LOatest legal work

This is my latest legal work against the government. Let me know what you think

JOHN DOE, SUI JURIS

Sovereign, One (Office) of We the People of the

Republic of Florida, a State

Plaintiff,

v.

BUREAU OF PRISONS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Defendant.

________________________________/

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

(For the command of this author of this contract is for the interpretation of all words with the rules of the interpretation of the author, in present-tense, on a level geometric plane).

1. I am, John Doe, MD, SUI JURIS, one of THE PEOPLE of the STATE OF FLORIDA REPUBLIC and I am accorded rights by the Constitution of The United States of America. I am the Plaintiff in this action. In the above entitled court of record, Plaintiff files suit against THE BUREAU OF PRISONS of UNITED STATES:

Introduction

Applicable Definitions

2. The definitions of the legal terms used in this case are as follows;
1. COURT OF RECORD - At common law, any jurisdiction which has the power to fine and imprison, is a court of record. Salk. 200; Bac. Ab. Fines and Amercements, A. And courts which do not possess this power are not courts of record. See Court. 2. The act of congress, to establish an uniform rule of naturalization, &c., approved April 14, 1802, enacts, that for the purpose of admitting aliens to become citizens, that every court of record in any individual state, having common law jurisdiction and a seal, and a clerk or prothonotary, shall be considered as a district court within. the meaning of this act. Bouvier SIXTH EDITION, REVISED VOL. I. A "court of record" is a judicial tribunal having attributes and exercising functions independently of the person of the magistrate designated generally to hold it, and proceeding according to the course of common law, its acts and proceedings being enrolled for a perpetual memorial. Jones v. Jones, 188 Mo. App. 220, 175 S.W. 227, 229; Ex parte Gladhill, 8 Metc. Mass., 171, per Shaw, C.J. See, also, Ledwith v. Rosalsky, 244 N.Y. 406, 155 N.E. 688, 689. "A 'court of record' is a judicial tribunal having attributes and exercising functions independently of the person of the magistrate designated generally to hold it..." Jones v. Jones, 188 Mo.App. 220, 175 S.W. 227, 229; Ex Parte Gladhill, 8 Metc., Mass., 171, per Shaw, C. J.
2. Sui Juris is defined in Bouvier’s Law Dictionary Sixth Edition as; One who has all the rights to which a freeman is entitled; one who is not under the power of another, as a slave, a minor, and the like. 2. to make a valid contract, a person must, in general, be sui juris. Every one of full age is presumed to be sui juris
3. Judicial Cognizance Judicial notice or knowledge upon which a judge is bound to act without having it proved in evidence. [Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Edition, page 760.] ;
4. Sovereign, We the People - The very meaning of 'sovereignty' is that the decree of the sovereign makes law. [American Banana Co. v. United Fruit Co., 29 S.Ct. 511, 513, 213 U.S. 347, 53 L.Ed. 826, 19 Ann.Cas. 1047.] ; The people of this State, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative. [Lansing v. Smith, 4 Wend. 9 (N.Y.) (1829), 21 Am.Dec. 89 10C Const. Law Sec. 298; 18 C Em.Dom. Sec. 3, 228; 37 C Nav.Wat. Sec. 219; Nuls Sec. 167; 48 C Wharves Sec. 3, 7.]; A consequence of this prerogative is the legal ubiquity of the king. His majesty in the eye of the law is always present in all his courts, though he cannot personally distribute justice. (Fortesc.c.8. 2Inst.186) His judges are the mirror by which the king's image is reflected. 1 Blackstone's Commentaries, 270, Chapter 7, Section 379. ;
5. Republican Government One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whom those powers are specially delegated. In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 11 S. Ct. 573, 35 L. Ed. 219; Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 22 L. Ed. 627." Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, p. 626.

Law of the case

3. The law of the case is decreed as follows:
1. United States Constitution Article 1§9 -No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
2. United States Constitution Article 1§10 No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility.
3. Florida Constitution Article1 SECTION 10. Prohibited laws.--No bill of attainder, ex post facto law or law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.
4. Florida Statute 876.07 Oath as prerequisite to qualification for public office.--Any person seeking to qualify for public office who fails or refuses to file the Oath required by this act shall be held to have failed to qualify as a candidate for public office, and the name of such person shall not be printed on the ballot as a qualified candidate. The oath taken by all Public Officials of the state of Florida reads, in part, as follows- "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Florida, that I am qualified to register as an elector under the Constitution and laws of the State of Florida, and that all information provided in this application is true."
5. Florida Statute 2.01 Re; Common law and certain statutes declared in force.--The common and statute laws of England which are of a general and not a local nature, with the exception hereinafter mentioned, down to the 4th day of July, 1776, are declared to be of force in this state; provided, the said statutes and common law be not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States and the acts of the Legislature of this state. ;
6. 18 USC § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
7. ...at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects...with none to govern but themselves..... [CHISHOLM v. GEORGIA (US) 2 Dall 419, 454, 1 L Ed 440, 455 @DALL (1793) pp471-472.] ;
8. "The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice." Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22, 24.
9. "The state cannot diminish rights of the people." Hertado v. California, 100 US 516.
10. Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them. [Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491.]; … the state cannot diminish rights of the people. [Hertado v. California, 100 US 516.]
11. Act Establishing Florida Statehood, 1845 (From: An Act For The Admission of the States of Iowa and Florida Into The Union, 1845, Collection M81-22)… whereas the people of the territory of Florida did, in like manner by their delegates, on the eleventh day of January, eighteen hundred and thirty-nine, form for themselves a constitution and State Government, both of which said constitutions are republican,… Be it enacted, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the States of Iowa and Florida be and the same are hereby, declared to be
    States of the United States
12. "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby; any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." Constitution for the United States of America, Article VI, Clause 2.
13. Americans with Disabilities Act, (Title II) Public services, which include state and local government instrumentalities, cannot deny services to people with disabilities participation in programs or activities which are available to people without disabilities. For existing facilities, barriers to services must be removed if readily achievable. Miscellaneous (Title V) Includes a provision prohibiting either (a) coercing or threatening or (b) retaliating against the disabled or those attempting to aid people with disabilities in asserting their rights under the ADA.
14. "'...our justices, sheriffs, mayors, and other ministers, which under us have the laws of our land to guide, shall allow the said charters pleaded before them in judgment in all their points, that is to wit, the Great Charter as the common law....' Confirmatio Cartarum, November 5, 1297" "Sources of Our Liberties" Edited by Richard L. Perry, American Bar Foundation.
15. "Henceforth the writ which is called Praecipe shall not be served on any one for any holding so as to cause a free man to lose his court." Magna Carta, Article 34
16. "We cannot say with assurance that under the allegations of the pro se complaint, which we hold to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers, it appears 'beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.' Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957). See Dioguardi v. Durning, 139 F.2D 774 (CA2 1944)." Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519.
17. An act of the court shall prejudice no man. Jenkins' Eight Centuries of Reports, 118; Brooms Legal Maxims, Lond. ed. 115; 1 Strange's Reports, 126; 1 Smith's Leading Cases, 245-255; 12 English Common Bench Reports by Manning, Granger, & Scott, 415
18. … relief that directly serves to bring end to present and continuing violation of federal law is not barred even though accompanied by substantial ancillary effects on state treasury . U.S.C.A. Cost. Amend. 11, Johnson v Collins, S.D. 1994, 875 F. Supp,1371
19. … in cases involving deprivation of constitutionally protected rights “affirmative” relief may be granted notwithstanding that the incidental effects is that the state will be forced to expend funds. Committee on Judicial Administration v Com of Mass. C.A.) 1973, 388 F 32d 1241
20. A federal prisoner have the right to sue the United States under for injuries sustained in prison under the provisions of the federal tort claims act . United States v Muniz, 374 U.S. 150, 83 S.Ct 1850 10 L.Ed 2d 805 (1963)
21. The liability of the United States under the provisions of the Federal Tort Claim Act is dependent upon whether a private individual under like circumstances would be liable under state law Simmons v Nash 361 FS 2d (3^rd Circuit)
22. Statute that is not ambiguous must be given its unambiguously intended effect by courts. Simmons v Nash 361 FS 2d (3^rd Circuit)
23. Federal prisoner could not be classified as “sex offender,” for purposes of statute requiring BOP to give notice of sex offender’s release, based on prisoner’s prior state conviction; classification could only be based on offense for which prisoner was currently serving sentence. 28 CFR 571.72. Simmons v Nash 361 FS 2d (3^rd Circuit)
24. BOP exceeded its statutory authority and inappropriately applied 4042 (c) by identifying him as a “sexual offender” Simmons v Nash 361 FS 2d (3^rd Circuit)
4. This lawsuit is a Declaratory Judgment action contesting classification of Plaintiff as a “sexual offender” by the Bureau of Prisons of the United States. Under 28 USC 1331 and 2201, The Federal Question at issue is whether the United States Government has immunity when acting to the detriment of Plaintiff under the “color of law” and not according to the law itself. It is incumbent on the government to know the law. The Defendant knows the law or should know the law as its very existence in fiction is absolutely dependent on the law. Government cannot exist without the law. If the Plaintiff, whose existence is a gift from the creator and not dependent on the largesse of the law is responsible to the “letter of the law” then certainly it is reasonable to expect Defendant to be held to the letter of the law, especially being comprised of constituents “learned” in the law such as the Attorney General himself, the top law enforcement official in the government.
5. An additional Federal Question is whether statutes passed by The Congress can supersede provisions of right’s guaranteed by The People; for The People; of The People of these United States, through the Constitution Bill of Rights amendments. The right to “due process of law” is one of these rights guarantees in the Constitution which reads in part that no prosecution of Defendant shall occur without “due process”. In subjecting Plaintiff to the negative consequences attendant to being placed on a “sexual offender list” without even a hearing as certainly lack of legal process. Another of these rights is for Plaintiff not to ever be subjected to ‘ex post facto” applications of the law. It is so important that it is mentioned twice in the United States Constitution at Article 1§9 and Article 1§10; and once in the Florida Constitution at Article 1 §10.
6. The Plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages of two-million dollars ($2,000,000.00) in compensation for Defendant taking his name and advertising it erroneously to the community as a “sexual offender” by “law”. There is no law that states Plaintiff should be registered as “sex offender” either in the State of Florida or United States Code. Additionally Plaintiff is seeking $2,000,000.00 to assist in the rehabilitation of his reputation destroyed by the Defendant; and an additional $2,000,000.00 for pain and suffering to Defendant purposely inflicted on Plaintiff by Defendant in an arbitrary and capricious manner. The total compensation Plaintiff is seeking is six million dollars ($6,000,000.00).

