Posts Tagged ‘Constitution’

Day the Towers Fell: Unanswered Questions

September 16, 2017

—What of the “five dancing Israelis” that same day that were barely a flash in the pan in the news cycle, and the dozens (hundreds?) of Israelis that were deported in the following days?
—Who shorted the airlines involved in the four hijackings and made big money?
—Why was every aircraft in the entire country grounded immediately, including military aircraft, while the bin Laden family took off in the hours following?
—Why did we never see a photo of the aircraft that crashed into the Pentagon, but we all saw the photos of the building and the hole in the building without the remains of the aircraft?
—What happened to the investigation into the billions of dollars of Pentagon budget not accounted for, after the papers were destroyed in the Pentagon hit in that section of the building?
—Why are NONE of the multitude of security videos in that area ever available? Did every one of them have top secret evidence? If so then why was that secret evidence in plain view enough for an open-air video to capture it in the first place?
—How, and when, did major CIA asset Osama bin Laden become Enemy of the State Number One?

–Why do freedom-loving Americans buy into the fraud that State Security would protect them, and protect their freedoms, while it was assaulting those freedoms in their face?

–The eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good. –Proverbs 15:3

 

Advertisements

U. S. and State Governments Aiding and Abetting Criminal Brownshirts Leftists Now?

August 20, 2017

Yahoo/AP distorts the facts in their article about Charlottesville. What else is new?

Everyone who paid attention knows that one group in Charlottesville came with a permit, working getting the required permit, and intending to peaceably assemble. They had the legal right to be there.

If the ALT-LEFT had not announced with follow-through credibility that they intended to shut down that rally, there would have been no problem. Conservatives and Christians are already shut out of Operation Mockingbird Media, the Old Grey Lady Ossified Official Press, and increasingly censored out of private but de-facto public forums and arenas like Social Media sites, Google, Twitter, and so on.

But the counter demonstration as the media calls it included the very violent masked marauders of the fascists of  “antifa” who came with soda cans filled with concrete and other lethal weapons, one flamethrower caught on video, and marched straight toward the rally.

So what did the “authorities” do? Governor McAuliffe, who knew that a federal judge had ruled that the rally had a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to speak, and that he had time to provide and coordinate PROTECTION for this assembly, he declared a “state of emergency” so he and the mayor could shut down the rally, and make sure they joined the message to the country that they will not tolerate free speech to the right of Josef Stalin or Pol Pot.

So how did they proceed? Just before they began to speak, for starters, the police declared it an “unlawful” assembly. With a permit they got legally, remember, and for a rally for which the organizers had been coordinating with the police.

Then they sent the police in to remove the rally attendees from the site of the rally.

The police “escorted” the rally attendees directly into the violent “counter-protestors”, who were waiting for them with all their weapons. When the inevitable physical battle began, the police FLED the scene, telling one reporter they were pulling back because it was “too violent”.

What in the world are police for? First, there was plenty of warning from the left Brownshirts that they intended to force the rally to shut down.

So instead of protecting citizens who came to (freely) assemble and (freely speak), who disavowed violence, and prepare to block the declared criminal intent from the Brownshirt leftists, they proceeded to shut down the rally for those Brownshirts.

In other words, the Governor and the Mayor joined the criminals. The fascist “Antifa” members who are willing to speak publicly claim it is not really organized are liars, because you cannot have that many popping up everywhere in these highly coordinated actions without some kind of patronage, financial support, and organization. This is something that in a sane country cries out for some harsh RICO action.

But what if these leftist Democrat and RINO-dominated federal and state governments are joining the criminals in de facto censorship? What if Romans One is happening before our eyes, with people who have turned their backs on God getting given up by God to rot in their own reprobate minds?

States independence, not constitutional convention

February 18, 2017

Mark Levin is a smart guy, but…

Please think before accepting a new constitutional convention.

One, if all three branches of the federal government have acted illegally and unconstutionally with impunity the entire history of the Republic, beginning with Hamilton’s execrable central bank, the Marbury v. Madison decision, then banning post office competition, and even an abominable war to overthrow state sovereignty, the claim that the income tax was ratified, and the rest, then rest assured, it is a useless exercise.

SCOTUS and gang could wait until you expend all that effort and money to then declare the effort itself unconstitutional. Then, you representatives would start backing off.

