Monday, 15 July 2013

Re: Black Racism Killed Trayvon ...

I can't remember the case, but it was while I was in law school, the most ridiculous case that I can recall regarding Congress' grab of, and abuse of the Commerce Clause; as well as the asinine Court's blessing of such a power grab.  It regarded a manufacturer of clothing,  I think they were jeans, but I don't remember now.  Because the jeans utilized a zipper that was made in a different State,  the Supreme's in their infinite wisdom ruled that the Court in question had jurisdiction because the manufacturer had imported less than a hundred zippers from one state to another. 

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 2:58 PM, MJ <michaelj@america.net> wrote:

AIS8C3
[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
Samuel Johnson 1750 dictionary
To RE'GULATE.v.a. [regula, Lat.]
1. To adjust by rule or method.
   Nature, in the production of things, always designs them to partake of certain, regulated, established essences, which are to be the models of all things to be produced: this, in that crude sense, would need some better explication.  Locke.
2. To direct.
    Regulate the patient in his manner of living. Wiseman.
    Ev'n goddesses are women; and no wife
    Has pow'r to regulate her husband's life.
 Dryden.
.
CO'MMERCE.n.s.
[commercium, Latin. It was anciently accented on the last syllable.]
Intercourse; exchange of one thing for another; interchange of any thing; trade; traffick.
The word "commerce" was almost never used in common parlance in the colonies or newly independent states. A search of newspapers, speeches, and letters of that time and place finds few instances of it. The word is originally French, and we have this from Emmerich de Vattel, in his Law of Nations (1758), Book I § 92:
... commerce consists in mutually buying and selling all sorts of commodities.
Vattel was well-known and often cited by the Founders.


Note the PARTIES involved -- States, foreign Nations and Indian Tribes.

What has this to do with 'any "thing"  or entity that can or will affect interstate commerce'.
It simply doesn't.
It is ABSURD.

Regard$,
--MJ

To "regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the States, and with the Indian tribes." To erect a bank, and to regulate commerce, are very different acts. He who erects a bank, creates a subject of commerce in its bills; so does he who makes a bushel of wheat, or digs a dollar out of the mines; yet neither of these persons regulates commerce thereby. To make a thing which may be bought and sold, is not to prescribe regulations for buying and selling. Besides, if this was an exercise of the power of regulating commerce, it would be void, as extending as much to the internal commerce of every State, as to its external. For the power given to Congress by the Constitution does not extend to the internal regulation of the commerce of a State, (that is to say of the commerce between citizen and citizen,) which remain exclusively with its own legislature; but to its external commerce only, that is to say, its commerce with another State, or with foreign nations, or with the Indian tribes. Accordingly the bill does not propose the measure as a regulation of trade, but as "productive of considerable advantages to trade." Still less are these powers covered by any other of the special enumerations. -- Thomas Jefferson


At 02:50 PM 7/15/2013, you wrote:
Michael, in a sense, I agree with you.  As an example, how does the Federal Government have jurisdiction over the criminalization of drugs,  which is codified in Title 21 of the United States Code, and not at all in the U.S. Criminal Code; Title 18.  The same goes for pollution standards, in Title 33. 

In another sense, I understand the logic, because as you well know, the Congress' jurisdicition extends over any "thing"  or entity that can or will affect interstate commerce.
 
Finally, whether we agree, or disagree, whether we like it or we don't like it,  that is the law of the land. 


On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 2:44 PM, MJ <michaelj@america.net> wrote:
But the US Constitution lists ... piracy, counterfeiting, treason, violation of laws of nations ... and no other crimes whatsoever ...
Besides, the dubiously ratified 14th from which all these 'civil rights' are derived ... applies to STATES.
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
What Law did Zimmerman 'put into effect'?
Regard$,
--MJ
"In our country the lie has become not just a moral category but a pillar of the State" -- the great Soviet dissident and literary figure, Alexander Solzhenitsyn in December 1974.