Parties

7. Plaintiff is Douglas E. Nalls, MD a freeman and one (Office) of the People of the Republican Government of Florida as established by An Act For The Admission of the States of Iowa and Florida Into The Union, 1845. Therefore, sovereignty is vested with Plaintiff and Plaintiff does not delegate his sovereignty to any other entity in this matter. Plaintiff is a real “flesh and blood man”, a product of the Creator God in His image and has proceeded into this world at the Creator’s behest and by His will. Plaintiff is not indebted to any man for his being or existence. Everything that Plaintiff consumes to maintain his existence is created by Plaintiff’s Creator. For the Creator’s blessing of Plaintiff, Creator requires that Plaintiff shall not worship any other God. Plaintiff is unlearned in the law and therefore the court is required to take judicial cognizance that it interprets Plaintiff’s pleading in a light most favorable to Plaintiff. Plaintiff has been determined to be disabled by the Social Security Administration, in part due to psychiatric disabilities generated by being designated a “sexual offender” by Defendant, but does not receive any benefit from the government for unknown reasons. Defendant qualifies for considerations under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
8. Defendant is a fiction seated in Washington, DC. Defendant is the product of men’s minds, including Plaintiff’ posterity. Plaintiff’s Creator requires that he shall not worship Defendant or shall exalt Defendant above himself. Defendant’s power is a product of Plaintiff, which Plaintiff takes back in these considerations. From the inception of Defendant, codified in The Constitution of the United States, Defendant’s powers were limited to guard against the seizure of government by despotic public officials. As an additional protection, all public officials assigned to carry out governmental functions were required to abode by an Oath of Office in which they swear to the Creator to uphold the Constitution of the United States on pain of condemnation with failure to do so. The Constitution is … supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby; any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." Constitution for the United States of America, Article VI, Clause 2.

Jurisdiction

9. This court of record has jurisdiction in this matter under 28 USC 1331 and 1332, federal questions and diversity issues. Also under 28 USC 1332, Plaintiff claims $6,000,000.00 in compensation from Defendant, exceeding the seventy-five thousand dollar ($75,000.00) threshold for the courts consideration. Other consideration warranting the consideration of the court are the provisions of 28 USC 2201 and 18 USC 242; and any other basis that the court determines applies to these circumstances.

Facts

10. Plaintiff was convicted of conspiracy to defraud the United States, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 371on September 26, 2002. He was released on February 2005, at which time he was informed that he was required to register as a sex offender in Florida. Prior to his conviction and release for fraud in Florida, Plaintiff was convicted of two counts of a third degree sexual offense in Maryland, in 1987. Since April, 2005, Plaintiffs name and information has appeared on Florida's Online Sexual Offender/Predator Registration. The Ft. Lauderdale Police Department was notified of Plaintiffs registration, and required Plaintiff to register with the Ft. Lauderdale Sexual Offender Registry. The Ft. Lauderdale Police then circulated a flyer in Plaintiffs neighborhood and apartment building with Plaintiffs name and image. Plaintiff alleges that since then, he has had to endure threats and harassment, threatened eviction, and vandalism to his property.
11. Initially, Plaintiff petitioned District court in his original case (Case No. 00-684-CR-Dimitrouleas) for relief, since the wrongful misclassification of Defendant as “sexual offender” stemmed from that case, which was not a “sexual offender” case. In fact, it required Judge Dimitrouleas’ ruling to designate Plaintiff as “sexual offender”, by law. Judge Dimitrouleas denied Plaintiff’s petition without explanation, at one point stating, he lacked jurisdiction and that the case was closed. Plaintiff then filed suit against the Governor of the State of Florida, the Attorney General of the State of Florida, and the Commissioner of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement in CASE NO. 06-20435-CIV-GOLD/TURNOFF. Plaintiff claimed that his designation and registration as a sex offender violates the ex post clause of the United States Constitution, and that he was denied due process of law in the improper designation and registration of him as a sex offender. Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief in the form of having his name removed from sex offender registries. (Id. at ) He also sought five million dollars in compensatory damages for his physical and emotional injuries, pain and discomfort, and embarrassment and humiliation.
12. Plaintiff lawsuit, CASE NO. 06-20435-CIV-GOLD/TURNOFF, was denied by the court, stating, at one point, the defendants in that case had immunity. Having asked the court to bar prosecution of the case for failure to state a claim, those defendants have conceded the facts of that case, which are identical to this index case.

