Archive for the ‘Congress’ Category
Fiction is meant for entertainment. When grandpa told you stories about his youth, and he embellished a bit, his idea was to make it exciting. It’s done for the entertainment of the child.
When your fishing buddy tells the story of the one that got away, everyone has a good laugh while chiding him on the details.
I loved the Bourne series of the books, and the movies. The movies were a far cry from the books, but they were action packed. The movies were exciting, entertaining, and added the visual effect that you might not have imagined in the books. The fight sequences drew the viewer into the story, while the books told a story of intrigue about two mortal adversaries.
Fiction is all well and good when it’s made for the enjoyment of the public. When the fiction is part of the legal system it is a means of dismantling the law. It is not designed for the well being of the people, but rather the consolidation of power by government, and the powerful forces that choose our elected representatives.
These fictions lead to erroneous notions, concepts, and case law that are an affront to “A Declaration”, and The Constitution of the United States. The design can be nothing else but a strategy to bring us into the slow but inevitable decay of tyranny.
It seems to be the general belief that our unalienable rights are not unlimited, and that they can be regulated and licensed. In order to sanctify the blatant contradiction of the fact that the People “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights”, fictions are created as points of law. Often cited, as the proof is the statement that “you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater”. This fiction of law is based in part on the half-truth related to the opinion of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes writing for the court in Schenck v United States, 249 U.S. 47.
The fiction occurs because of the fact that the common man will not sit down and examine the details, nor take the time to read the actual case, from which this massive fraud derives. I say massive because men, women, talking heads, government crony’s, and even those pretending to be patriots repeat it. Someone said it somewhere along the line so it is believed, and truth will not overcome the combination of ignorance, and ego.
The case is based on the fact that Schenck, and others, were inciting people to violate a law that the congress actually had the power to create. It was 1917, and the United States was entering the war in Europe. Congress declared war, and as delegated at Article 1, Section 8, the Congress used its power “To raise and support Armies”.
I am a firm believer in the fact that those powers delegated to the government should be recognized as valid, but I am diametrically opposed to perceived or created powers based on interpretations. I do not subscribe in any way to the notion that we have a living Constitution. All these maneuvers are of course fictions created by the courts, and carried out by myths, compliance, and conspiracies.
In Schenck, Justice Holmes wrote, “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic”. The controlling aspect of the statement points to the fact that the act inflicts an injury to wit, “causing a panic”. Even to the most casual observer a panic can, and will inflict some form of harm on those in the theater.
Holmes goes on to say, “The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent”.
In Schenck, the defendants were charged “with the mailing of printed circulars in pursuance of a conspiracy to obstruct the recruiting and enlistment service, contrary to the Espionage Act of June 15, 1917”.
Holmes clarifies by writing “We admit that, in many places and in ordinary times, the defendants, in saying all that was said in the circular, would have been within their constitutional rights. But the character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done”. Congress had declared war on Germany for the sinking of the Lusitania, an act that was considered an attack on the sovereign United States. In order to prosecute this war they exercised their power to protect this nation by calling forth the men of this country.
This entire case pivoted on arguments that were inadequate, and obviously detrimental to congresses authority “To raise and support Armies”.
Schenck could have argued that the war created a “clear and present danger that” it “will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent”.
The obvious underlying fact of the matter for those of you who run from the term “conspiracy theory” would have been that the Lusitania was indeed stocked with munitions, that congress should have been aware of this violation at least by way of their oversight of the War Department, and that the entire scenario was cooked up by J.P. Morgan and his associates who had lent the British and French over One Billion Dollars.
The British and French were loosing the war so Morgan and his associates needed a means of bringing the United States in to save the day, or more appropriately the money. None of this would have been a complete secret from the members of congress as not to make a viable defense. Over and above this is the fact that if congress perceived a “clear and present danger” then it had the duty to muster Militia to exercise its duty to “repel invasions”.
The congress does of course have the delegated power “To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States” in ...