At 02:33 PM 7/15/2013, you wrote:
It has been long ago decided that there is nothing afoul of the double jeopardy clause of the 5th Amendment, if in fact the State or other municipality chooses to prosecute an individual, and the Federal government also chooses to prosecute.  The theory of "Dual Sovereignty"
 
"The Constitutional Right not to be placed in double jeopardy, being a vital safeguard in American society, should not be given a narrow, grudging application".  See Green v. United States, 355 U.S. 184;  2 L.Ed.2d 199,  (1961);  (c.f.; See Also Bartkus v. Illinois, 359 U.S. 121, 131-133; 3 L.Ed.2d 684 (1959);  a defendant prosecuted by two sovereign governments for the same conduct may on occasion be able to invoke  double jeopardy protection.)
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 2:20 PM, MJ <michaelj@america.net> wrote:
 
Holder was all full of vim and vigor, talking about how the U.S.D.O.J.  was on the job, looking at and reviewing what could be done in the legal arena to continue the prosecution of Zimmerman. 


Continue? Wasn't he declared 'not guilty' by a jury of strangers?
What is to continue -- specifically?
Regard$,
--MJ
"Show me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people were placed on the sole chance of their rulers being good men, without a consequent loss of liberty?" -- Patrick Henry, Speech on the Federal Constitution, Virginia Ratifying Convention (5 June 1788).

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

Re: Black Racism Killed Trayvon ...

when will people come to the realization that the left and this administration are GROSSLY over playing their hand. wasn't the war on women and biden telling the blacks that the republicans was gonna put em back in chains in this day and age clue enough?


On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:39 AM, MJ <michaelj@america.net> wrote:

Black Racism Killed Trayvon ...
By Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson

Rachel Jeantel, the troubled young woman who was speaking on the phone to Trayvon Martin just before he was killed, testified in George Zimmerman's second-degree murder trial that Martin called Zimmerman a "creepy a– cracka" before their violent confrontation.

I've been warning for the past 23 years that black racism is out-of-control – it appears black racism killed Trayvon Martin, and Paula Deen's career!

Since the shooting of Martin, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and the NAACP (along with the liberal media) have done their best to portray Martin as an innocent kid tiptoeing through the tulips who just happened to be the victim of a racist white vigilante (even though Zimmerman is half Hispanic).

Blatant hostility and racism toward whites is common among black youth. Martin's friend Rachel Jeantel admitted that where she comes from the term "cracka" is a common term used to describe whites.

Before his death, Martin was suspended from school; he was caught with a marijuana pipe; it was reported he had burglary tools in his locker; and it was recently revealed that pictures of marijuana plants and someone suspected to be Martin holding a gun were found on his cell phone. Does this sound like a well-adjusted teenager?

Trayvon Martin was the product of a broken home. He was also a victim of the corrupt civil-right leaders who peddle racism infecting the minds of young blacks. Martin's parents (Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton) stood next to race hustlers and knowingly allowed this case to be framed as a race issue. As a result, supporters have taken to Twitter, threatening to kill Zimmerman and random white people if he gets off:
  • @HotTopicLys: f**k Don West. f*** George Zimmerman. I'll kill both them n***as.
  • @StayFocus_Jones: ima kill a white person in self-defense if Zimmerman go free lol on everything.
  • @ZackSlaterExe: If they don't kill Zimmerman Ima kill me a cracka.
  • @BE4L_Pervis: If Zimmerman win, I'm gonna kill a white kid by mistake.

All the threats and screams of racism from these thugs, as well as Sharpton and Jackson, have nothing to do with justice for Trayvon! Just as the uproar over celebrity chef Paula Deen's use of the word "N–-er" decades ago has nothing to do with eradicating racism.

Deen has been excoriated after she admitted she had used that word in a deposition over a case accusing her of condoning an atmosphere of sexual harassment and racism in her businesses.

Paula Deen has apologized profusely to everybody and their mama! She released statements, videos and appeared on the "Today" show begging for forgiveness from blacks.

Jesse Jackson (of all people!) has said his organization plans to investigate the matter and that he will help the embattled chef overhaul her image. She didn't owe an apology to all black people. Jesse Jackson is not the gatekeeper to black America, and she doesn't need him to remake her image.

Since Paula's admission, the Food Network, Wal-Mart, Caesars Entertainment, Smithfield Foods, Sears and diabetes drug maker Novo Nordisk are no longer doing business with her. This type of overreaction by majority white-owned companies is the height of cowardice.

Just as in the Zimmerman case, it's time for people to take a stand against all forms of racial intimidation!

By apologizing to all blacks, Deen and her former sponsors are unwittingly sending the message that just the accusation alone is enough to get whites to cave. This only encourages vultures like Jackson and Sharpton to swoop in and exploit these incidents for personal gain.

