Welcome to the New American Monarchy
Wikipedia begins its definition of the US Constitution adopted and ratified in 1787-1789 by saying: "The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America." The purpose of that Consitution, or so we were told, was to replace the supreme power of the English Monarchy. A despotic, corrupt supreme law that had and used that power to "jail civilians indefinitely."
Court: US Can Jail Civilians Indefinitely
A federal appeals court has ruled President Bush can order the indefinite jailing of civilians imprisoned in the United States. The five-to-four decision effectively reverses last year’s ruling that the administration cannot label US residents “enemy combatants” and jail them indefinitely without charge. The ruling came in the case of the only person still held as an enemy combatant on US soil. Ali al-Marri was arrested six years ago at his home in Peoria, Illinois, where he lived with his wife and five children. He was initially charged with credit card fraud and lying to federal agents. But in June 2003, President Bush declared him an enemy combatant and ordered him into military custody. He has spent the last four years in solitary confinement at a Navy brig in Charleston, South Carolina. Al-Marri’s attorney Jonathan Hafetz said, “This decision means the president can pick up any person in the country—citizen or legal resident—and lock them up for years without the most basic safeguard in the Constitution, the right to a criminal trial.”
You can read more about this here. Also, at the New York Times.
Lies and False Accusations Rule!
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Does Patriotism Matter?
Are these people patriots or traitors?
Thomas Sowell --
The Fourth of July is a patriotic holiday, but patriotism has long been viewed with suspicion or disdain by many of the intelligentsia. As far back as 1793, prominent British writer William Godwin called patriotism “high-sounding nonsense.”
Internationalism has long been a competitor with patriotism, especially among the intelligentsia. H.G. Wells advocated replacing the idea of duty to one’s country with “the idea of cosmopolitan duty.”
Perhaps nowhere was patriotism so downplayed or deplored than among intellectuals in the Western democracies in the two decades after the horrors of the First World War, fought under various nations’ banners of patriotism.
In France, after the First World War, the teachers’ unions launched a systematic purge of textbooks, in order to promote internationalism and pacifism.
Books that depicted the courage and self-sacrifice of soldiers who had defended France against the German invaders were called “bellicose” books to be banished from the schools.
French textbook publishers caved in to the power of the teachers’ unions, rather than lose a large market for their books. History books were sharply revised to conform to internationalism and pacifism.
The once epic story of the French soldiers’ heroic defense against the German invaders at Verdun, despite the massive casualties suffered by the French, was now transformed into a story of horrible suffering by all soldiers at Verdun — French and German alike.
In short, soldiers once depicted as national heroes were now depicted as victims — and just like victims in other nations’ armies.
Children were bombarded with stories on the horrors of war. In some schools, children whose fathers had been killed during the war were asked to speak to the class and many of these children — as well as some of their classmates and teachers — broke down in tears.
In Britain, Winston Churchill warned that a country “cannot avoid war by dilating upon its horrors.” In France, Marshal Philippe Petain, the victor at Verdun, warned in 1934 that teachers were trying to “raise our sons in ignorance of or in contempt of the fatherland.”
These were voices drowned out by the pacifist and internationalist rhetoric of the 1920s and 1930s.
Did it matter? Does patriotism matter?
France, where pacifism and internationalism were strongest, became a classic example of how much it can matter.
During the First World War, France fought on against the German invaders for four long years, despite having more of its soldiers killed than all the American soldiers killed in all the wars in the history of the United States, put together.
Yet during the Second World War, France collapsed after just six weeks of fighting and surrendered to Nazi Germany. At the bitter moment of defeat the head of the French teachers’ union was told, “You are partially responsible for the defeat.”
Thomas Sowell is a nationally syndicated columnist and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
McCain didn't vote.
What about these people listed on a local blog? Read "Roll Call vote on Dodd Amendment. Here's the good guys."
No mention of the bad guys, though. Are they stand up heroes or sell-out cowards?
Thomas Sowell's commentary in the Sunday, July 6, 2008 Eureka Reporter might shed some light on those representatives that believe the "end (always) justifies the means". I've included the whole article on this blog for obvious reasons even though Joe regards most of this kind of thinking right out of the dark ages. What he says is worth reading . . .