No Comments »
By now everyone is aware of the Aurora, Colorado shooting where 71 people were murdered or wounded.
The incident that took place in a movie theater was the act of James Holmes, a student at the University of Colorado who was working towards a doctorate in neurosciences. Does his profile fit that of a mass murderer? Probably not, but I’d be willing to bet that in an unfettered investigation conducted by a legitimate Grand Jury, they would find that Holmes personality had been altered.
It was found that in previous mass shootings that the perpetrators were on some form of Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor, or, by police report information, the shooter had previously begged for help, claiming that he was being abducted, and tortured. The reports, in at least one instance, included witness statements that claimed to have seen the subject grabbed by masked men and thrown into a van.
Cho Seung-Hui, the Virginia Tech shooter, was on mind-altering drugs. In light of the recent developments in GlaxoSmithKline $3 Billion US fraud settlement wherein it was shown that the pharmaceutical giant had falsified its testing results, I can’t believe that anything is beyond the scope of what might have taken place prior to this most recent shooting.
In current times we discovered that the Russian’s still had sleeper agents in the U.S., and apparently throughout the world. Russian convicted of treason in sleeper agent case.
In 1975 the concept of sleepers was widely introduced to the public in the movie Telefon based on the novel by Walter Wager. Most would say this is nonsense, but during the Sixties, and Seventies there was confirmation that the agents did exist, and they were activated by certain phrases. More recently it has come to light that The Psychiatrists Who Programmed the Sleepers are Being Killed. The article is long with a number of links, but is worth reading for anyone who wants to understand what might be taking place in the minds of the people who commit these crimes.
Why do I mention any of this as related to such a tragic event as this Aurora shooting? Because in light of the investigations that take place, and the information that subsequently is released years later, we have to ask ourselves if there is something else going on.
One question, at the forefront for me, is why after all the obvious lying on so many levels do we consistently dismiss the idea that our government has a hand in the most foul, and nefarious acts taking place in the world? Did we not see that the attack on Iraq was completely without merit as to the claims of WMD’s? Do we even care that we’ve murdered hundreds of thousands of women and children in the name of our own personal safety?
Did we bother to question as to how the Patriot Act immediately popped into play? Congressman Ron Paul stated, “The PATRIOT Act Was Written Many, Many Years Before 9/11 [And The Attacks Simply Provided] An Opportunity for Some People To Do What They Wanted To Do”
To some this may seem a little too conspiratorial, but the fact of the matter is that there is enough evidence in our past to make even the most die-hard skeptic question why such incidents occur at the most opportune time for a government agenda, or inopportune time for those who aspire to freedom. It can’t be coincidence all the time, and it can’t be suited to the government’s agenda at that particular moment each time.
We know that the ATF’s Fast and Furious sting allowed thousands of guns to go to drug cartels, that the program was responsible for the death of law enforcement agents, and also responsible for the deaths of thousands of others, both in Mexico and the US. We also know that the DOJ, and the Attorney General has tried to cover it up, and has been caught lying to congress. What are another 71 people to attain your goal of disarmament?
On top of all of this is the UN Gun Ban Treaty that is supposedly designed to remove military style weapons from the civilian population. Make no mistake that this treaty is aimed at the American people, the constitutional mandate to muster the Militia, and our inherent right to keep and bear arms when enemies both foreign and domestic threaten us.
This theater shooting comes just days before the treaty ratification vote in the US Senate. It comes at a time when it seemed apparent that the administration did not have the votes to have this treaty confirmed.
It also comes in the wake of Leon Panetta telling congress Obama can start wars without them under the direction of the UN. Should we question whether an international cabal is running our government?
Still, the flag wavers place their heads in the sand and refuse to believe that our government would commit such atrocities. Ladies and gentlemen, what will it take for you to remove the veil, and demand hard investigations with the outcome being the indictment, and prosecution of those who create these nightmares?
I am telling you that this shooting stinks from Colorado all the way to New York where the mayor is probably ecstatic over the fact that he has another tool to ban weapons in the hand of the citizen.