Two, it’s a Pandora’s box. You get scoundrels lying to get in, with betrayal and payoffs in mind. Think central bank. Think RINOs on steroids.

Three, there are two much better tactics for the goal of liberty.

Tactic one. Repeal of the 17th, to put the Senate back in the hands of the state legislatures. That returns some sovereignty to the states and even the people. Because you can tear into your state reps and senate easier than the U. S. Senator.

Tactic Two. Frame everything within the 10th Amendment.

Tactic Three. Make your state refuse federal strings attached money. It’s a stupid excuse for giving up your sovereignty for 30 pieces of silver. Call it that.

Four. Finally, yell and scream secession! The looney Left Coast have now made it even pc to talk about it. Advocate Calexit for starters. Secede. Free Florida. Georgia for Georgians. The Cajun Republic.

 

Obama actions contradict what he says

November 5, 2016

Obama invokes the Constitution against Trump: He’s the most over-ruled president in history on constitutional grounds.

Obama says Trump would shut down the Press. Obama tried to remove Fox News from the WH Press Pool. Obama’s IRS tried to wear down recognition for applicants of the political opposition, not just Tea Party applicants.

Obama says Trump would throw opponents in jail. Obama promised the “most transparent” government in history. The Obama administration has criminally prosecuted more whistleblowers than any other administration in history.

Obama preaches about avoiding discrimination against people of different faiths. But Muslims from Syria are three times as likely to receive asylum from his administration than Christians, Alawites or other faiths. Wikileaks reveals the discrimination in his administration against Arab Christians for jobs.

Obama preaches against hating others based on religion. Yet every time a terrorist invokes Islam in an incident, he directs this warning against everybody else.

Obama reacts to warnings about Islamic radicalism by pointing to the Christian Crusades. He never mentions that the excuse for the Crusades was to reclaim the “Holy Land” after Islamic armies had conquered them by force.

Obama blasted Trump for saying that if he says something, government employees would do it. Of course what he didn’t say was that he has “a pen and a phone”.

JFK, the Cold War, Krushchev, Allende, and Zelaya

May 11, 2015

In general, as a convinced anarcho-capitalist, I agree with most of what Mr. Hornberger said in his video linked here about the JFK assassination:

http://www.voicesofliberty.com/video/the-facts-of-the-jfk-assassination-and-what-we-should-learn-from-them/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_campaign=VOL&utm_medium=post

Except mainly for one brief glancing comment about Salvador Allende. Not his fault, necessarily, though, considering the totality of the news blackout on certain aspects of the way things were then.

That said, once you learn some facts that are publicly available, and some that aren’t so much, there is no way one can say that Salvador Allende wanted a peaceful coexistence. There are other aspects of those events that say different, most of which were suppressed by the international press cartel for its own reasons, or for the reasons of those who run it. If the same sequence of events were to happen today, there would be a LOT of facts coming to light on all sides of the issues.

If I had doubt about that before, they were all blown away during 2009, when the entire force of the international news cartel Establishment threw its entire propaganda machine into supporting the same story line about events in Honduras, contrary to the truth. Every single official representative of every single member of the United Nations supported the s
ame story color-coordinated story line as the Media Cartel.

In Honduras there were even large demonstrations outside the offices of CNNE (CNN Espanol) demanding they remove their reporter and stop telling lies about events there.

That’s why I did some research about Allende. Most of what’s in the public libraries is tilted in one direction but even between the lines in the leftist shill press there is some truth to be had.

ALLENDE WAS NOT INTERESTED IN PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE.

One connection I discovered between the Honduras and the Chile stories was Jose Miguel Insulza, the Secretary General of the OAS. He was the chief political adviser to Salvador Allende in that regime, which had declared itself loudly as a Marxist government. Not just socialist, but Marxist. They saw the existing economic system of Chile something to overturn.

Allende brought not only Fidel Castro to visit, but he invited Castro-sympathizer revolutionaries from all the countries around Latin America. This was the 1970s when it was clear, without even believing government press, that Cuba was sending material support to violent leftist insurgencies across the country, and that was also with Soviet support.*

Okay, as socialism is ruinous on any economy, and catastrophic if administered as a shock treatment, Allende’s policies and its effects did just that. I can believe they had help from the CIA, but this process needed no CIA help. Socialism did the same thing that government interference has always done throughout thousands of human history, including the Soviet Union, only faster in the industrial age (which would have collapsed within months from 1917 without help from  Western banking capital).