Standards

13. When considering Defendant’s motion, the court must construe the factual allegations in the complaint in the light most favorable to Plaintiff. Collins v. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, 224 F., 3d 496, 498-99 (5^th Circuit 2000); In re Stac Elecs. Sec. Litig., 89 F 3d 1399, 1403 (9^th Cir. 1996). Only if no possible construction of the alleged facts will entitle Plaintiff to relief should the court grant Defendant’s motion. Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69, 73, 104 S. Ct. 2229, 2232 (1984). If the factual allegations in the Plaintiff’s complaint support any legal theory that entitles Plaintiff to some relief, the court should overrule Defendant’s motion. By challenging prior complaints alleging it “failed to state a claim”, the prior defendants to Plaintiff’s actions have effectively admitted the facts of the complaint, including the government in Case No. 00-684-CR-Dimitrouleas. See Crowe v. Henry, 43 F. 3d 198,203 (5^th Circuit 1995). There remain no issues in dispute between the parties
14. Immunity is the province of The Sovereign. This country was founded as a democratic republic in which The Sovereign is The People themselves. Before tribunals, it is the delegated powers of The People that confers any immunity on government at all. Therefore, any consideration of finding immunity for crooked public officials who assume prosecutorial powers under the “color of law” is unacceptable and can not be continenced by this court to excuse illegal conduct as delineated in the law itself at 18 USC 242. If public officials are immune, then what does 18 USC 242 apply to and how does one access justice under it? Does 18 USC 242 serve just as window dressing propaganda for public official rule, as sovereign, over our lives (See Bivens) If it were not so, then the law as it is applies here.

Analysis

15. A case decided by the 3^rd Circuit Court of appeals is directly on point in the instant action. The case is Simmons v Nash 361 FS 2d (3^rd Circuit). In this case the facts resembled the facts in Defendant’s case except that plaintiff had not been released from prison prior to his action. Plaintiff filed for declaratory relief and it was granted. The court reasoned that statute that is not ambiguous must be given its unambiguously intended effect by courts. It stated (a) Federal prisoner could not be classified as “sex offender,” for purposes of statute requiring BOP to give notice of sex offender’s release, based on prisoner’s prior state conviction; classification could only be based on offense for which prisoner was currently serving sentence. 28 CFR 571.72. Finally the court concluded BOP exceeded its statutory authority and inappropriately applied 4042 (c) by identifying him as a “sexual offender” Simmons v Nash 361 FS 2d (3^rd Circuit).
16. The defendant in Simmons v Nash was not awarded any compensatory damages presumably because he was still in custody when the court ruled. This Defendant in the instant action has had to endure the humiliations, verbal attacks, neighbors threats of attack, threatened eviction, alienation of affection from domestic partner and family, vandalism, and other negative effects, consequent to The BOP classifying him as a “sexual offender/predator” (Florida’s online list makes no distinction), since he was first listed in April 2005. Plaintiff believes he was denied a kidney transplant for a fatal disease he has because social services evaluated his priority as “low” in part because he had been designated as a “sexual offender”. Plaintiff has been prescribed and taken psychiatric medication including “Abilify” and “Celexa” consequent of a severe depressive disorder he has been diagnosed with in part due to having been designated a “sexual offender” and the frustration of not having equitable due process considerations. By law, Defendant is deserving of the relief sought.
17. The law provides “… in cases involving deprivation of constitutionally protected rights “affirmative” relief may be granted notwithstanding that the incidental effects is that the state will be forced to expend funds. Committee on Judicial Administration v Com of Mass. C.A.) 1973, 388 F 32d 1241.” Also “…relief that directly serves to bring end to present and continuing violation of federal law is not barred even though accompanied by substantial ancillary effects on state treasury .” U.S.C.A. Cost. Amend. 11, Johnson v Collins, S.D. 1994, 875 F. Supp,1371. Further “…A federal prisoner have the right to sue the United States under for injuries sustained in prison under the provisions of the federal tort claims act . United States v Muniz,” 374 U.S. 150, 83 S.Ct 1850 10 L.Ed 2d 805 (1963

Conclusion

Wherefore, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for declaratory judgment and injunction against listing Plaintiffs name on any sexual offender list and in the sum of six million dollars ($6,000,000.00) in compensation to make Plaintiff whole again and obtain denied surgery,

Verification

Under penalty of perjury, I declare I have read the foregoing, and the facts alleged are true, to the best of my knowledge and beliefs.

Compelling Words

Read an interesting post on suzie's comedic blog about the N-Word. I picked it up on Digg. It got my interest because I happen to be Black myself and I must confess that the word may be part of a subconscious compulsion that draws me in as it does others. There were over seventy comments to that article that the moderator allowed! After reading the post I didn't think it was particularly useful. It didn't solve anything. The word is still the word.

The Bible in John describes the word as God. Maybe that is why we become so obsessed with them. But I don't see any intrinsic power in words at all. The only power to be derived from words is the power we give them. We are the power. Name-calling in particular is demonstrative. The particular word criticized has a history of pejorative connotations. So I guess the history of a word has a lot to do with how people perceive them. If I called you a name the has no traditional connotation how would you receive or interpret that word. For instance, if I called you a "giraffe", how would you receive that and interpret. My guess is that you would not receive it at all refering to you. You would most probably end up ignoring it. But, if the media, say through entertainment, had prepped you to believe that there was some kind of embarrassing, humiliating, shameful, or negative connotation associated with being called a "giraffe", getting called a "giraffe" would might indeed offend you.

This is the key to the whole dilemma. Your life is your own and yours alone. It is for you to define for yourself. You can not project something that does not exist within you to project out. Whatever you project is still yours. It does not affect anybody else. If it happens to offend someone else you just harmonized with some one on your same wavelength. What you project out only hurts you. If you concentrate on experiencing your life, you couldn't be concerned about defining others as you would be busy defining yourself. That is what is between you and The Creator.

The Quest for Comedic Stardom: My Reaction to the N-Word

The Quest for Comedic Stardom: My Reaction to the N-Word

Air Express Lane

Today President Bush announced he would make available restricted military airspace for airline traffic along the East Coast. On its face, this act would seem like the best domestic administration this regime has come up with since its inception 7 years ago, to solve a domestic problem. Most critques say this manuever will not contribute anything to relieve airline congestion. It sounds good though that somebody is doing something. We should all be very dubious of what The President says. This man does not have a conscious and he could care less about inconviences of the average middle class American. I really do believe this is a maneuver to set us all up for a "false flag" operation during The Holidays. This Holiday Season is one of the last chance windows that can provide cover for a "false flag" operation to initiate war with Iran. Most airline commuters are so glad to hear that The Presient has proposed them some relief, they are not focused on the dangers that is posed by this evil man. This is a time for a terror alert indeed.

New Attorney General

Bush had Michael Mulkasey sworn in publically as Attorney General of the United States. He had already had his private Jewish based swearing in lqst week. You know Jews don't actually have to honor their pledges under their religious oaths. Anyway conspicuously absent from the ceremony were: Diane Feinstein; Joseph Liebermann; Chuch Schumer; and Arlan Spector, all Jews instrumental in getting this torture enabler confirmed as Attorney General. All Recent Republican Attorney Generals were present at the ceremony except for Alberto Gonzalez. However Bush mentioned Gonzalez prominently during his ceremony speak. This is a crazy place!

Busting the Stranglehold on the World

There is a wonderful new article that I found http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=193604. It sheds a whole new light on the motives behind the push for war with Iran. The article was written by Ellen Brown, JD and posted at her blog and website http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/war-with-iran.php. I am reprinting it here for convience but I recommend highy her website. She is a smart woman. I am not so much endorsing this article because of its Islamic based anti-usery solution to finances, but because it is anti-userious. Usury is condemned by both Christianity and Judaism. That pretty much leaves it as a tool of the devil. Please read.

BEHIND THE DRUMS OF WAR WITH IRAN:
NUCLEAR WEAPONS OR COMPOUND INTEREST?