These incidents cannot be so coincidental. We’ve seen just too many that are confirmed as government operations.
So I ask my fellow Americans not to shut their eyes to the dangers that we face from a rogue government, and to remember that the Second Amendment was specifically enumerated so that the people could “alter or to abolish” government when it interfered with the “security of a free state”.
I, for one, am not of “the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation…”
Are you?
‘Nick’
No Comments »
Please, if you believe in what I’ve said here, feel free to use it. Send it to your servants. Send it to newspapers, radio, and TV stations.
Dear Servant of the People,
It is my understanding that the congress, comprised of those subject to the sovereignty of the People, is now dealing in compromises with murderers.
“On Thursday, in a letter to Rep. Issa, Holder indicated his willingness to partially comply with the subpoena. In what he called "an extraordinary accommodation," Holder agreed to provide some additional documents, but said that other documents remained, "outside the scope of the committee's interest in the inappropriate tactics used in Fast and Furious."”
I will remind you of a few things that you should keep in the back of your mind.
First and foremost, you are a representative of your constituents who is placed in position by a ballot cast by those to whom you are responsible. Although I wonder if there is a legitimate voting process now a day, you are nonetheless a servant, and bound by the rule of law.
Second, a violation of the oath of office is a felony under the rule of law. A violation consists of voting for and enacting legislation outside the clearly defined limits set forth in the Constitution.
Third, this administration, and as it appears, the last administration engaged in operations that not only account for the loss of life, but also were designed to infringe upon the rights of the People.
Fourth, neither you, nor the Attorney General is entitled to any immunity because of your ‘self proclaimed position of power’. Immunity is a fiction designed by the courts. For the life of me, I can’t find it enumerated as a power granted to you by the People.
Fifth, we have committed enough murder in the Middle East and Africa to guarantee us all a very nice spot in hell. From what I have read of the official numbers, and some really official accounts, we have murdered as many as One-Million Women and Children, and according to the Veterans Administration we’ve lost over Seventy-Thousand Soldiers in our wars of conquest.
As any one who is conscious enough to inhale should know, the government lies at a level that is both disgusting and dangerous. It does so constantly, and without any shame what so ever.
Our unemployment rate passed 20% a few years ago, and is certainly not going down. We’ve dropped millions from the unemployment statistics because they are no longer eligible for assistance.
There have been a growing number of tent cities popping up across the country for at least six years to my knowledge.
The congress, despite the objections of the American People, created more than Twenty-Five Trillion Dollars, in order to bail out fraud, incompetence, and the thievery of those who should have been rewarded with jail sentences instead of the future earnings of the workingmen and women of this country.
The lawful limit of immigrants to this country is 1.2 million people per year. Not counting those who unlawfully cross our borders, you have allowed some Three Million immigrants to come here, many of who come from Third World countries, and they come here to sack our coffers.
Granted, some come here with talent, but none of that talent is lacking in the American worker who is suffering from your One World Globalism, and the fallacy of Free Trade. This is the time to revoke work visas, stop immigration, impose tariffs, and secure opportunities for those who have lived their lives here, and are suffering from your failed agenda.
Your answer, as is typically the case, is to create a greater burden on the citizen using the word compromise as if it were some ingenious device to solve the woes of the world. The Constitution does not authorize compromise, nor does it empower you to legislate acts that are not clearly defined, nor created by judicial fiat.
But you have an answer to all your crimes don’t you? Disarm the American People before they wake up from their slumber and realize just how dangerous you are, and how repugnant your actions are to the rule of law.
Leonid Brezhnev once told an old boss of mine “he feared the common man”. His reasons were simple. Given the fact that a man could not feed his family, or it had been placed in jeopardy, that normally peaceful man would resort to methods he would typically shun. Brezhnev’s reasons were sound, and came from years of experience.
The Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches, have by their actions, placed the people of this country in a tenuous position, and regardless of the feminization of the American male, there are still enough who will rise up to prosecute the lawless in government.