As libertarians SHOULD know but always forget to point out, when the CIA brings down a socialist regime it is only accelerating a political process that occurs naturally, the same as to the USA regime. From what I understand, that’s just simple Austrian economics.

Anyway, Allende and his administrators (including Insulza) was already into his plan to build his own alternative military structure, just like Obama promised he was going to do in 2008. (Remember that?)

Allende’s regime was stockpiling weapons in government warehouses maintained by political appointees. He was importing experienced (violent) revolutionaries from all around outside his borders. Cubans were invited in (like they were to Venezuela even BEFORE Chavez).

THEN THE SAME CHILE CONGRESS that put the winner of the plurality into power of the general election (well below majority) , finally DEMANDED that the military take action to stop the runaway regime. So they did.

What follows was not pretty. But Chile is in a better condition now that it would have been had the military left Allende to execute the remainder of his totalitarian plans.

JFK somewhat before and toward the end sought peace. Apparently Krushchev did too, in my opinion, his removal being one piece of evidence.

But I doubt that of Allende. I also KNOW that Manuel Zelaya of Honduras in 2009 received the same (better even) coverage that Allende got in 1973. I also know that Roberto Michelletti got the same vitriol (worse really) spun at him that Pinochet got for so many years.

And in the usual leftist shill web sites supported by the usual socialist billionaire-foundation suspects, they still use the same lying rhetoric as back then.

(NOTE: Were there atrocities back then? No doubt. There were also full-blast shootouts between revolutionaries and military troops at those clandestine arms depots. The violent revolutionaries wanting to support the planned totalitarian regime change were called “resistance” against the coup, and the military “golpistas”.

Portugal had a peaceful coup. Libya had a peaceful coup and the West blasted away the ONLY middle-eastern nation and its leader that had denounced its own previous policies, and was a blue ribbon success for peaceful change among Arab countries. The ONLY one where Christians felt safe, women were lifted up in public view, prominently.

Honduras restored constitutionality, which you could call a “coup” but only if you count the stopping of a counter-coup that was already in progress, or restoration of constitutional continuity in power rather than presidential continuity in power.

I am an anarchist, but there things that are worse sometimes that the regime that rules in your land. Ask the Cold-war era refugees from Eastern Europe.

<<————————————>>

*–Remember it didn’t take long for the Soviets to remove Khrushchev after that rapprochement either. (And speaking of facts kept out of general public view, the current Rockefeller patriarch of the day had visited Moscow between both events.

It seems both sides of the Cold War (or their manipulators) wanted to keep the threat levels and military production up, but without actually letting any missiles fly.

IRS and Feds engaging in more prosecutorial criminality

March 8, 2015

Here’s another case of federal and IRS prosecutorial criminality.

He’s a creationist who is well-known among Christians who are interested in the topic. He was, in the opinion of m many, the most effective creationist speaker. His invitations to speak were many, he had years scheduled in advance. They sold the videos in DVDs but made clear that permission was granted to copy them, as long as they were given away, and they were download-able on the Internet.

The IRS put him away for 10 years claiming “structuring”. Structuring is when somebody follows the law but somebody at the IRS decides you’re trying to avoid the reporting requirements. They got the structuring laws passed by claiming it was a “tool” to go after drug traffickers.

There were other bogus charges and then the first thing the judge did after a request from prosecution was to ban the defense strategy. There were all kinds of things they also threw at him.

He had been denounced by a jealous Christian school director in the same town of Pensacola.

I just discovered that as the end of his sentence draws near, they have created more bogus charges to keep him in prison. The judge presiding –note this!– has banned all taking of notes, and has banned everyone from having a Bible open in the courtroom. I am not making this up.

Outside the courtroom after one session:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgaZFQrKBn4

Kent Hovind’s blog: http://www.kenthovindblog.com

https://www.facebook.com/drkenthovind

http://ytmp.blogspot.com

Forbes is reporting on it:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2014/10/29/government-coming-down-harder-on-kent-hovind/

Taxation is tribute, tribute is theft

September 16, 2014

Both dominant USG political parties are socialist, because their platforms and practice both make the basic assumption that all your money belongs to them to do with as they see fit, and they will let you keep enough to live another day to continue to “pay tribute”. This is the life of serfs and lords of the manor. Organized grand theft.