Ellen Brown, November 10^th, 2007
http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/war-with-iran.php

Post your comments here

---

On October 25, 2007, the United States announced harsh new penalties on the Iranian military and its state-owned banking systems. Sanctions, bellicose rhetoric and the implicit threat of military action are goads for another war, one that critics fear is more likely to ignite a nuclear holocaust than prevent one. The question is, why is Iran considered such a serious threat? The official explanation is that it is planning to develop nuclear weapons. But the head of the UN watchdog agency IAEA says he has "no concrete evidence" of an Iranian weapons program.¹ And even if there were one, a number of countries have tested or possess nuclear weapons outside the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, including Pakistan, North Korea, India, and probably Israel; yet we don't consider that grounds for military action. Iran would just be joining a long list of nuclear powers.

Another theory says the push for war is all about oil; but Iran supplies only 15 percent of total Persian Gulf oil exports, and its oil is already for sale.² We don't need to go to war for it. We can just buy it.

A third theory says the saber-rattling is about defending the dollar. Iran is threatening to open its own oil bourse, and it is already selling about 85 percent of its oil in non-dollar currencies. Iran has broken the petrodollar stranglehold imposed in the 1970s, when OPEC entered into a covert agreement with the United States to sell oil only in U.S. dollars. As Dr. Krassimir Petrov explained this suspected motive in a 2006 editorial in Gold-Eagle.com:

As long as the dollar was the only acceptable payment for oil, its dominance in the world was assured, and the American Empire could continue to tax the rest of the world. If, for any reason, the dollar lost its oil backing, the American Empire would cease to exist. Thus, Imperial survival dictated that oil be sold only for dollars. . . . If someone demanded a different payment, he had to be convinced, either by political pressure or military means, to change his mind.³

An interesting theory, but it still fails to explain all the facts. In a March 2006 editorial in Asia Times Online, William Engdahl noted that war with Iran has been in the cards as part of the U.S. Greater Middle East strategy since the 1990s, long before Iran threatened to open its own oil bourse.⁴ And Iran is not alone in wanting to drop the dollar as its oil currency. To curb currency risks, Russia is planning to open an Energy Stock Exchange in St. Petersburg next year to trade oil in rubles, something that will have significantly more impact on the dollar than Iran's oil bourse. Central bankers in Venezuela, Indonesia, and the United Arab Emirates have all said they will be investing less of their reserves in dollar assets due to the dollar's weakening global position.⁵ When those countries switch to other currencies for their oil trades, will the United States feel compelled to invade them as well?

These theories all have some merit, but none of them seems sufficient to explain the war drums. What is so special about Iran? Here is another possibility: Iran poses a serious threat, not only to oil and the dollar, but to a secret financial weapon that keeps a global banking empire in power. . . .

Compound Interest:
Financial Weapon of Mass Destruction

Around 1980, when interest rates were soaring, Johnny Carson quipped on The Tonight Show that "Scientists have developed a powerful new weapon that destroys people but leaves buildings standing – it's called the 17% interest rate." Compound interest is the secret weapon that has allowed a global banking cartel to control most of the resources of the world. The debt trap snapped shut for many countries in 1980, when international interest rates shot up to 20 percent. At 20 percent interest compounded annually, $100 doubles in under 4 years; and in 20 years, it becomes a breathtaking $3,834.⁶ The devastating impact on Third World debtors was underscored by President Obasanjo of Nigeria, speaking in 2000 about his country's mounting burden to international creditors. He said:

All that we had borrowed up to 1985 was around $5 billion, and we have paid about $16 billion; yet we are still being told that we owe about $28 billion. That $28 billion came about because of the injustice in the foreign creditors' interest rates. If you ask me what is the worst thing in the world, I will say it is compound interest.⁷

What bankers call the "miracle" of compound interest is called "usury" under Islamic law and is considered a crime. It was also a crime under Old English law until the sixteenth century, when Martin Luther redefined the offense of "usury" to mean the taking of "excess" interest. Modern Islamic thinkers are not averse to a profitable return on investment when it takes the form of "profit-sharing," with investors taking some risk and sharing in business losses; but the usurer gets his interest no matter what. In fact he does better when the borrower fails. The borrower who cannot afford to pay off his loans sinks deeper and deeper into debt, as interest compounds annually to the lender.

The debt trap that snapped shut in 1980 was set in 1974, when OPEC was induced to trade its oil only in U.S. dollars. The price of oil then suddenly quadrupled, and countries with insufficient dollars for their oil needs had to borrow them from international lenders. By 2001, enough money had flowed back to First World banks from Third World debtors to pay the principal due on their original loans six times over; but interest had consumed so much of those payments that the total debt had actually quadrupled.⁸ In 1980, median income in the richest 10 percent of countries was 77 times greater than in the poorest 10 percent. By 1999, that gap had grown to 122 times greater. In December 2006, the United Nations released a reported titled "World Distribution of Household Wealth," which concluded that 50 percent of the world's population now owns only 1 percent of its wealth, while the richest 10 percent of adults owns 85 percent. At interest compounded annually, the debts of the poorer nations can never be repaid but will just continue to grow.

The Private Global Banking Scheme

It is this debt scheme, with its lethal weapon of interest compounded annually, that has allowed a small clique of financiers to dominate the business of the world. In Tragedy and Hope, Professor Carroll Quigley wrote from personal knowledge of this financial clique, which he called simply "the international bankers." Dr. Quigley, who was Bill Clinton's mentor at Georgetown University, said the aim of the international bankers was "nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole," a system "to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements."⁹ The key to the bankers' success was that they would control and manipulate the money systems of the world while letting them appear to be controlled by governments.

Most countries have now been brought into this private global banking scheme, with most of the world's money being created by commercial banks in the form of interest-bearing loans. In the United States today, the only money created by the government consists of coins, which compose only about one one-thousandth of the total money supply. Federal Reserve Notes (dollar bills) are created by the Federal Reserve, a private banking corporation, and lent to the government. The vast bulk of the money supply, however, is created when commercial banks make loans. They do this by double-entry bookkeeping: the sum of the borrower's promissory note is simply credited as a deposit to the borrower's account and offset with a matching liability on the bank's side of its books.¹⁰ Money creation is now a private affair in most other countries as well. Even where the central bank is technically state-owned, as in the United Kingdom and Canada, the central bank creates only the paper currency of the nation, leaving most of the money supply to be created by commercial banks as compound-interest-bearing loans.¹¹

The alternative to this independent "central bank" system is what used to be called "national banking." A state-owned central bank issued the national currency as an agent of the government, and the government spent the money or lent it into the economy for internal development and public needs. The "seigniorage" on this money -- the difference between the cost of creating it and its face value – accrued to the government, which got the money debt- and interest-free. The goal of the international bankers was to privatize this system and bring it under their control. The central bank would still create the national money supply, but it would lend the money to the government, leaving the government with a massive debt on which it owed interest. Once caught in the debt web, the government could then be induced to privatize other assets, making them available for purchase and control by international finance capital.