Every one of the Thirteen Colonies had a Militia Act. That Militia was the People’s teeth, their final tool against tyranny. The Militia was such an important part of our law enforcement that it not only became part of the body of the Constitution, but was also defined as “being necessary to the security of a free State” and a right that “shall not be infringed”.
Where do we stand today?
Our borders are open to hundreds of thousands of illegal’s, some of whom may no doubt be of the nature to destroy us as a result of our wars of conquest, and occupation.
Our manufacturing base is depleted.
Our programs of free trade that gives our potential enemies the upper hand have limited our access to rare Earth elements, necessary to the defense of our country.
You have created Trillions in debt that also gives our potential enemies the upper hand.
What is the solution of the government?
Disarm the American People under any form of trickery, corruption and fraud possible.
Create laws that you have no authority to enact, and punish those who wish to defend their life and liberty.
Give immunity to public thugs who taser five year old girls, and beat to death mentally handicapped men.
Do you believe that you will be immune from a tired and distraught People who have nowhere else to turn?
Is ...
No Comments »
The following is a comprehensive list of all representatives that voted against an audit of the "Privately Owned" Federal Reserve Bank.
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/materials/HR1207-Shame-List.pdf
We feel that every representative should have stood in favor of this important legislation for several reasons.
The primary, and most basic reason being that in the 97 years of its operation the Federal Reserve has NEVER been audited. EVER!
Do you think perhaps it is overdue? Especially in light of what has transpired with the economy in the last 24 months?
Can any of these representatives offer a valid reason for voting aginst this legislation? I dont think so, and we here at RTR have heard them all.
1. The most ridiculous being that it would disrupt operations and pose a risk to the recovery. What recovery? Most recently: Wells Fargo laying off 2,800, Microsoft laying off 5,800, and the tens of thousands that have lost their jobs?
High unemployment, and a moribund housing market have increased risks to the U.S. economic recovery, while the public debt looms large and needs to be cut.
2. Investors were worried that greater political influence in the Fed's operations, could weaken the central bank's resolve to fight inflation in the future. Please note, the dollar has lost approximately 95% of it's value since the Fed came into being in 1913. I think the Fed, based upon this fact, is losing it's battle against inflation.
The U.S. House of Representatives had approved a bill in December of 2009 that included a provision, championed by Texas Representative Ron Paul, that would have opened the Fed's dealings to audits much the same as agencies of the government. But in a statement on June 15 of this year, House Democrats participating in negotiations over a final financial reform bill signaled a willingness to live with a narrower Senate audit provision that does not cover monetary policy.
The Fed, which has admitted it was too complacent about regulatory oversight in the run-up to the global financial crisis, has come under heavy fire for being too close to the banks it regulates. So, in the end, the U.S. central bank appears to be emerging largely unscathed by the regulatory reform efforts. It successfully fought off a Senate push In May 2010, that would have stripped it of its oversight of smaller banks, and is poised to emerge as the most powerful financial regulator when reforms are complete.
If you agree with us that this legislation should have passed, then exercise your right in the next election cycle and vote out those who failed once again to do the right thing, and uphold their oath to defend, and protect the Constitution of the United States of America.
No Comments »
Jesse's Cafe Americain
“I have to think this train is probably going to leave the station soon and we need to focus our efforts on explaining the story as best we can. There were too many people involved in the deals -- too many counterparties, too many lawyers and advisors, too many people from AIG -- to keep a determined Congress from the information.”
James P. Bergin, NY Fed, in an email to his Fed colleagues
'Though it is hard to divine much understanding from the unredacted filing, it has become clear that Goldman had more involvement than previously believed: In addition to the credit default swaps it bought from AIG, the filing shows that Goldman Sachs also originated many of the underlying assets that AIG and the New York Fed bought back from Société Générale.
The American people have the right to know how their tax dollars were spent and who benefited most from this back-door bailout," said Kurt Bardella, spokesman for Issa. "Now that it's public, let's see if the sky really does fall as the New York Fed said it would to justify its coverup."