Jackson claims he's going to investigate Deen's past use of a racial slur. Did anyone investigate his past use of racial slurs when he used the slur "hymie" and "hymietown" respectively when referring to Jews and New York City? Or when Jackson accused Barack Obama of "talking down to black folks" by lecturing them on moral issues?

If Jackson, Sharpton and the NAACP hadn't jumped on the Trayvon Martin case and made it into a racial matter, nobody would have heard of it. His death would have gone unnoticed, just like the more than 500 black youths that were murdered in Chicago in black-on-black violence last year.

The attention on the Zimmerman trial is not about justice for Trayvon; it's about intimidation and dividing the American people along race.

I hear from many white people that they've given up on trying to help or deal with blacks. If they hire blacks, they're afraid to correct them because they may cry racism. God forbid if they have to lay off or fire a black employee – all hell might break loose! This is putting fear in white people because they can't win either way.

Whites have to overcome the fear of being called "racist." Blacks have to be on the side of good and stand for what is right, regardless of race. In order to conquer these racist black leaders, we must see clearly that the uproar in the Trayvon Martin and Paula cases is NOT about justice.

Original Source: http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/black-racism-killed-trayvon-and-paula-deens-career/

http://www.bondaction.org/content/article/37076/Black%20Racism%20Killed%20Trayvon

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

Pics and toons 7/15/13 (2)





--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

Pics and toons 7/15/13





--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

HOORAY! Angry camel all tied up and about to have his throat cut attacks crowd, killing one





BareNakedIslam posted: "Don't worry, there is no footage here of the slow death of the poor camel by throat-cutting.  Just a lot of screeching by the Muslim savages. http://youtu.be/kfTJCUzPHRs"

New post on BARE NAKED ISLAM

HOORAY! Angry camel all tied up and about to have his throat cut attacks crowd, killing one

by BareNakedIslam

Don't worry, there is no footage here of the slow death of the poor camel by throat-cutting.  Just a lot of screeching by the Muslim savages.

Read more of this post

BareNakedIslam | July 15, 2013 at 7:09 pm | Categories: Religion of Hate | URL: http://wp.me/p276zM-VQu

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://www.barenakedislam.com/2013/07/15/hooray-angry-camel-all-tied-up-and-about-to-have-his-throat-cut-attacks-crowd-killing-one/




--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

Obama military really is persecuting Christians





Dr. Eowyn posted: "Do you remember our Trail Dust's post of April 28, 2013, "Christianity to be outlawed in U.S. military," on the Pentagon consulting the virulently anti-Christian atheist Mickey Weinstein to develop new policies on "religious tolerance," including a policy"
Respond to this post by replying above this line

New post on Fellowship of the Minds

Obama military really is persecuting Christians

by Dr. Eowyn

Do you remember our Trail Dust's post of April 28, 2013, "Christianity to be outlawed in U.S. military," on the Pentagon consulting the virulently anti-Christian atheist Mickey Weinstein to develop new policies on "religious tolerance," including a policy for court-martialing military chaplains who share the Christian Gospel during spiritual counseling of American troops?

3 days later, on May 1, 2013, I posted a follow-up, "Pentagon may court martial soldiers for sharing their Christian faith," about a statement from the Pentagon confirming that not only will military chaplains be court martialed, any soldier who engages in "religious proselytization" (i.e., who shares the Christian faith with another) will also be subjected to court martial and "non-judicial punishments."

A day after, on May 2, 2013, Bob Unruh of WND reported that the Pentagon was backing off. Lt. Cmdr. Nathan Christensen issued a statement saying that the Department of Defense "never and will never single out a particular religious group for persecution or prosecution."

Blah. Blah. Blah.

All lies.

Christians in the U.S. military are being persecuted and prosecuted. Below are two examples of Christian servicemen being coerced to either embrace the "gay lifestyle" or get out.

persecution-of-christians

1. The case of Technical Sgt. Layne Wilson, a 27-year veteran of the Utah Air National Guard.

Todd Starnes reports for Fox News, July 11, 2013, that last December, TSgt. Wilson wrote a private email to a chaplain at West Point, stating his unhappiness about a "gay" wedding in West Point's Cadet Chapel.

West_Point_Cadet_ChapelWest Point Cadet Chapel

Wilson wrote: "This is wrong on so many levels. If they wanted to get married in a hotel that is one thing. Our base chapels are a place of worship and this is a mockery to God and our military core values. I have proudly served 27 years and this is a slap in the face to us who have put our lives on the line for this country. I hope sir that you will take appropriate action so this does not happen again."