Thomas Sowell --
Internationalism has long been a competitor with patriotism, especially among the intelligentsia. H.G. Wells advocated replacing the idea of duty to one’s country with “the idea of cosmopolitan duty.”
Perhaps nowhere was patriotism so downplayed or deplored than among intellectuals in the Western democracies in the two decades after the horrors of the First World War, fought under various nations’ banners of patriotism.
In France, after the First World War, the teachers’ unions launched a systematic purge of textbooks, in order to promote internationalism and pacifism.
Books that depicted the courage and self-sacrifice of soldiers who had defended France against the German invaders were called “bellicose” books to be banished from the schools.
French textbook publishers caved in to the power of the teachers’ unions, rather than lose a large market for their books. History books were sharply revised to conform to internationalism and pacifism.
The once epic story of the French soldiers’ heroic defense against the German invaders at Verdun, despite the massive casualties suffered by the French, was now transformed into a story of horrible suffering by all soldiers at Verdun — French and German alike.
In short, soldiers once depicted as national heroes were now depicted as victims — and just like victims in other nations’ armies.
Children were bombarded with stories on the horrors of war. In some schools, children whose fathers had been killed during the war were asked to speak to the class and many of these children — as well as some of their classmates and teachers — broke down in tears.
In Britain, Winston Churchill warned that a country “cannot avoid war by dilating upon its horrors.” In France, Marshal Philippe Petain, the victor at Verdun, warned in 1934 that teachers were trying to “raise our sons in ignorance of or in contempt of the fatherland.”
These were voices drowned out by the pacifist and internationalist rhetoric of the 1920s and 1930s.
Did it matter? Does patriotism matter?
France, where pacifism and internationalism were strongest, became a classic example of how much it can matter.
During the First World War, France fought on against the German invaders for four long years, despite having more of its soldiers killed than all the American soldiers killed in all the wars in the history of the United States, put together.
Yet during the Second World War, France collapsed after just six weeks of fighting and surrendered to Nazi Germany. At the bitter moment of defeat the head of the French teachers’ union was told, “You are partially responsible for the defeat.”
Thomas Sowell is a nationally syndicated columnist and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
Friday, July 4, 2008
What Value Words of Truth?
United States Declaration of Independence1823 facsimile of the engrossed copy from Wikipedia
America's legitimate right to stand or exist as nation co-equal to all other nation's on the earth including its patriarchal adversary, England and its aristocratic ruling monarchy, was founded on the legal premise expounded in the Declaration of Independence. These men, the architects of this long lost Republic, argued their right to overthrow the rule of a despotic parent that refused to recognise their offspring's right to legitimate existence did so by invoking God's recognition. Hence, these words:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
Those men not only spoke and wrote such words, they put their lives on the line for treason for making such a Declaration. They didn't hope nor offer hope in some angry, senile old man or some word-hack spouting sanctimonious ideas about hope and trust in vague promises of a new direction.
If you need someone to tell you what to do, how to do it and to speak for you, take some time and read the book by an American historian and political scientist, Howard Zinn published in 1980, A Peoples History of the United States. Herein lies the history of a free people that knew how to speak for themselves and how to act for themselves.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." These words became their truth.
All men may have been created equal, but very few act like they are, actually believe that equality is a self-evident truth, with the rare exception of the kind of people Mr. Zinn wrote about, perhaps. Joe Blow, like he says, is just a nobody. So, he celebrates the Fourth of July the only way he knows how to celebrate life, like nobody, but like any first-class citizen, he votes with his feet.
What value are your words of truth?
Monday, June 30, 2008
Make The Connection?
Massive FBI raids -"Operation Southern Sweep" - Over 450 agents and local police involved after TWO years "investigations" while millions of dollars are reportedly involved, if the amount they say they recovered is true.
Over at the Humboldt Herald today we find, "Code enforcement news unreported" with the following: "It’s been rightfully pointed out that local media — including the blogs — are dropping the ball on keeping up with the Code Enforcement Task Force. The meetings are not being televised and last we heard, Task Force member and HumCo Supervisor Chair Jill Geist didn’t want the meetings broadcast because of financial burden."
