1) from Co-Creating Our Future on Planet Earth: ‘Extremist Mass Media Uses Oregon Standoff to Criminally Profile Truth and Freedom Lovers’ - February 23 (orig, posted at truthandarttv.com - Bernie Suarez - February 21)
(A report of an article in the Washington Post by one Leah Sotille, demonizing the Oregon refuge crowd.)
kibitzer3 says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Excellent article. Thanks for the posting of it, Jean.
It would appear to be getting to Crunch Time, if they are now trying to demonize such as the Founding Fathers, and anyone who talks about ‘freedom’. That’s the last card to play – for both sides. And I trust that the Right side of the matter will win out. Trust that, because this is a moral universe – because the universe has purpose, and that Purpose is Good. We are NOT the flies in the web of an evil Spider God. We are here to figure our way out of the 3D hologram temporary prison; better to be looked at as a classroom.
Life is a school. The purpose is to graduate. And we are on that verge. For most of us, at least. So it’s up to us to rise to the occasion. Not let the Bad Guys wear us down.
--
2) from 1776coalition.com: ‘Donald Trump muses about Marco Rubio’s eligibility to run for president’ - FoxNews.com - February 22
..
Based on the U.S. Constitution neither Rubio or Cruz is eligible for the Vice Presidency or the Presidency as neither of them is a "Natural Born Citizen" which has been interpreted to mean the offspring of two U.S. Citizen Parents. Case closed. By the way, the same ineligibility applies to Obama, as his father was never a U.S. Citizen. I'm actually surprised these learned Constitutional Scholars are so inept or corrupted that they have not weighed in on this issue for the last eight years.
Reply
- Just to clarify: The constitutional Framers were obviously, by considerable historical evidence, going by the definitive tome of the day on such subjects, E. de Vattel's 'The Law of Nations, Or Principles of Natural Law,' in which he clarifies the definition of a NBC. Which is a person born in the country (or its jurisdictional equivalent) of citizen parents thereof (and particularly the father, from whom nationality descends, legalistically speaking). Thus, both the doctrine of jus sanguinis - law of the blood - and jus soli - law of the soil - apply. THAT makes it "case closed".
3) from patriotsforamerining.com: ‘One World Order vs. Natural Born Citizens by JB Williams’ - newswithviewscom - February 23 - posted by Harry Riley - February 23
..
Permalink Reply by Stan Stanfield 2 seconds ago (February 24)
J.B. Williams unfortunately, for all of his good efforts in this regard, is muddying the waters on the NBC issue by failing to note the proper definition as codified by E. de Vattel in his definitive tome of the day on the matter, 'The Law of Nations, Or Principles of Natural Law'. In Book One, Ch. XIX, Sect. 212 he clarifies the term, as being a person born in the country of citizen parents of that country - and yes, specifically that of the father, from whom nationality descends, legalistically speaking. (Both the mother and the father were considered One in those days, and the father was the One.) Williams uses wording in Sect. 215 to think that de Vattel is referring to a 'natural born' citizen therein, when all de Vattel is doing there is discussing a 'born citizen'. Sect. 215 does not negate or repudiate Sect. 212, which talks about both the parents - jus sanguinis, in the legal parlance - AND the 'soil' - jus soli. We're talking apples and oranges here.
The best/most comprehensive source of info on this subject that I know of is Atty. Mario Apuzzo's site: puzo1dotblogspotdotcom.
--
...And for a good reason that this all is not just an academic exercise:
Anyone Disagreeing with the Government Will Go To Prison Including the Media for Covering It
Prophetic words by President Bush
“Homegrown violent extremists can be motivated by any viewpoint on the full spectrum of hate—anti-government views, racism, bigotry, anarchy and other despicable beliefs,”John Carlin Assistant Attorney General in charge of anit-domestic terrorism (October 2015)
As one can clearly observe, Assistant Attorney General, John Carlin, is clearly stating that if one disagrees with the government, they are considered (under the Patriot Act) to be a Homegrown violent extremist.
