"Patriarca asked Barboza if anyone else lived in [the targeted hoodlum's] house, and Barboza mentioned the victim's mother," continues Carr.
"You're gonna kill his mother too?" asked Patriarca.
"It ain't my fault she lives there," the hit man snorted by way of reply.
"Patriarca canceled the contract," Carr tersely summarizes. Barboza, not surprisingly, proved to be too ruthless and deranged for the Mob, and ended up – like Bulger – as another of the FBI's protected assets.
It is a monumental pity that the Detroit Special Response Team, or the decision-makers above them in the Detroit PD, didn't have the sense of proportionality displayed by Mob figures like Kevin Weeks and Raymond Patriarca. If they had, the murder suspect they sought – 34-year-old Chauncey Owens – could have been taken into custody without the midnight paramilitary raid that resulted in the burning and shooting death of seven-year-old Aiyana Jones.
Shortly after midnight on May 16, while Aiyana – a radiant little girl who might have grown up to resemble Zoe Saldana – was sleeping on the downstairs living room sofa where she would be killed just a few minutes later, the raid team gathered for a "safety briefing."
As described by police sources to the Detroit Free Press, that briefing dealt entirely with considerations of "officer safety," which – as any honest observer will admit – is the highest and most important consideration in any law enforcement operation.
The raid team "was told there was information that the suspect might be armed, possibly with an assault rifle and a handgun," reports the Free Press. "Someone said there also might be dangerous dogs and that the house was believed to be a possible dope den."
Another intelligence source speculated that the unprepossessing duplex might actually be the location of the missing Iraqi WMDs, which had been stored in a basement vault guarded by a basilisk.
No, not really.
But in its anxiety over officer safety, and its eagerness to stage a properly impressive raid for the benefit of the embedded A&E camera crew, the SRT did not take into account "the possibility of any children being present," despite the fact that the front yard was littered with toys – a clue that even a police officer should be able to recognize – and warnings to that effect offered by neighbors as the raid unfolded.
Street officers and homicide detectives were already on the scene when the SRT's armored personnel carrier rolled up in front of the duplex.
The APC was driven by Officer Joseph Weekley, who was also the first through the door after a flash-bang grenade had been thrown through the window. Weekley went barreling into the living room armed with a machine gun and protected by a ballistic shield.
Meanwhile, Aiyana – according to at least one eyewitness – was being severely burned by the incendiary grenade that had been thrown into her bed.
It's not clear whether Aiyana suffered her fatal gunshot wound before or after Weekley entered the house. In either case, Officer Weekley has been identified as the shooter. He initially claimed that his gun accidentally went off during a "scuffle" with Aiyana's 47-year-old grandmother.
Within a few hours that account was "clarified" by the police, who said that there was incidental "contact" between Weekley and Aiyana's grandmother; the latter denies having contact of any kind with Weekley.
Geoffrey Fieger, the attorney representing Aiyana's family, claims to have seen a videotape of the raid showing that the shot was fired into the house shortly after the grenade was hurled through the downstairs window.
Chauncey Owens, who has been charged ...
No Comments »