At a 1968 meeting of the secretive globalist group known as the Bilderbergers, a U.S. official named George Ball spoke of creating a "world company." Ball was U.S. Undersecretary of State for Economic Affairs and a managing director of banking giants Lehman Brothers and Kuhn Loeb. The "world company" was to be a new form of colonialism, in which global assets would be acquired by economic rather than military coercion. The "company" would extend across national boundaries, aggressively engaging in mergers and acquisitions until the assets of the world were subsumed under one privately-owned corporation, with nation-states subservient to a private international central banking system.¹²

Before World War II, the head of this private global banking system was in England; but it moved to Wall Street with the economic ascendancy of the United States. Under the Bretton Woods Agreements, the U.S. dollar became the world's "reserve currency" along with gold. In 1971, President Nixon took the dollar off the gold standard, and the dollar became the world's reserve currency without that tether. U.S. lenders could create and lend dollars to whatever extent the world could be induced to borrow them. To insure that the lenders got their interest, in the late 1970s the World Bank and International Monetary Fund began imposing "conditionalities" on loans to Third World debtors, requiring them to open up their capital markets, slash spending on social programs, and privatize their industries. Meanwhile, speculative attacks on local currencies that had been left to "float" in foreign exchange markets without the tether of gold caused radical currency devaluations, allowing foreign investors to pick up these privatized assets at bargain basement prices.

When Dominoes Won't Fall

Iran was among the few nations to have escaped this global privatization scheme. Iran had its own oil, and it managed to avoid the trap of speculative currency devaluation by imposing foreign exchange restrictions and price controls on its currency, something it could do because it had adequate foreign exchange reserves from its oil sales.¹³ Iran's state-owned oil industry has allowed its economy to perform well, despite economic sanctions and rumors to the contrary.¹⁴ A "reformist" movement toward increased privatization ended with the 2005 election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a "populist" who has promised to redistribute Iranian oil wealth more expansively and has committed the government to funding public-sector projects and charitable investments.¹⁵

Islamic scholars have been seeking to devise a global banking system that would serve as an alternative to the usury-based scheme now in control internationally, and Iran has led the way in devising that model. Iran is characterized as a democratic Islamic republic, which enforces Islamic principles not only morally but legally and politically. The American-backed Shah of Iran was overthrown in 1979, ending 2,500 years of monarchical rule. All domestic Iranian banks were then nationalized, and the government called for the establishment of an Islamic banking system that would replace interest payments with profit-sharing. Iran's state-owned central bank issues the national currency, with the seigniorage accruing to the government rather than to private banks.¹⁶ The Iranian government is among the few to have very little foreign debt. It uses its state-owned banks to make loans and credits available to industrial and agricultural projects. The most unique feature of the Iranian banking system, however, is that it follows the Islamic proscription against usury. That means loans are made interest-free.¹⁷

At least, that is true in principle. To make their system work with the prevailing scheme, Islamic economists have had to come up with some creative definitions of "interest." Assuming Iran can develop a workable alternative model, however, it might well threaten the usury-based banking system that now dominates international finance and trade. If governments were to start doing what banks do now – advancing "credit" created out of nothing with accounting entries – they could sidestep the hefty interest that is the principal cost of most government programs today. It has been estimated that eliminating interest charges could cut the average cost of infrastructure, sustainable energy development, and other programs in half.¹⁸ Third World economies might finally escape the iron grip of the international bankers, bringing a 300-year global banking empire crashing down.

The size of the stakes was suggested by Tarek El Diwany, a British expert in Islamic finance and the author of The Problem with Interest (2003). In a presentation at Cambridge University in 2002, he quoted a 1997 United Nations Human Development Report which said:

Relieved of their annual debt repayments, the severely indebted countries could use the funds for investments that in Africa alone would save the lives of about 21 million children by 2000 and provide 90 million girls and women with access to basic education.

El Diwany commented, "The UNDP does not say that the bankers are killing the children, it says that the debt is. But who is creating the debt? The bankers are of course. And they are creating the debt by lending money that they have manufactured out of nothing. In return the developing world pays the developed world USD 700 million per day net in debt repayments." He concluded his presentation:

But there is hope. The developing nations should not think that they are powerless in the face of their oppressors. Their best weapon now is the very scale of the debt crisis itself. A coordinated and simultaneous large scale default on international debt obligations could quite easily damage the Western monetary system, and the West knows it. There might be a war of course, or the threat of it, accompanied perhaps by lectures on financial morality from Washington, but would it matter when there is so little left to lose? In due course, every oppressed people comes to know that it is better to die with dignity than to live in slavery. Lenders everywhere should remember that lesson well.¹⁹

That could explain the big guns trained on Iran, and the tightening of economic sanctions against it. Dominoes that won't fall into the debt trap must be pushed. Like in the brutal attacks in Lebanon in July 2006, the military targets in Iran are liable to be economic ones – ports, bridges, roads, airports, refining infrastructure.²⁰ The threat posed by Iran's alternative economic model will be obliterated by blasting it back into the Stone Age.

Putting Up Dukes

Read the handwriing


In his post at http://existentialistcowboy.blogspot.com/, the cowboy laid out the case of US miscalculations in its proposed war with Iran. Apparently, Russia and China are not going to just sit on the sidelines and allow the US to drop bombs on the Persians. Russia and China's own energy interest are at stake in the matter. The Cowboy points out that America may not be quite prepared to take on these twin behemoth's along with Iran. I'd say that is quite the understatement to, say the very least. I think however that what we are up against, if our leaders are stupid enough to attack Iran, is far worse than we can imagine.

America is the most evil country in the world as evidenced by the fact that we remain the only country to drop nuclear bombs and fire bombs on civilian people. The world has never forgotten that. The people of the world have been preparing since that day to get even with America. People hold grudges for centuries. (Witness the controversy over the Congress designating the Turks responsible for the Armenian Genocide from almost a hundred years ago). They may not articulate their animosity towards the United States openly, but believe me, its there. Put yourself in their shoes.

You can be sure that both the Germans and the Japanse deeply resent America. They have organized their economies to support their complete redemption from their ignominious humiliations of WW2. Both countries have developed warfare technologies that exceed our own. If you haven't been paying attention, you should observe that Japan is the leader in autonomous robotics to the point they could easily convert their expensive "toy" robots to mechanical soldiers. It is no telling what type of technologies the ingenious Germans have developed secretly that they have not shared with America. Remember how quickly they ramped up during the war.

The Chinese are a different story. They have fought us to a draw in two wars in Vietnam and Korea. Now we have given them all our basic technology which they have the option to improve on. We are practically totally reliant on their "cheap" labor for almost everything we use and consume. They can easily peer into almost every aspect of our industry via the American based internet, while at the same time we have practically no access to their industry because the internet has not infiltrated into the inner recesses of China as it has in America. China has over 1.5 billion people that we know about. We don't even know if their census is reliable. That is five times more people than we have to fight a war. At the minimum they have five times more engineers than we do, five times more workers, five times more physicists, five times more soldiers, etc. etc. etc. There is no way our intelligence services can monitor and analyze everything that's going on in this world against us especially while we are busy with middle east wars.

For years China has had to listen hypocritical haranges from US diplomacy vilifying them, before they developed the vast economy that they now have. And similarly for the Russians.
Putin is not playing at all. We really need to wake up and smell the coffee and chart a new course.

The problem with our leaders is they are more afraid of the American people than they are of our foreign enemies. The 'powers that be in America' are afraid to share technology readily available, for fear it will empower the individual American too much and they won't be as easily manipulated. 'The powers that be' found out with the internet empowering Americans takes away some of their own power. Since the internet its pretty damn near impossible to keep any secrets again. Even foreign intelligence agencies are leaking American secrets on the internet when before they were able to totally control the dissemination of information. If for instance, American people realized that there is truely such a thing as "free energy" easily available and that we don't need oil from the middle east, it would take from the so called authorities a significant portion of their power over the masses. 'The powers that be' in America maintain a reliance on oil to keep the American people dependent on them providing it and paying them to provide it. The only value American money has is a function of how much oil it can buy. A probem has now developed because the foreign owners of the oil are wising up to realize there is nothing they want to buy from America. We don't produce anything of value anymore- just abstract values like democracy and freedom and equities, etc. The best cars are produced in Asia and Europe; and that's why everyone in the world want yen and euros. The only really productive company in the US is Apple computer and they should be designated a national treasure.