Reuters while describing Carlin’s position, likens domestic, right-wing extremism with anti-governmental views, is guilty of providing “material support” for domestic terrorism.
Further, disagreeing with your government can cause you to “disappear” under the NDAA. Since 9/11, the feds have been engaged in a sequential and incrementally implemented scheme to do away with the First Amendment.
Technically, anyone in the Independent Media will be declared to be guilty of providing material support for domestic terrorists for interviewing “domestic terrorists” such as Ammon Bundy. Any media member interviewing someone who is promoting their cause against the government, will be arrested. I see no distinction between being declared to be a domestic terrorist and providing material support for a domestic terrorist. Both groups will be imprisoned or worse.
Legal Double Talk Will Land Dave Hodges et al In Prison
Shawna Cox and Ammon Bundy appeared on The Common Sense Show and talked about their objectives in Burns, Oregon.
Dave Hodges, the host of The Common Sense Show, dated to interview Ammon and Shawna in separate interviews and is just as guilty of any crime committed by Ammon and Shawna because Hodges “provided material” by interviewing them.
According to a recent ACLU Report , “The Federal government’s “material support” and conspiracy statutes allow the government to obtain convictions without having to show that any specific act has taken place, or is being planned, or even that a defendant intended to engage in terrorism.” This is precisely what the Bundy’s and their colleagues are being charged with. In other words America, you are guilty of pre-crime because someone THINKS you were going to do something. No act of Congress is necessary because according to recent interpretations of Americanjurisprudence, proving material support for terrorism is a crime prohibited by the US Patriot Act in Article 18 of the United States Code, sections and 2339B. Again, you may not have done anything wrong, but the government thinks you are going to. For example, if Dave Hodges interviews Ammon Bundy and allows Ammon to have his say, and Ammon goes on to commit an act that the government says is terrorism, then Dave Hodges is guilty of providing material support. The government could say that Bundy was attempting to grow the number of confederates who are loyal to his cause and Dave Hodges assisted. Therefore, Dave Hodges is arrested as an accomplice in all of Bundy’s actions.
This Is Not a New Development
Below, I wrote the following article on October 17, 2015, from which excerpts are included. Based upon Carlin’s statements, I predicted that all working in the Independent media will be subject to arrest under new Department of Justice Guidelines for providing material support to “Domestic Terrorists”. And that is exactly what we are on the verge of seeing. What exactly is a domestic terrorist?
Some news outlets are reporting that this is a new development. It is not and as I reported on this in October of last year. Below are the excerpts from that article which clearly makes the point that the present Obama administration has planned to jail or murder (possible NDAA application) all who publicly disagree with their policies for quite sometime. The only thing that is new is that the federal government is actually arresting people for WHAT THEY MIGHT DO.
CNN Exposes a Very Dangerous Agenda
“Washington (CNN) Domestic terror groups pose a greater threat to America than ISIS or al Qaeda, a Justice Department official said Wednesday.
To help combat them, the department has created a new counsel that will coordinate the investigation and prosecution of anti-government and hate groups”. (Editor’s note: It is legal to be anti-government in one’s speech and this attitude does not imply the subsequent use of violence).From CNN, “Assistant Attorney General John Carlin, who oversees national security at the Justice Department, announced the new position — the Domestic Terrorism Counsel — following a number of violent attacks or plots against the U.S. that he said were motivated by “anti-government views, racism, bigotry and anarchy, and other despicable beliefs.”
Take note of the use of the strategy often referred to as incrementalism. Carlin vilifies groups that most Americans do not approve of (e.g. the KKK, overt practices of racism, acts of violence etc.). However, Carlin slips into his rhetoric that anyone that characterizes any person harboring any expressed anti-government views, as a domestic terrorist. This is a thinly veiled attempt to end all criticism of the government and government officials.
It is in the DNA of America to oppose governmental tyranny and that is precisely what we are witnessing in today’s Obama administration. It is our duty to protect and defend the Constitution. However, these “Anti-government” views and activities are being characterized as the actions of a domestic terrorist.