I never, not once, I NEVER agreed to ANY such “social contract” WHATSOEVER.

There is no government on Earth today that did not arrive to it by conquest. Today’s “lords” pretend to be more benevolent but they still have the warfare-welfare state to sell.

All the wars in the Middle East have a pivot point in Jerusalem. USG lined up to lay its reputation on the line, along with the sons of serfs, in support of Israel, which is a creation of what were called Zionists before WW2. Truman and other lords of the manor threw reports of Irgun atrocities in the trash and recognized Israel immediately.

Meantime, the Federal Reserve continues its counterfeit money operation. Fiat money makes it easier to wage war, so we have a runaway government waging unconstitutional wars with unconstitutional money. What they can’t get by taxing us out of house and home (in many cases literally) they get by robbing us in the greatest theft scheme of history, currency devaluation. They call it “inflation” so it doesn’t sound so bad.

When Krugman of the NYT says a little bit of inflation is good, he’s quoting Keynes, whose ideas corrupted the conversation and made most economists stupid. What neither Keynes or Krugman will admit publicly is that inflation is a direct theft of value from what “purchasing power” the “little people” have.

But politicians loved him. Durban said quipped “Keynesianism is dead” at the presser for so-called “Sequestration”. Sequestration had absolutely ZERO cuts to the budget over the previous year. So when USG complained about having to cut services, they were lying when they said it was stingy Republicans are blah blah. But the Republican Party is no better, they did the same thing to finance the wars too.

I told everybody in 2008 that Obama would do the same things Bush did. And I am so sorry that Obama did not only that but much much more than Bush could have hoped for.

Jesus came to set at liberty those who are captive, give comfort to the poor, heal the sick, and most importantly save our souls. In Matthew 17 he exposes all taxation schemes as “tribute” extorted (stolen) by conquering looters. In saying “Give unto Caesar what is Caesar and unto God what is God’s” he was referring to the fact that Caesar and all extortionists (see Matthew 17) do not own anything legitimately. Romans 13 is no excuse for Caesar-loving 501c3 loving pastors, because if any government does not meet its requirements it means it deserves nothing.

Second Amendment: Did they mean to protect the right of only governments to arm themselves? Really?

May 30, 2014

Mr. P. H. would have his readers believe that the Second Amendment was meant to ONLY protect the right of the *government* to “bear arms” for the protection of a “free state”!

Yessir, they say, the Founding Fathers knew that without a constitution that guaranteed the right of the government to bear arms, why, the poor Congress and the poor Executive and the poor government-financed Army and the militia that they organized would be left defenseless! Nobody would let them arm the police! How could they have a standing army!

You heard right. They do agree that these rights are for all individuals, and that the fourteenth amendment recognized that these rights extend to individual rights from all governments (federal, state, local):

–free exercise of religion
–freedom from a religious establishment (official church)
–speech
–press
–assembly
–petition the Government for redress
–freedom from forced hosting of soldiers, whether in time of peace or war both
–to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable and warrantless searches and seizures
–no holding to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury
–freedom from double jeopardy
–to refuse to be forced to testify against one’s self
–to one’s life, liberty AND property, except by *due process* of law (not arbitrary process)
–freedom eminent domain except for a public purpose
–fair compensation for properties seized under eminent domain
–if accused, a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of peers, to confront witnesses against him, assistance of counsel, and to obtain witnesses in his own favor
–and, no excessive bail
–ALL other rights even if not enumerated

But some people say that there is one that was included in this list of INDIVIDUAL rights that was the ONE exception. That is, they say, that the right to defend your freedom against your own government is a right that they reserved for only the government itself!?!

Intellectual Property Monopolies Clarified

March 22, 2014

Tibor Machan always has something interesting to say in his columns at the Daily Bell web site. For example, his article “Intellectual Property, Anyone?”.

One comment pointed out that one reason that many intellectuals, even some libertarians, defend “intellectual property” monopolies, is “the envy that the intellectual suffer for the successful, troglodyte businessman”…

That may be true for many, but not for all.. But there is at least an idea that other parties who use someone’s new idea are somehow “freeloading”. I do believe in “credit where credit is due”, but this is impossible to do “justly” in the long run when you create incentives for “rent-seeking”. That’s what a copyright and patent regime does , especially in a land of corporations, or, the present land of corporations.

