http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D3gnw0lLbHJg%26feature%3Dshare&h=8AQEdAR_6AQF-7j38Qc7g1HoytN3Or7hVivv6NYOA-rMY_g This is really you tube...freedom watch with Sen. Rand Paul
Since at least the embodiment of this Obama Regime taking the huge step beyond: The Problem: Notice the quickly passed without much thought of implications of the names of the "precedent" cases to justify this action. And Please Notice, not one person including Judge Napolitano, has noticed! The change in the Constitution is that "Precedence" IS ALLOWED TO OVER-RULE "THE RULE OF LAW"! Thus Pres. Jefferson's "On every question of construction, [let us] carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and INSTEAD OF TRYING WHAT MEANING MAY BE SQUEEZED OUT OF THE TEXT, or INVENTED AGAINST IT, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." Legal definition 'precedent' part of the definition that is relevant: ".. As a practical matter, courts can usually find precedent for any direction they want to go in deciding a particular case. Accordingly, precedent is used as often to justify a particular outcome in a case as it is to guide the decision.The body of judicial decisions in which were formulated the points of law arising in any case. .." " Precedents can only be useful when they show that the case has been decided upon a certain principle and ought not to be binding when contrary to such principle..".
The 'code word' is "Threat" for Government defines, as it has been since 2009, 'threat' - including ebony against Gibson Guitar, the 50 yr. home of a family bordering the FL Everglades, contamination of 331,000 pounds of private company's ground beef...and on...and on... AND Sen. McCain, not hearing his own voice!!!: "any person NO MATTER WHO, THAT POSES A THREAT. Since when do we enforce action against any person BEFORE A CRIME HAS BEEN COMMITTED!!! BASED ON GOVERNMENT DEFINED "THREAT"!!! NEVER. Any American, NO MATTER WHO, WHO IS SILENT BEFORE OUR FOUNDER'S PROTECTION 'GUILT MUST BE MADE BY THE ACCUSER'. THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE is the protection of the "Person" of the Constitution. Person means "An individual comprised of a "body [habious]" and a "soul" spirit. ALL LAW THAT HAS OCCURRED AND IS REPRESENTED BY ALL REGULATIONS OF THIS CURRENT, SOCIALIST REGIME - DENYS THE "SOUL" OF ONE PERSON BEFORE THEIR GOD AND THE DECLARATION AND CONSTITUTION OF THIS NATION. HABIOUS IS NOT ONLY A SMALL PART OF DUE PROCESS - IT IS USELESS, UNLESS ATTACHED TO THE 'SOUL'. HOW CAN THESE AMERICANS BE SO IGNORANT TO THE MOST SACRED PROPERTY: SOVEREIGNTY OF THE "SOUL" - "BODY" IS USELESS WITHOUT SOUL. THINK OF A PARALYZED 'PERSON' FOR THE INSULTING, RIDICULOUS NATURE OF THIS ARGUMENT!
If this doesn't make you furious at this Socialist regime which could only be the one to continue its systematic removal of life (plane ticket for whatever purpose but not greyhound, train) - search including the inside of 'body-habious' which is why this debate is even occurring.. 1828 Person: 1. An individual human being consisting of body and soul. We apply the word to living beings only, possessed of a rational nature; the body when dead is not called a person. It is applied alike to a man, woman or child. A person is a thinking intelligent being." The 'body' is not a person when detached or dead. Since you cannot detach 'body' from a live person, then you can't treat the 'body' as if 'it' was, somehow capable of the "THREAT" of any crime or action----before the action occurs!!!
THREAT: "A menace; denunciation of ill; declaration of an INTENTION or determination to inflict punishment, loss or pain on another." There is no unlawfulness because the "Threat" does not result in the crime or the application of the threat. And 'threat' requires a 'soul' for a 'body' cannot perform the illegal act, NO MATTER WHO, unless the 'soul' is attached!!!
One last: "The Natural Rights of persons (body and soul) are INALIENABLE, preceding the social contract and the constitution, and persons may not be deprived of them even with their consent, since they do not have the power to surrender those rights, and therefore do not have the power to delegate the deprivation of those rights to others. ["Declaration of Constitutional Principles" by Jon Roland; www.constitution.org] Hopefully, Jon Roland will be elected in 2012 to the Senate - from Texas --- to help you Senator americans "Sometimes [they] can't see the light shining in their eyes! (President George Washington)"! This PRINCIPLE is the REASON the
above is an unmitigated insult to our Founders and to every American of the very essence of our Constitution and Does "bear false witness against your neighbor" and then there is "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you". I'm pretty sure, Mr. and Mrs. American Senator...you don't think this regime.. would ever 'touch' or accuse your 'habious' would it!!!! So why place this on Americans or
any person? Please be ashamed of yourselves... it would be so refreshing for you to admit, what Obama's regime shall never admit, that "person" is "body and soul" - thinking and cannot as 'body' unless soul is attached. Please read I Timothy I: 8-22!
Cathy West, Escondido CA
PS Thank you for listing your votes by your party membership and for the count completely stated. This American appreciates the return to "information needed to make a proper determination may have been withheld or distorted in a way that is intended to mislead or which has that effect through negligence. [also #12 of several ways in which statutes or other official acts may be unconstitutional" from Mr.
Roland's "Declaration of Constitutional Principles".
No comments:
Post a Comment