Economics

True Value

Money is supposed to be a reflection of true value. Ina real sense, the only thing of real value are materially real things. Abstractions do not have any value. What are real things? Commodities represent real things So do any derivative of the earth itself. That is why gold and the precious metals; and crystals represent the highest values in monetary terms, even though for the most part they have no functional significance except for their rarity. If you scan the planet to find out what it is people value, on a practical level, it is not money. Rather it is the things that you can exchange for with money. For example, food, transportation, water, environment, clothing, and other things significant to sustaining and perpetuating life itself are the things that we truely value.

This understanding leads to the obvious conclusion that the most valuable thing there is, is life itself. Each individual life is the holder of all true value. All other real values are derived from the effort to survive and perpetuate life.

Our Constitution recognized this when it codified the power to create money, which is a reflection of The People's value. The Preamble begins in stating: "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." In Section 8 of the Constitution it states that "The Congress shall have Power To... coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures." The Constitution does not give the power to create money to anyone else, nor does it give the power to give the people's authority to anyone else. In fact the Constitution establishes that money shall be based on some amount of Gold! So it appaers that the right to create money is derived from the people and invested in the Congress. On its face it would make it appear that the Federal Reserve, which is a private Bank is unconstitutional. There is no provision in the constitution for the Congress to delegate Constitutionally granted authority to a private corporation, no more than there is Constitutional authority to grant the right to exclusively create money to any single private individual. If it were the case that a private individual was invested with that power then 'We the People' would all become the slaves of the individual who could create money. No less is true for a corporation that has that type of power, as it is manifested in the Federal Reserve Bank. Thus we are the slaves of the owners of the Federal Reserve Bank.

The whole trick to it, is that anybody can promise the grantors of the power to print money, anything they might desire, while they become unaccountable for their granted priveleges to 'We the People'. That is what has precisely happened with Congress. The Congress has unconstitutionally given the Federal Reserve 'We the People's' power to create money, while the Federal Reserve rewards individual Congressmen whatever they might desire. It is a total sellout of The People.

If anything, it is 'We the People' who should be paid to use our money creating power and not just for our representatives to be compensated. We should be compensated directly based on th amount of circulating money, much as the Federal Reserve levies interest and taxes on The People.

Who should be required to pay us? Well, other than the people, you have corporations and other fictitious entities that have no value in and of themselves. All fictitious entities that utilize the People's money should have to pay 'The People'. Its a simple economics model! That means that all these corporations, trust, foundations, etc would have to pay the people for use of their value in the commercial markets. That would reverse the circumstance wherein the people are slaves to the corporations and make the corporations slaves to the people.

Madmen

Everyone and their mommas have concluded George Bush is a madman! The evidence of his insanity is replete when you look at his record'

Before his office he was accused of a mass murder with cannibalism. in 1984

He married a woman who was accused of intentionally killing her ex-boyfriend ind an auto accident

He presided over the most state sponsored executions in history as governor of Texas

He is susupected of having masterminded the 911 disaster

He lied the country into two wars

He allowed treason by his cabinet official in the Valerie Plame affair

He is attempting to start a third World War

He has compromised The Constitution which he has sworn to uphold

And all of this is what is publically known and more. The question becomes who has enabled this man to get away with these things. It is easy to say it is all Dick Cheney's fault, but that would be insufficient. Then we can blame his cabinet ad executive staff for carrying out his will, but they are still insufficient to accomplish and get away with all that he has. You might blame the enabling Congress to include both democrats and Publicans. That too can't explain the phenomenon. Can we blame the Jewish lobby? I don't think so as much as I would like. What about the voters? I don't think so because he really never was voted in to office. What of the medis's complicity? Sure they contributed to the situation but they could not allow what has happened. We have to blame all of us! Its our collective fault. Whatever comes next will be our fault again. Remember that when the worse is happening to you. You have been warned!

Happy Veteran's Day

Veterans

I'm a veteran! I appreciate that Americans express their appreciation of my service by taking a day and dedicating it to veterans. I can't say I ever regretted my time in the military. What I do regret is the unvarnished racism i experienced in the Navy as a Black officer. I served during peacetime in the 80's when America's institutions were at war with Black people, for the most part. Maybe that will be the the subject of some future blog, as apropos.

What I did notice this Veteran's day was that George Bush was not present for the Veteran celebration on Sunday in Washington DC. Instead, VP Cheney was called upon to lay a wreath for dead veterans, as if it was simply some kind of ceremonial chore done in a foreign country and the president was too busy to make it.

To the contrary, President was at his ranch, vacationing and entertaining Angela Merkel of Germany. He gave some type of cursory press conference, dismissing it abruptly, stating that he had to go feed Angela Merkel some "HamBurger" intending the pun as Prime Minister Merkel is from Hamburg, Germany. He is such a devious and stupid man.

Personally i could never eat any food from Bush on his ranch or even in the White House, let alone ingest his "hamburger". For his bloodthirstiness towards living people, I have always imagined Bush secretly lived the life of a cannibal. For some reason he always reminded me of the cannibals from the Texas Chain Saw Massacre Movie. I thought Bush relished the fact that he was responsible for killing so many people with these wars in Iraq and Afganistan. He certainly expressd his bloodthirstiness as Governor of Texas by achieving recognition as the most prolific governor in putting captives (criminals) to death. The one criminal he spared execution as governor of Texas was George Lee Lucas, a confessed serial killer and cannibal. What led me to post this blog was my discovery while http://surfingtheapocalypse.com or http://rumormillnews.com that President Bush had been investigated as a mass murder and cannibal in 17 deaths in Brownsville, Texas in 1984. Ultimately, the 17 murderss were labeled a mass cult suicide in spite of Bush's teeth mark imprints on the bodies of the murdered victims. It seems the Bush's politically connected daddy came to his rescue. All of this confirmed my discernment of Bush's character. This information is totally available on the internet. I wonder if Angela Merkel was aware of it. If so, how could she eat with Bush.

As an aside ther is also considerable information on the internet that Laura Bush murured her ex=boyfriend when she was 17 years old intentionally crashing into him at a high rate of speed while occupying a much larger car. Wow! What a couple made in hell! What kind of country have we become

Iowa J&J Day

Politics

I don't know how many people stayed up to watch the Iowa Democratic Jefferson/Jackson Day Forum, but it turned out to be one of the most exciting political events in my 53 year memory. The People of Iowa were absolutely fired up! They shouted and screamd throughout the event, from beginning to end. The most significant thing about the event is that The People of Iowa are really fired up for this election.

It really is no surprise that The People across this country are absolutely enthused about this election. After seven years of this Bush administration The People are fed up! The TV and print pundits tell us there are only three branches of government: the Congress; the Courts; and The Executive Presidency. Itt is also what they teach us in schools. It is not true! Actually, there are four branches of government. The fourth branch is the most powerful branch of government. That fourth branch of government is The People. All the powers of the three other branches of government derive from The People. The People are the sovereigns of this country much like the Queen is the Sovereign of the UK. The People need only to realize their true role and power as an actual branch of government. The media, education system and the government has a vested interest in dumbing us down. It is so that they can hold sway over our power. It is no wonder that the government keeps secrets from us, ; it is no wonder that the media keeps us misinformed and distracted with ongoing entertainment fantasy; and it is no wonder that the education systems doesn't teach anything to our children other than how to become slaves of the corporate state. The Constitution guarantees that The People remain the Sovereign Power in the US by its guarantee of our rights, especially to bear weapons and to form local defense militia, not just against foreign powers but against the government5 itself. That is why the government is building up Homeland Security and employing foreigners as security contractors in order to counterbalance the powers of the true owners of this country- The People. Foreigners and naturalized citizens owe their allegience to to government that bring them here and give them priveleges; and not to The American People who don't want them here.