You can read the rest of the article and the following post: "Editor's Note" here.
So, you apparently have warrantless searches under the guise of "Code Enforcement" and rubber stamp "warranted" searches based upon someone's use of electricity as an excuse to look for what?
Now, after you get all of that wonderful information under your belt and mull that question, take a look at this:
Over at the Humboldt Herald today we find, "Code enforcement news unreported" with the following: "It’s been rightfully pointed out that local media — including the blogs — are dropping the ball on keeping up with the Code Enforcement Task Force. The meetings are not being televised and last we heard, Task Force member and HumCo Supervisor Chair Jill Geist didn’t want the meetings broadcast because of financial burden."
You can read the rest of the article and the following post: "Editor's Note" here.
So, you apparently have warrantless searches under the guise of "Code Enforcement" and rubber stamp "warranted" searches based upon someone's use of electricity as an excuse to look for what?
Now, after you get all of that wonderful information under your belt and mull that question, take a look at this:
Police, Firefighters, Utility Workers Among Hundreds Trained as "Terrorism Liaison Officers"
"Colorado is one among of handful of states where hundreds of firefighters, paramedics, police, and even corporate employees are being trained to hunt down and report a broadly defined range of “suspicious activities.” They’re called Terrorism Liaison Officers. The federally supported initiative trains them to look out for “observed behavior that may be indicative of intelligence-gathering or pre-operational planning related to terrorism.”
Read the followup Denver Post article, "Terror Watch Uses Local Eyes."
You don't suppose that all you folks who were at those meetings, Code enforcement meeting draws 600 and County code enforcement actions draws hundreds have more to worry about than code enforcement issues do you?
Did someone actually believe that these elected county representatives were seriously looking after everyone's best interests? Or, did they all get a pass on January 1, 2000?
Saturday, June 28, 2008
The Patriot Perspective
“The Constitution shall never be construed... to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” —Samuel Adams
"Second Amendment Security"
“The People” narrowly prevail, 5-4
By Mark Alexander
“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” —Second Amendment to the United States Constitution
Yesterday, in a narrow 5-4 vote (Scalia, Alito, Roberts, Thomas and Kennedy), the Supreme Court reaffirmed, in District of Columbia v. Heller, that the people’s inherent right to keep and bear arms is plainly enumerated in our Constitution. The Court ruled that the Second Amendment ensures an individual right, that DC could not ban handguns, and that operable guns may be maintained in the homes of law-abiding DC residents.
However, the ruling still leaves open the question of whether the Bill of Rights has legal precedence over state and municipal firearm restrictions.
As UCLA Law School professor and constitutional scholar Eugene Volokh points out, “The Heller decision only involved the Second Amendment’s effects on federal laws (including laws of federal enclaves, such as DC). Whether the Constitution limits state and local gun bans—which is to say, whether the Second Amendment is ‘incorporated’ against states and their subdivisions by the Fourteenth Amendment—will have to be decided in a future case.”
...Continue Reading »
I'll never forget the cartoon by Vip that showed this great big giant of a bully with this great big chip of wood on his shoulder, looking down at this ematiated little guy with disgust and scorn telling him: "Go ahead. Knock it off." The next picture showed the little guy with a great big Colt 45 shooting that chip right off his shoulder.
So, bring it on bullies!
--Joe
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Save The Little Children
Once again the precious lives of our children are used to justify trashing the law and eliminating Constitutionally protected rights. This is what a major portion of Americans are hoping in: Senator Barack Obama. Here is his response on the latest Supreme Court ruling on gun ownership:
"I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms, but I also identify with the need for crime-ravaged communities to save their children from the violence that plagues our streets through common-sense, effective safety measures. The Supreme Court has now endorsed that view, and while it ruled that the D.C. gun ban went too far, Justice Scalia himself acknowledged that this right is not absolute and subject to reasonable regulations enacted by local communities to keep their streets safe. Today's ruling, the first clear statement on this issue in 127 years, will provide much-needed guidance to local jurisdictions across the country. "
"As President, I will uphold the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun-owners, hunters, and sportsmen. I know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne. We can work together to enact common-sense laws, like closing the gun show loophole and improving our background check system, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals. Today's decision reinforces that if we act responsibly, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe."