THIS IS THE BEGINNING OF THE CREATION OF AN “ENEMIES OF THE STATE” LIST. IT IS ANALOGOUS TO WHAT STEVE QUAYLE HAS LONG REFERRED TO AS THE “RED LIST/BLUE LIST”
From the NDAA, to the plethora of illegal and unconstitutional Executive Orders, the present (Obama) administration has made a mockery of the Constitution. However, in the words our occupied government (i.e. analogous to the French Vichy WW II Nazi collaborators), this administration wants to declare you to be a terrorist for the simple act of disagreeing with the government’s mandates. If traditional, Bible-believing Christians oppose gay marriage, they are members of a hate group cult. No matter how offensive these Christian world views may appear to some, it is the Constitutional right of these conservative groups to hold and express these beliefs. Yet, these beliefs are being criminalized and the holders of these beliefs are being set up for persecution. The Constitution is dead, long live the Constitution! The world has turned upside down.
Again, the CNN coverage of Carlin’s inflammatory comments continues, “Groups such as ISIS and al Qaeda, who are inspired by religious extremism, are designated by our federal government as terror organizations, which makes it illegal to support or assist them. But no such statute exist to prosecute white supremacists, the Ku Klux Klan or anti-government extremists, forcing federal law enforcement to find more concrete charges to lock them up”…
End of excerpts
“Domestic Terrorism overshadows Muslim extremism.”John Carlin
One can see that any American, loyal to the Constitution, and expresses that view can and soon will be arrested for what they might do. This new interpretation of the Patriot Act has already taken place:
Cliven Bundy is accused of conspiracy to commit an offense against the US; assault on a federal officer with a deadly weapon; use and carry of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence; interference with commerce by extortion; obstruction of the administration of justice; and aiding and abetting.
Did Cliven Bundy actually commit an offense against the U.S? NoDid Cliven Bundy actually assault a federal officer with a deadly weapon? No, but the government says he intended to.Did Cliven Bundy carry a weapon in relation to a crime of violence? No, but but this criminal administration said he intended to.Did Cliven Bundy interfere with “commerce by extortion”? No, it was Bundy that was having his commerce interfered with by the BLM.Did Cliven Bundy interfere with federal authorities and their intent to steal his land and hand it off to Chinese Solar Energy front companies acting on behalf of the Chinese military? Yes, but this legal bootstrapping to a crime that has not yet happened, but the government says that it will.Is Cliven Bundy guilty of aiding and abetting? Yes, under this new thought crime interpretation of the Patriot Act. He supported the Hammonds who were having their commerce and property rights interfered with by the BLM. But again, this is legal bootstrapping.
Let me remind everyone that the Hammonds were put in prison under domestic terrorism statutes because a 
controlled burn, conducted on their land with the permission of the federal government, that got out of control. Terrorism? Really? We are only witnessing the beginning of government terrorism against its citizens.
controlled burn, conducted on their land with the permission of the federal government, that got out of control. Terrorism? Really? We are only witnessing the beginning of government terrorism against its citizens.
Subsequently, America, by standing up for your rights against governmental Fifth Amendment violations resulting in the loss of property value and even property ownership, one has become labeled as a terrorist. And now your independent media is also guilty of domestic terrorism for covering these events.
Conclusion
A blind man could see that the government is saying that if you disagree with them, that you are a terrorist. If the media, in any way, supports this new group of terrorists, they are guilty of providing material support for terrorists who intend to commit acts of terror. As Abbott and Costello once said “Who’s on first?”
Did you ever think you were going to live in an America such as this? Who will be the first talk show to go to prison for providing material support for “would-be” terrorists? Or worse yet, will they just “disappear” said talk show host?
My warnings were not taken seriously on October 17, 2015, maybe they will be now.
---
...But at the bottom, bottom line:
from Golden Age of Gaia: ‘Are We Made in God’s Image or Have We Made God in Ours? - Part 3/3’ - Steve Beckow - February 23
“…If we realize that One, we return to the God we never left and know It for the very first time. The creation has returned to the Creator, in whose image it was made. The dance is done. The truth is known.”
No comments:
Post a Comment