Iowa Democratic Candidates

Obviously, Barack Obama was the headliner for the J&J Day forum in Iowa. He was the Statesman and the agent for change by his eloquent articulations of a new vision for America. One of the things he has emphasized in his campaign is that is going to take the Power of The People to change America. That is a realization that escapes most politicians. I think Obama is the best Democrat in the race but I think Ron Paul will make the best President. That would be a President recptive to The People's concerns more than the concerns of any banks, corporations or government entities.

The runnerup for The Iowa affair was John Edwards. he is quite sincere in what he is saying and blieves in the American people. The only problem for Obama and Edwards is the American People have to start believing in themselves. Hiliary and the rest of the democratic field were dull by comparison. Joe Biden remarkd that Chicago was inthe house because of the outstanding support demonstrated by Obama. At heart, I really thinkJoe Biden is a racist. He reminds me of the charactr played by Tom Cruise in "Lions for Lambs".

Republican Draft Dodgers

No one in the MSM is talking about the fact the Rudy Guilianni is a draft dodger. Rudy is all gung-ho to send other peoples children off to war when he himself is a draft dodger who comes from a line of draft dodgers. I want to see Ann Coulter call Rudy a "faggot" like she id John Edwards. Bush was a draft dodger as well. As they say 'birds of a feather flock together'.

Divide and Conquer

The foremost strategy in all Satanic undertakings ever devisd is "divide and Conquer". Divide and conquer is antithetial to the idea of montheism- - the One God; The One Universe; and The One People. Satanic elements within the culture presses for division of our people. They invent reasons o separate families such as sexual guilt and money. Satanic elements creates reasons to separate people along racial definition such as intelligence quotients, contending, politics, religious beliefs, sexual proclivities, and skin color. They invent schemes that divide nations such as communism vs capitalism, war, impositon an inconsideration to defeat all sids in any conflict.

It is no happenstance that th Shiite Mosques in Iraq was destroyed and blamed on the Sunni when it was the occupiers of Iraq who wre in control. It is no accident that abortion is framed by the media as the right of a woman to choose vs the right of the state to dictate the outcomes of the lives of women. It separates people along gender lines and encourages deviancy from obvious human orientation. It is no secret that the responsibilities of parenting have been enforced by outsie powers that do harm to family orientation.

The Bible says in Genesis 5:2 ...Male and Female created he them; and blessed them , and called their name Adam, in the Day when they were created.

We need to believe the Bible and not the media for our moral foundation. It is the best moral document we hav available and it has proved itself time and time again. Men and their constructs have been repeatedly wrong.

Wake Up

Guiliani Politics

The "Publicans" are nominating Rudy Guiliani for President. Even more amazingly the MSM supports Guiliani with their on air ravings of this criminal crossdressing thug It is no wonder that Guiliani attained the high offic of Mayor of New York City. NYC has been the seat of Mafia gangs since time immemorial. Guiliani comes from a long line of mafia soldiers. In wikipedia its documented that:

"Rudolph Giuliani was born in the New York City borough of Brooklyn, the only child of working-class parents Harold Angel Giuliani, and Helen C. D'Avanzo, both children of Italian immigrants.^[5] The family was Roman Catholic and its extended members included police officers, firefighters, and criminals.^[6] Harold Giuliani had trouble holding a job and had been convicted of felony assault and robbery and served time in Sing Sing;^[7] after his release he served as a Mafia enforcer for his brother-in-law Leo D'Avanzo, who ran an organized crime operation involved in loan sharking and gambling at a restaurant in Brooklyn.<sup>[8]"

The whole expose on Guiliani's origins can be found at http://www.thesmokinggun.com/rudy/rudy.html and http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0027,barrett,16192,1.html. I suggest people read about the gangster the Publicans and the MSM are promoting for president of the United States.

Not only is Guiliani affiliated with the Mafia which is confirmed by his association with indicted business associate Bernard Kerik, but he is apparently a transgender bisexual crossdresser who has actually lived with homosexuals. Guiliani takes "responsibility" for his bad association with Kerik yet there aren't any consequences. I wonder if Guiliani is going to give Kerik a pardon if he becomes President for keeping his mouth shut about what he knows about Guiliani.

911


911 occurrd while Bush was president, but he gets no blame for it happening on his watch. Seems to me, that flies in the face of true accountability. Even more disturbing is that Bush could not testify under oath to the 911 Commission without being accompanied by Cheney. And people wonder why there is a 911 truth movement.

Sex

I wonder why GLT people want to force the public at large to acknowledge the sexuality of the homosexual community. After all, there are only two sexes: male and female. Ordinary people don't need to display their sexuality in public. In fact, most people see it as unseemly to display normal sexuality at all in public, while public sexuality displays by homosexuals is seen aa an attribute. That doesn't make much sense.</sup>

People are starting to Recognize

People in the united States are really beginning to recognize what we are up against on a massive level. Thy don't trust anything in the media anymore. All thinking people are waking up and realizing what we have been living is bullshit! Yesterday even the Mayor of Salt Lake City, One of the most "conservative" cities in the united States spoke out.

Please read this address of Mayor Ross C. "Rocky" Anderson on October 27, 2007
Salt Lake City, Utah:

Today, as we come together once again in this great city, we raise our voices in unison to say to President Bush, to Vice President Cheney, to other members of the Bush Administration (past and present), to a majority of Congress, including Utah's entire congressional delegation, and to much of the mainstream media: "You have failed us miserably and we won't take it any more."

"While we had every reason to expect far more of you, you have been pompous, greedy, cruel, and incompetent as you have led this great nation to a moral, military, and national security abyss."

"You have breached trust with the American people in the most egregious ways. You have utterly failed in the performance of your jobs. You have undermined our Constitution, permitted the violation of the most fundamental treaty obligations, and betrayed the rule of law."

"You have engaged in, or permitted, heinous human rights abuses of the sort never before countenanced in our nation's history as a matter of official policy. You have sent American men and women to kill and be killed on the basis of lies, on the basis of shifting justifications, without competent leadership, and without even a coherent plan for this monumental blunder."

"We are here to tell you: We won't take it any more!"

"You have acted in direct contravention of values that we, as Americans who love our country, hold dear. You have deceived us in the most cynical, outrageous ways. You have undermined, or allowed the undermining of, our constitutional system of checks and balances among the three presumed co-equal branches of government. You have helped lead our nation to the brink of fascism, of a dictatorship contemptuous of our nation's treaty obligations, federal statutory law, our Constitution, and the rule of law."

"Because of you, and because of your jingoistic false `patriotism, ' our world is far more dangerous, our nation is far more despised, and the threat of terrorism is far greater than ever before.

It has been absolutely astounding how you have committed the most horrendous acts, causing such needless tragedy in the lives of millions of people, yet you wear your so-called religion on your sleeves, asserting your God-is-on-my- side nonsense - when what you have done flies in the face of any religious or humanitarian tradition. Your hypocrisy is mind-boggling - and disgraceful.
What part of "Thou shalt not kill" do you not understand? What part of the "Golden rule" do you not understand? What part of "be honest," "be responsible, " and "be accountable" don't you understand? What part of "Blessed are the peacekeepers" do you not understand?