Sounds good, use our "common sense," "keep our communities and our children safe," "act responsibly." Lord forbid a gun should fall into the hands of "terrorist" or a "criminal"!
The practical reality of acting responsibly is, despite the fact the Court ruled Americans can keep guns at home for self-defense is something altogether different. Now that gun ownership is legally protected don't let a police officer see you holding that gun. Today the mere presence of someone packing a weapon, whether it be a gun, a knife or a club, makes them feel threatened. That act alone, feel threatened, grants all police officers the right to defend themselves. It grants them a license to kill. All they are required to do is act "in good faith."
So, remember the little children. They just might save your life some day!
"I have always believed that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to bear arms, but I also identify with the need for crime-ravaged communities to save their children from the violence that plagues our streets through common-sense, effective safety measures. The Supreme Court has now endorsed that view, and while it ruled that the D.C. gun ban went too far, Justice Scalia himself acknowledged that this right is not absolute and subject to reasonable regulations enacted by local communities to keep their streets safe. Today's ruling, the first clear statement on this issue in 127 years, will provide much-needed guidance to local jurisdictions across the country. "
"As President, I will uphold the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun-owners, hunters, and sportsmen. I know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne. We can work together to enact common-sense laws, like closing the gun show loophole and improving our background check system, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals. Today's decision reinforces that if we act responsibly, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe."
Sounds good, use our "common sense," "keep our communities and our children safe," "act responsibly." Lord forbid a gun should fall into the hands of "terrorist" or a "criminal"!
The practical reality of acting responsibly is, despite the fact the Court ruled Americans can keep guns at home for self-defense is something altogether different. Now that gun ownership is legally protected don't let a police officer see you holding that gun. Today the mere presence of someone packing a weapon, whether it be a gun, a knife or a club, makes them feel threatened. That act alone, feel threatened, grants all police officers the right to defend themselves. It grants them a license to kill. All they are required to do is act "in good faith."
So, remember the little children. They just might save your life some day!
--Joe
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Some Pride - A Little Peace
Mining in the swamp of worthless opinions contained in the myriad of words Joe occasionally finds a valuable gem. "Guernica has lessons for the present" doesn't sound like much of a prize jewel does it? Well, it is!
This is a thoughtful, well-written commentary by Ellen Taylor in the June 24, 2008, Times Standard's "My Word" that addresses something every American needs to deal with. That "something" is absolution.
Read what she says here
This countries legitimate right to exist is founded, not on men preaching trust and hope, but on law; law supported and justified by The United States Constitution. A simple truth that is lost on a country that practices anarchy, mob rule and enforces chaos within and abroad. That Law makes every registered voter responsible and accountable for what their government does and does not do, whether they like it or not. In other words, their failure to enforce the law makes everyone complicit in the crimes of the lawless whether it be the government or some thug beating his wife. More importantly, killing innocent people in the guise of war is murder regardless the intent or motivation. If there was ever a time for the American people to stand up, be accountable and justify their legitimate right to exist it is now. Otherwise, everyone could find themselve beyond absolution.
This is a thoughtful, well-written commentary by Ellen Taylor in the June 24, 2008, Times Standard's "My Word" that addresses something every American needs to deal with. That "something" is absolution.
Read what she says here
This countries legitimate right to exist is founded, not on men preaching trust and hope, but on law; law supported and justified by The United States Constitution. A simple truth that is lost on a country that practices anarchy, mob rule and enforces chaos within and abroad. That Law makes every registered voter responsible and accountable for what their government does and does not do, whether they like it or not. In other words, their failure to enforce the law makes everyone complicit in the crimes of the lawless whether it be the government or some thug beating his wife. More importantly, killing innocent people in the guise of war is murder regardless the intent or motivation. If there was ever a time for the American people to stand up, be accountable and justify their legitimate right to exist it is now. Otherwise, everyone could find themselve beyond absolution.
--Joe
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)