It inevitably becomes a battle of wits and trickery. Two people who have the same idea, but one of them lives closer to the patent office. Is that “fair”? I’m a software engineer, but some of my code is generic functions that I’ve written before. Whose code is that?

The US Constitution included the mention of copyright and patent, with a parenthetical clause that says the purpose was utilitarian. It a land of individual artisans, maybe, maybe not.

The most convincing argument, though, against “intellectual property”, in my opinion, is the total, absolute, unequivocal requirement by definition of an agency (government, mob, dictator, etc.) with powers to violate the non-aggression principle, PLUS the total, absolute, unequivocal arbitrary and capricious nature of where the boundaries are on “intellectual property”. That is, how far does it reach? How many years?

One science fiction writer, Robert Sawyer I think, wrote once that he thought copyrights should be limitless, without expiration, and inheritable to all generations!

This is all because we have come to think of copyright in this way. I have read that before the introduction of the printing press, there was no such thing as copyright, and copyright itself was “invented” by kings and authorities for the purposes of censorship. Think the “stamp act”. Think permits for the First Amendment akin to permits for the Second.

Although Thomas Cahill in his book “How the Irish Saved Civilization” pointed out that the reverence for books that the Irish learned from St. Patrick led to a noble’s exile for sneaking into his neighbor’s palace in the dark of night to copy the neighbor’s books in the dark!

The idea of monopoly rights for inventions for utilitarian purposes is also part and parcel with the idea that a monopoly of force over a bounded geographical area –or unbounded, as some world dictatorship advocates would have it– is necessary for scientific, artistic, and technological advancement.

One example demonstrates the lie of the collective utilitarian argument used in the USA Constitution. Tim Berners-Lee, and hypertext (and related ideas), and his colleagues, public-domaining the Web, and we all can see the results.

A more expansive article of evidence is the “open source” movement (as in the Open Source Foundation, which grew out of the idea of “free software”, with “free as in free speech, not free beer”, Richard Stallman’s preaching point. Tens and maybe hundreds of thousands of programmers are contributing to projects that by now ALL of us use.

Linux servers dominate the nodes used to carry the Internet. Firefox and Chrome and other freely shared browsers are pushing Internet Explorer out of the way. More and more of us are using Open Office or Libre Office or the Google applications to do their documents. This has inspired a parallel movement to do the same thing with hardware inventions, but not just computer hardware, but physical inventions. Open Source programs for 3-D printing for example.

And note that the barriers for entry into the class of patent-holders also holds back new inventions. With the new law Obama recently signed, it’s also a matter of who gets to the patent office first, and no matter if you had prior art, no matter if it was already in the public market. Get the patent and start trolling.

Another argument against patents as incentives for invention is the obvious fact of incentives to suppress them. A new energy patent holder (see infinite-energy.com, and use the hyphen!) might be tempted to sell it to an oil company for a billion bucks, and the oil company might consider it a bargain! And don’t forget the rumor of the light bulb that never burns out. Amazing how long those lights last in your car’s dashboard. And remember Tesla’s suppressed inventions. He might have been able to continue some of that today, with crowd-sourcing.

But the clincher, in my opinion, is the fact that no matter how you might enforce copyright or patent monopoly in the real world, there is no “natural” way at all, no “self-evident” way at all, to do it without arbitrary and capricious decree by somebody against any and all others.

//

“Affirmative Action” programs are just a mask on the old “token Negro” hiring

March 17, 2014

Whites and European-descendants are a minority in the world today. Was it racism when the Hopis got chased all over southwest US by other tribes (Navajo I was told)? Was it racism when the tribe Columbus found on Hispaniola had wiped out the tribe that had occupied the island before that? Is white slavery racism?

They say “hate crime” is worse because it targets a group. Tell you what, EVERY crime targets the entire human race.

It’s a distraction anyway. It used to be that civil rights leaders in the 1960s (I was there) complained about “token Negro” hires. They loudly protested the practice of hiring somebody over another just because they were black.

So the left-socialists turned the injury of token hirings into insult, and slapped a new label on the same thing (like Orwellian Doublespeak), and called it “affirmative action”.

Better to just treat each person as an individual.

//