Because of you, hundreds of thousands of people have been killed, many thousands of people have suffered horrendous lifetime injuries, and millions have been run off from their homes. For the sake of our nation, for the sake of our children, and for the sake of our brothers and sisters around the world, we are morally compelled to say, as loudly as we can, `We won't take it any more!' "

"As United States agents kidnap, disappear, and torture human beings around the world, you justify, you deceive, and you cover up. We find what you have done to men, women and children, and to the good name and reputation of the United States, so appalling, so unconscionable, and so outrageous as to compel us to call upon you to step aside and allow other men and women who are competent, true to our nation's values, and with high moral principles to stand in your places - for the good of our nation, for the good of our children, and for the good of our world."

In the case of the President and Vice President, this means impeachment and removal from office, without any further delay from a complacent, complicit Congress, the Democratic majority of which cares more about political gain in 2008 than it does about the vindication of our Constitution, the rule of law, and democratic accountability.

It means the election of people as President and Vice President who, unlike most of the presidential candidates from both major parties, have not aided and abetted in the perpetration of the illegal, tragic, devastating invasion and occupation of Iraq. And it means the election of people as President and Vice President who will commit to return our nation to the moral and strategic imperative of refraining from torturing human beings.

In the case of the majority of Congress, it means electing people who are diligent enough to learn the facts, including reading available National Intelligence Estimates, before voting to go to war. It means electing to Congress men and women who will jealously guard Congress's sole prerogative to declare war. It means electing to Congress men and women who will not submit like vapid lap dogs to presidential requests for blank checks to engage in so-called preemptive wars, for legislation permitting warrantless wiretapping of communications involving US citizens, and for dangerous, irresponsible, saber-rattling legislation like the recent Kyl-Lieberman amendment.

We must avoid the trap of focusing the blame solely upon President Bush and Vice-President Cheney. This is not just about a few people who have wronged our country - and the world. They were enabled by members of both parties in Congress, they were enabled by the pathetic mainstream news media, and, ultimately, they have been enabled by the American people - 40% of whom are so ill-informed they still think Iraq was behind the 9/11 attacks - a people who know and care more about baseball statistics and which drunken starlets are wearing underwear than they know and care about the atrocities being committed every single day in our name by a government for which we need to take responsibility.

As loyal Americans, without regard to political partisanship -- as veterans, as teachers, as religious leaders, as working men and women, as students, as professionals, as businesspeople, as public servants, as retirees, as people of all ages, races, ethnic origins, sexual orientations, and faiths -- we are here to say to the Bush administration, to the majority of Congress, and to the mainstream media: "You have violated your solemn responsibilities. You have undermined our democracy, spat upon our Constitution, and engaged in outrageous, despicable acts. You have brought our nation to a point of immorality, inhumanity, and illegality of immense, tragic, unprecedented proportions. "

"But we will live up to our responsibilities as citizens, as brothers and sisters of those who have suffered as a result of the imperial bullying of the United States government, and as moral actors who must take a stand: And we will, and must, mean it when we say `We won't take it any more.'"

If we want principled, courageous elected officials, we need to be principled, courageous, and tenacious ourselves. History has demonstrated that our elected officials are not the leaders - the leadership has to come from us. If we don't insist, if we don't persist, then we are not living up to our responsibilities as citizens in a democracy - and our responsibilities as moral human beings. If we remain silent, we signal to Congress and the Bush administration - and to candidates running for office - and to the world - that we support the status quo.

Silence is complicity. Only by standing up for what's right and never letting down can we say we are doing our part.

Our government, on the basis of a campaign we now know was entirely fraudulent, attacked and militarily occupied a nation that posed no danger to the United States. Our government, acting in our name, has caused immense, unjustified death and destruction.

It all started five years ago, yet where have we, the American people, been? At this point, we are responsible. We get together once in a while at demonstrations and complain about Bush and Cheney, about Congress, and about the pathetic news media. We point fingers and yell a lot. Then most people politely go away until another demonstration a few months later.

How many people can honestly say they have spent as much time learning about and opposing the outrages of the Bush administration as they have spent watching sports or mindless television programs during the past five years? Escapist, time-sapping sports and insipid entertainment have indeed become the opiate of the masses.

Why is this country so sound asleep? Why do we abide what is happening to our nation, to our Constitution, to the cause of peace and international law and order? Why are we not doing all in our power to put an end to this madness?

We should be in the streets regularly and students should be raising hell on our campuses. We should be making it clear in every way possible that apologies or convoluted, disingenuous explanations just don't cut it when presidential candidates and so many others voted to authorize George Bush and his neo-con buddies to send American men and women to attack and occupy Iraq.

Let's awaken, and wake up the country by committing here and now to do all each of us can to take our nation back. Let them hear us across the country, as we ask others to join us: "We won't take it any more!"

I implore you: Draw a line. Figure out exactly where your own moral breaking point is. How much will you put up with before you say "No more" and mean it?

I have drawn my line as a matter of simple personal morality: I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who has voted to fund the atrocities in Iraq. I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who will not commit to remove all US troops, as soon as possible, from Iraq. I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who has supported legislation that takes us one step closer to attacking Iran. I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who has not fought to stop the kidnapping, disappearances, and torture being carried on in our name.

If we expect our nation's elected officials to take us seriously, let us send a powerful message they cannot misunderstand. Let them know we really do have our moral breaking point. Let them know we have drawn a bright line. Let them know they cannot take our support for granted - that, regardless of their party and regardless of other political considerations, they will not have our support if they cannot provide, and have not provided, principled leadership.

The people of this nation may have been far too quiet for five years, but let us pledge that we won't let it go on one more day - that we will do all we can to put an end to the illegalities, the moral degradation, and the disintegration of our nation's reputation in the world.

Let us be unified in drawing the line - in declaring that we do have a moral breaking point. Let us insist, together, in supporting our troops and in gratitude for the freedoms for which our veterans gave so much, that we bring our troops home from Iraq, that we return our government to a constitutional democracy, and that we commit to honoring the fundamental principles of human rights.

In defense of our country, in defense of our Constitution, in defense of our shared values as Americans - and as moral human beings - we declare today that we will fight in every way possible to stop the insanity, stop the continued military occupation of Iraq, and stop the moral depravity reflected by the kidnapping, disappearing, and torture of people around the world.



Politics

For the life of me I can't understand how anyone would consider voting for Hiliary Clinton to become Presidnt of the United States. We have enough experience with her and her husband to know that they are globalists who strictly represent the interest of international corporations. The media even mention the signature laws and governmental changes that Hiliary helped to enact against the people of this country not to mention the vote she cast to authorize the President's invasion of Iraq based on lies. It was Hiliary who destroyed the promise of health care for the citizens of the united States. She put up a good act that she was an advocate but it was all a bullshit manipulative game. It would give her credibility when she she ran for president as she had long planned. Remember it is Bill and Hilliary Clinton who would not get rid of partial birth abortion when they had the chance when they were in office before. As an OB/GYN physician myself I can tell you that partial birth abortion is clearly infanticide. There is no distinction. If you believe partial birth abortion is not infanticide then you too are clearly deluded. No one should have the right to kill babies. Remember it is the rich elite globalist corporate rich who want the depopulation of the earth. That is their agenda. With their world wide pro-abortion pro-eugenics brainwashing they have been successful to a degree that I could not have dreamed of 30 years ago as a young man. It was Hiliary and Bill who helped to change the bankrupcy las so that they are more favorable to the rich so that they can keep you as a debt slave in perpetuity. They did that after they got rid of the social service safety net of aid for dependent childen while blaming it on the republicans. Everyone after all know he Republicans are no good! Right! It not just the Republicans. It all of those in the Congress and government who strictly repesent the interst of bankers, globalists, corporations and elitist who want he common man to worship them as gods.

Anyway, the best candidates for President are Ron Paul on the Republican side and Barack Obama on the Democrat side. We could have a real election if those two were nominated. As a Black man, I like Obama but I must admit that Ron Paul is the best candidate for the sake of our country