Instead of responding to the private email, the Commandant of Cadets notified the Utah Air National Guard. All of which led to Wilson being reprimanded for conduct inconsistent with the United States Air Force, which had brought disgrace and discredit upon the Air National Guard.

In a letter to Wilson, Lt. Col. Kevin Tobias of the Air National Guard reprimanded Wilson for failing "to render the proper respect to a commissioned officer" and that "As a noncommissioned officer you are expected to maintain a standard of professional and personal behavior that is above reproach. You have failed!"

Col. Ronald Blunck concurred with Tobias – noting that TSgt. Wilson's "right to practice your religious beliefs does not excuse you from complying with directives, instructions and lawful orders."

After formally reprimanding Wilson, the Air National Guard then terminated its six-year reenlistment contract with Wilson, in effect telling him to retire. "Due to the fact that I expressed my views on homosexuality in uniform; Lt. Col. Tobias stated that I was no longer compatible with further military service," Wilson wrote in a letter detailing the discrimination allegations.

What is even more outrageous is that at the time of Wilson being reprimanded, the Supreme Court had not yet ruled on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which means DOMA was still the law of the land. In other words, in objecting to the homosexual wedding in the West Point chapel, TSgt. Wilson was merely expressing his disapproval of an act that was in violation of a federal law!

Wilson maintains that the military has created an atmosphere where those who do not approve of homosexual conduct "must remain disapprovingly silent or face reprisal to our careers. It is evident those who refuse to affirm homosexuality and openly oppose it are being severely punished."

John WellsTSgt. Wilson has retained the counsel of attorney John B. Wells, a retired Navy commander, who is asking the military to rescind the reprimand and reinstate the original six-year reenlistment contract with Wilson.

"This was an executed contract," Wells said. "But they just went in, tore it up and issued a new one." Wells said his client's only "crime" was registering his opinion that a gay marriage in a military chapel was a violation of the law that existed at that time. "His actions were proper within the scope of the Uniform Code and the Manual for Courts-Martial. While his interpretation of the law may or may not have been correct, his actions should not have given rise to the firestorm of reprisals that he has suffered."

Wells believes that incidents like TSgt. Wilson's are just the "tip of the iceberg" and that "The military is trying to make examples of people who have religious beliefs that homosexual conduct in the military is wrong. When these people assert their First Amendment rights, they are getting slapped down and slapped down hard. The end game is to force conservative Christians out of the military."

2. The case of Master Sgt. Nathan Sommers, a 25-year Army veteran.

Todd Starnes reports for Fox News Radio, June 24, 2013, that Master Sgt. Sommers is a 25-year military veteran, a decorated soloist with the U.S. Army Band, and a Christian conservative.

On June 9, 2013, one day after Sommers told Fox News he was facing discrimination and persecution because of his conservative political and religious beliefs, the master sergeant was found guilty of three Article 15 charges:

  1. Failing to go to an appointed place of duty;
  2. Disobeying an order; and
  3. Making a false official statement.

But according to attorney John Wells, the Army's charges against Sommers stemmed from his giving a superior officer the wrong date for a doctor's appointment. As for the charge of Sommers disobeying an order, Wells explains that in order to comply with that order, Sommers would have had to disclose private information about his autistic son's medical records. "The timing does seem strange," Wells told Fox News. "It's suspicious. It looks like a graduated attempt to build a case against him on some really ridiculous charges.."

 

 

Although Sommers received an oral reprimand and will not be reduced in rank, Wells says he plans on appealing the non-judicial punishment and is considering a lawsuit under the Administrative Procedures Act and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act: "MSgt. Sommers wants to thank the tens of thousands of Americans that have followed his case and offered up prayers for his case. He has decided to put his fate in God's hands and continues to pray for those who are persecuting him."

 

 

Retired Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin believes the Army is trying to send a message to not only Sommers but others in his unit: "Over my 36 years in the US Army I saw numerous situations like this where a soldier is singled out by the chain of command for punishment. The Article 15 proceeding may be technically legitimate, but one must recognize that an Army Master Sergeant with 25 years does not normally do stupid things that are easily avoidable unless there is some mitigating circumstance."

 

 

 

MSgt. Sommers believes the real reasons why he was reprimanded are his conservative political beliefs and Christian faith.