Other lawmakers believed that the New York Fed was trying to hide its ties to Goldman Sachs.' AIG Reveals the Story - CNN
"Wednesday’s hearing described a secretive group deploying billions of dollars to favored banks, operating with little oversight by the public or elected officials.
We’re talking about the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, whose role as the most influential part of the federal-reserve system -- apart from the matter of AIG’s bailout -- deserves further congressional scrutiny...
By pursuing this line of inquiry, the hearing revealed some of the inner workings of the New York Fed and the outsized role it plays in banking. This insight is especially valuable given that the New York Fed is a quasi-governmental institution that isn’t subject to citizen intrusions such as freedom of information requests, unlike the Federal Reserve.
This impenetrability comes in handy since the bank is the preferred vehicle for many of the Fed’s bailout programs. It’s as though the New York Fed was a black-ops outfit for the nation’s central bank...
New York Fed staff and outside lawyers from Davis Polk & Wardell edited AIG communications to investors and intervened with the Securities and Exchange Commission to shield details about the buyout transactions, according to a report by Issa.
That the New York Fed, a quasi-governmental body, was able to push around the SEC, an executive-branch agency, deserves a congressional hearing all by itself." Secret Banking Cabal Emerges From AIG Shadows - Reilly - Bloomberg
And this is the same Federal Reserve that was proposed by the Obama economic team to be the 'super regulator' with broad powers and consumer protection responsibilities over the entire financial system.
The Fed is a private agency, quasi-governmental, but not subject to discretionary audit or review by the government, except at arms length, through managed testimony. They make a point of demanding secrecy and independence at their own discretion, oversight on their terms.
This is a choice promoted by Geithner and Summers, who are creatures of the Fed and the banking system, almost sure to return to sinecures there after leaving government. And it is tempting choice for a president and congressmen of a weak character. If the Fed bears the responsibility they do not have to budget money and manage the process, and they can point fingers at its every failure. It is a formula for conflicts of interest, soft bribery and corruption. Confidence does matter.
The Fed and Blackrock are becoming to the Obama Administration what Halliburton and KBR were to Bush and Cheney, and the banking crisis -- the new Iraq. Can the handling of it be so inept that it becomes Obama's Watergate as well?
The Fed must be audited, and its power to disburse public money to private banks, except in the normal course of open market operations, curtailed. Only the Congress has the right to tax the people, and the Fed's ability to disburse billions of funds at its own discretion to domestic and foreign banks is a de facto form of taxation, since the Fed operates on a cost plus basis, without budgetary allotment from the Congress. The obligations of the Federal Reserve flow directly from its balance sheet, which is the basis for the national currency.
And despite the arguments from the Financial Times to 'stop snooping' the press and the Congress should delve deeply into the AIG bailout, because enough has already been exposed that it smells to high heaven.
It is remniscent of Watergate and Enron to see Timmy, Ben, and Hank falling all overthemselves in establishing that they had no knowledge or involvement in the payments of billions to AIG.
The truth must come out.
My own suspicion is that Goldman 'set up' AIG for a proper face ripping with its financial arrangements, playing both sides of the deal. There is further evidence of money flowing from Goldman to AIG executives before the bailout occurred. And at the least the major players saw what was happening and turned a blind eye to it, busying themselves with other things and establishing their plausible deniability.
A proper investigation can establish any specific guilt. It is a shocking scandal that the FBI and Justice Department are still not more actively involved in real investigation rather than these staged hearings.
But this incident should make it absolutely clear why the Fed cannot enjoy the expansion of its role as the regulator of the system. It is too conflicted in its mission of monetary independence, and at the same time the creature of the banks, to be a true civil servant fully answerable to the Congress.
Yes I understand the distinctions between the Fed Board of Governors and the NY Fed with regard to FOIA requests, and the appointmet process. What I am saying is that the distinctions obviously do not hold, do not work. The Fed is one organization. These distinctions are remniscent of the banking scandals exposed by then AG Elliot Spitzer. They simply do not work. They are ...
No Comments »
Recent Form Posts