His troubles began last year when he was confronted about having pro-Republican and anti-Obama bumper stickers on his personal vehicle. The stickers read: "Political Dissent is NOT Racism," "NOBAMA," "NOPE2012," and "The Road to Bankruptcy is Paved with Ass-Fault." That last bumper sticker included the image of a donkey. Sommers was told by his superior officer that the bumper stickers were creating "unnecessary workplace tension."

 

Sommers also came under fire for reading the works of conservative Mark Levin, Sean Hannity and David Limbaugh. Last summer he was quietly reading Limbaugh's The Great Destroyer backstage at a concert when a superior officer told him that he was causing "unit disruption" and was offending other soldiers. "I wasn't reading aloud," Sommers told Fox News. "I was just reading privately to myself. I was told they were frowning on that and they warned me that I should not be reading literature like that backstage because it was offensive."

 

 

But the incident that led to an official investigation of Sommers came late last summer when he served Chick-fil-A sandwiches, paid for with his own money, at his promotion party.

 

"My family likes Chick-fil-A and we like what they stand for," he said. "I can make a statement and at least express a religious point of view at my promotion party – theoretically without any fear of reprisal." The soldier also tweeted about the party: "In honor of DADT repeal, and Obama/Holder's refusal to enforce DOMA act, I'm serving Chick-fil-A at my MSG promo reception for Army today."

 

The tweet came under fire from his superior officers, according to an official military document that states: "As a Soldier you must be cognizant of the fact that your statements can be perceived by the general public and other service members to be of a nature bordering on disrespect to the President of the United States."

 

 

Attorney Wells believes Sommers is being discriminated against not only because of his Christian faith, but also because of his objections to homosexuality: "There's no question about it. Because he is religious, because he feels that homosexual conduct is wrong for religious reasons, he is basically being persecuted."

H/t Western Center for Journalism

~Eowyn

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/obama-military-really-is-persecuting-christians/

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com



--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

Illegitimate


Sunday, July 14th, 2013
Illegitimate
Claire Wolfe

I've been struggling several days to find the right way to say something. Still haven't gotten there.

It would help to be drunk or stoned, I think. Words flow more freely then; connections connect more connectedly. But I'm as sober as a judge I usually am, which is a handicap.

Partly, it's that the thing I'm aiming to say is both huge and … nothing. Both burning with enormity and outrage … and a great big ho-hum. It would shock the bejabbers out of Joe Average (if Joe Average were willing to consider it), but most people reading this blog would probably say, "Why are you even bothering to bring that up? Old news. Get over it."

­–

This thing I don't have the right words to express is that there is no legitimate U.S. government -- merely a clever puppet show of one. There is no federal government to which anyone, anywhere owes the slightest allegiance. The country is run by its "security" apparatus. (Yes, and its federalized banking cartel and its unelected bureaucrats and all the Usual Suspects, but it's the power of the secret "services" that's (relatively) new and most alarming.)

You see? My good old fellow free-market anarchists, denizens of intellectual Ancapitstan already know this. You can go on as fervently as I about unanimous consent and Lysander Spooner. It is OLD freakin' news that Those Who Would Govern Us have no legitimate authority as long as one peaceable individual denies consent.

That is, it's old news to us out here on the fringe, the readers, the ponderers, the Outlaws, the rebels, the individualists.

Joe and Josie? Obviously, millions of Mr. and Ms. Averages have been edging for years toward the realization that something's terribly, terribly wrong. But to whatever extent they articulate it, it's usually in terms of bigness or unaccountability. The federal government is "too big" (which of course it is). Bureaucrats are "unaccountable" (also a no-brainer). Big government is run by and for "big money" (yup). The Averages are even beginning to grasp that their old beliefs that "electing the right people" and "reforming the system" are chimeras.

But what comes after?

What if you could sit Aunt Lyda and Uncle William and all the other members of the Average family down and point out to them that a government that's ridden with enormous secret agencies operating under secret law interpreted by secret courts is not, cannot be, and will never be, a democracy or a republic or whatever form you've been taught all these years to salute?

This government is a foreign thing. And all those people you think you're electing merely dance at the end of its strings. And it will never be "reformed" or "held accountable" because by its very nature it is totalitarian. It exists to rule you, period. And as long as your money and your belief feed it, rule you it will.

­–

I don't know if it's true that John Kennedy was assassinated by the CIA. I don't know if it's true that Barack Obama lives in terror of assassination at the hands of U.S. "security" services.

But it makes sense. We know that the CIA never really was an "intelligence" agency. From its inception it was about assassinations and coups; its "intelligence" was usually faulty and always politically motivated. We know that, even before the monstrous growth of secret "security" agencies following WWII, at least one unelected, unaccountable agency held presidents, congressthings, and senators in its thrall.

But of course the FBI and even the CIA are now old hat. Amateur hour. We've got "security" agencies we surely don't even know about. And we've got ones whose existence has been reluctantly and gradually revealed doing things whose scope we can't even guess at. And we know that we are the real target of it all. We, that is, as in We the People. And we know the process of being governed increasingly works against us.

­–

Bigness and unaccountability are bad enough. We should know. We've lived with them and our parents and grandparents lived with them clear back to the days of Roosevelt II or Wilson (at least).

But being governed by secret and hyper-secretive "security" agencies is a whole 'nother thing. A whole different level of tyranny and peril.

And it's this that Joe and Josie and Aunt Lyda and Uncle William don't get yet. They're still happy to believe that the NSA's omni-scooping and the unnamed activities of yet-undiscovered "security" agencies are all for our protection.

They don't yet know that they are the targets. They don't yet know that, when you have this level of secret control, you no longer have even a serious pretense of government "by the people." You have the forms ­ empty. You have a substance that's something altogether else, and altogether terrifying.

­–

Writing about Edward Snowden the other day, Justin Raimondo noted that in in the old Soviet Union, people so despaired of ever learning any actual truth from those in power that they eventually resorted to a form of mental shorthand; they assumed that the truth was simply the opposite of whatever the government claimed.

If the government labeled a man a traitor, a wrecker, a saboteur, then it followed that the man must actually be a hero.

In these 'Netly days, we can dig deeper and discover more nuanced realities. Most won't. And I can't blame them.

I just wonder how far we are from the moment when some critical mass of citizens belatedly realizes that "for your protection" actually means "for the preservation of your masters" and "to preserve freedom" actually means "our sole purpose is to take freedom from you ­ and take it we will, quietly at first, then as savagely as we wish …

And there will be nothing you can do about it, you blind, dumb, deluded fools."


http://bit.ly/15Ih14O

Obama Agrees with Hitler on Schooling Children


7/15/2013
Obama Agrees with Hitler on Schooling Children
by Wendy McElroy

According to Godwin's Law, the first person to invoke Hitler loses the debate. But there is a corollary. Sometimes the comparison invokes itself.

In a legal case that seems headed to the US Supreme Court, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has sided with Hitler against parental rights. Romeike v. Holder involves a German family which is seeking asylum in America because Germany has threatened to remove the Romeike's younger children if they continue to homeschool.

In 1938, Adolf Hitler ordered all German children to be educated either in state schools or in government-approved private schools that strictly followed the Nazi blueprint. The Reichsschulpflichtgesetz (Compulsory Education Law), which specifically banned home schooling, remains in force in Germany today.

The Nazi and American systems of education have always had similarities. The 19th century American education reformer Horace Mann is called the father of American education. The main goal of both systems was not to teach children the three Rs or critical thinking but to produce good citizens. The Nazi vision of a "good citizen" and that of Mann differed but the two approaches had definite overlap. For example, they stressed the inculcation of obedience to authority. Moreover, they reflected a belief that the state should focus upon children because, unlike adults, children were 'wax' and could be more easily shaped.

    "This new Reich will give its youth to no one, but will itself take youth and give to youth its own education and its own upbringing." -- Adolf Hitler

A key difference between the German and American educational systems, however, is that Americans are legally permitted to home school their children.

That situation may change under Obama. In his 2012 State of the Union address, Obama called on "every State to require that all students stay in high school until they graduate or turn 18." Traditionally, education is a state prerogative but the federal government is often able to dictate terms because state schools depend upon federal funding.

The DOJ's stance toward the Romeikes is also revealing. The family was initially granted asylum under a statute that applies to any applicant who has a "well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion." US Attorney General Eric Holder objected to the asylum and the ruling was overturned on appeal. Romeike v. Holder was then taken to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals where the homeschoolers' petition was denied. Nevertheless, the court has ordered the DOJ to respond to a rehearing request.

Given that the DOJ brief in Romeike v. Holder was filed on behalf of the US Attorney General, it can be seen as an official statement on home schooling from the Obama administration. It states "The goal in Germany is for an open, pluralistic society....Teaching tolerance to children of all backgrounds helps to develop the ability to interact as a fully functioning citizen in Germany." In other words, banning homeschooling promotes tolerance and good citizenship. The brief makes favorable reference to a German court ruling that found, "the general public has a justified interest in counteracting the development of religiously or philosophically motivated `parallel societies' and in integrating minorities in this area." In other words, people whose philosophy contradicts the 'general good' (as defined by the state) should be integrated by forcing their children to attend state schools where they become part of a propaganda machine.

    "When an opponent declares, 'I will not come over to your side, and you will not get me on your side,' I calmly say, 'Your child belongs to me already. A people lives forever. What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants however now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community'." -- Adolf Hitler

The comparison between Obama and Nazis on education sounds like hyperbole, but it is rapidly becoming less of an overstatement. Consider an social experiment being conducted by the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) ­ the second largest school district in America. 'Covered California', the state's health insurance exchange, has granted LAUSD almost one million dollars for a pilot program. One of the program's main goals is to train students to become "messengers" for Obamacare. Specifically, the children will be trained to 'educate' their families and possibly other adults about why they should enroll in the tax-subsidized healthcare program. Public school is now training children to educate their parents toward the correct political position.

Heartland Institute explained, "LAUSD will also use tax-paid staff to promote ObamaCare through phone calls to students' homes, in-class presentations, and meetings with employees eligible for ObamaCare's taxpayer-covered healthcare."

Investor's Business Daily reported the words of LAUSD spokeswoman Gayle Pollard-Terry. She explained "proudly" that the "pilot program" was meant to ascertain "how well teenagers serve as messengers of government-sponsored information." Investor's reported: "If they prove proficient at influencing their own families to believe material sent home from schools, she said, the teens will be used to deliver numerous other official messages to adults in their home and neighborhoods." And pilot programs, by definition, are trials in contemplation of expanding the model.

Public schools have always been used to spread state propaganda but the LAUSD program is so blatant that it is being widely compared to the Hitler Youth; sadly, this also becomes less and less hyperbole. The Nazi program was for males aged 14 to 18, with children aged 10 to 14 being divided by sex into two other sub-programs. The Hitler Youth were instilled with Nazi values which they then spread them to relatives and the general public. The program evolved from children teaching their parents to children denouncing those parents who refused to 'learn'.

But for Obama Youth to be truly effective, children must be forced to attend public school or state-approved private ones. He could do it with the stroke of a pen by using his favorite political weapon: an executive order. That is what Michael Farris, founder of the Home School Legal Defense Association, expects to happen.

To me, Farris' prediction still seems over the top. On the other hand, I have just compared Obama to Hitler and a LAUSD program to the Hitler Youth. When reductio ad absurdum no longer works, as it no longer does in American politics, it is not possible to say what is overstatement.

There has never been a better time than now to get your children out of America.

http://bit.ly/1bDbVJX

Florida Law will not allow a civil suit against Zimmerman





 

 

When the defense of liberty becomes a crime, tyranny is already in force. At that point, failure to defend liberty makes slavery a certainty.

 

 

Lots of talk of **civil suits*  related to the Zimmerman case.
So, thanks to Steve for sending in this information that shuts that avenue down.
I only see one problem in all of this -  The present *court* system ignores most all laws that don't agree with their agenda.  And they have been all too willing to MAKE UP THE LAW they want to use.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.032.html

The 2012 Florida Statutes

 

Title XLVI
CRIMES
Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
View Entire Chapter

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s.
776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term "criminal prosecution" includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).
History. s. 4, ch. 2005-27.

 



__._,





   
__,_._,___


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

WARNING: Animal lovers are advised not to watch this





BareNakedIslam posted: "SYRIA: Allegedly, Muslim jihadist rebels killing helpless horses and donkeys for no reason...and apparently enjoying it. http://youtu.be/qGW-0jJfHAg h/t ines"

New post on BARE NAKED ISLAM

WARNING: Animal lovers are advised not to watch this

by BareNakedIslam

SYRIA: Allegedly, Muslim jihadist rebels killing helpless horses and donkeys for no reason...and apparently enjoying it. h/t ines

Read more of this post

BareNakedIslam | July 15, 2013 at 12:55 pm | Categories: EnemyWithin-foreign | URL: http://wp.me/p276zM-VOo

Comment    See all comments

Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
http://www.barenakedislam.com/2013/07/15/warning-animal-lovers-are-advised-not-to-watch-this/




--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.