| Sep 1, 2010 |
|
MICHIGAN MILITARY VETS DEFY UNJUST STATE LAW
Baraga American Legion refuses to surrender property rights The Preamble to the Constitution of the American Legion states: "For God and Country we associate ourselves together for the following purposes: To uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America; to maintain law and order; to foster and perpetuate a one hundred percent Americanism; to preserve the memories and incidents of our associations in the Great Wars; to inculcate a sense of individual obligation to the community, state and nation; to combat the autocracy of both the classes and the masses; to make right the
[full story]
|
|
| Sep 1, 2010 |
|
THE LOST ART OF CRITICAL THINKING PART 1
Part 1, Critical Thinking, A Broad Stroke Contrary to popular application, the "critical” in critical thinking doesn’t mean categorizing political opponents as "idiots”! Far from it. Thinking reasonably, reflectively, and deeply is an essential (that is, critical) skill. Its focus determines what one believes—and how he acts out those beliefs. For good reason, the God of the Old Testament implores His own to "come, let us reason together.”[1] Note that He doesn’t compel them to rally for the purpose of contentious wrangling.
[full story]
|
|
| Aug 23, 2010 |
|
REPUBLIC VERSUS DEMOCRACY
What's the Difference? Given the current actions by the administration in Washington, I thought it would be a good idea to go back to basics. Actually, given the actions of most administrations in our history, it would be a good idea. Reading material online about the difference between a republic and democracy, I’ve come to the conclusion that many people are frustrated lawyers; i.e., they don’t have a degree, but they revel in nitpicking arguments about word definitions.
[full story]
|
|
| Aug 23, 2010 |
|
THE EVOLUTION OF REVOLUTION
In recent years throughout the States of America, there has been what is referred to as the State Nullification Movement. This movement is based upon the concepts expressed in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 and 1799, drafted and advocated by founding fathers Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. Nullification’s idea is this: the United States Constitution ("USC”) is a union of sovereign States, as confirmed by the Declaration of Independence and Treaty of Paris of 1783 and as reflected in the Constitution of (for) the United States of America (USC, tenth amendment); the federal government
[full story]
|
|
| Aug 23, 2010 |
|
'Why So Many Prisoners
John Locke's ideas and the 'separation of powers' (executive, legislature and judiciary) to which you refer, are, by themselves, completely incapable precluding tyranny. The following explains why the missing ingredient is the Supreme Rule of Law of the People's Trial by Jury Courts.
[full story]
|
|
| Aug 19, 2010 |
|
THOMAS JEFFERSON AND LOGIC
For several months now, I’ve been writing articles about logic, and I’ve made connections between that subject and the founding of the American Republic. As a corollary, I’ve mentioned that the disappearance of logic as a primary subject in US schools has accompanied a long, gradual erosion of individual freedom and independence. Now I’ve discovered an even closer link: It leads to Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence.
[full story]
|
|
| Aug 19, 2010 |
|
DISARMING AMERICA
A determined campaign is being waged in the United States that is perpetuated by the Godless humanists who endeavor, at the leading of Satan the greatest criminal mind in the Universe, to pave the way to a sheer control of the people and to establish the United States as a constituent of a one-world order.
[full story]
|
|
| Aug 19, 2010 |
|
THE IMPORTANCE OF HISTORY PART 5
Hosea 4:6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.
[full story]
|
|
| Aug 19, 2010 |
|
STATES, NOT SUPREME COURT, MUST DECIDE LAW & PROTECT FREEDOM
I am going to borrow heavily from two outstanding columns that appear on my son's web site, LibertyDefenseLeague.com. One author, Russell Longcore, is a publisher; the other, Wilton Strickland, is an attorney. Both are avid proponents of State sovereignty and independence. Longcore's column is entitled "Edwin Vieira on Secession, New World Order and the American Republic." See it here. Strickland's column is entitled "Staying Away From The Federal Courthouse." See it here.
[full story]
|
|
| Aug 19, 2010 |
|
Federal Court Rescinds USDA Approval of Genetically Engineered Sugar Beets
Today Judge Jeffrey White, federal district judge for the Northern District of California, issued a ruling
granting the request of plaintiffs Center for Food Safety, Organic Seed
Alliance, High Mowing Organic Seeds, and the Sierra Club to rescind the
United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) approval of
genetically engineered "Roundup Ready” sugar beets. In September 2009,
the Court had found that the USDA had violated the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by approving the Monsanto-engineered
biotech crop without first preparing an Environmental Impact Statement.
The crop
[full story]
|
|
| Aug 19, 2010 |
|
ANNIVERSARY OF A WHISTLEBLOWING HERO PART 1
Twelve years ago, a 150-second TV broadcast changed our world; everyone everywhere owes a debt of gratitude to the man whose life it turned upside down—in his effort to protect ours. On August 10, 1998, eminent scientist Dr. Arpad Pusztai (pronounced Poos-tie) dared to speak the truth
[full story]
|
|
| Aug 19, 2010 |
|
This is my country
It is politically incorrect for Public and Civil Servants to wear anything of a religious nature while serving the public, despite the fact that civil servants are allowed to wear turbans on the job as public or Civil servants. Why? Because it is against their religion not to wear it.
[full story]
|
|
| Aug 19, 2010 |
|
CHALLENGES ARISE AS THE PEOPLE FIND THEIR POWER
Like most Americans today, frustrated by the daily D.C. assault on everything I believe in, I often wonder how much difference I can really make and if I wouldn’t be better off to just go fishing with my kids and wait for the fireworks to begin, once the people have truly had enough.
[full story]
|
|
| Aug 18, 2010 |
|
Supreme Court rules against ban on GMO alfalfa, but requires complete safety study first
The battle continues as agri-giant Monsanto pushes to
have its genetically-modified (GM) alfalfa approved for use in the U.S.
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Monsanto by ruling against
a lower court's nationwide ban on the GM alfalfa; however, the court is
requiring the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to complete a
comprehensive safety study before the "franken-crop" can officially be
approved.
[full story]
|
|
| Jul 26, 2010 |
|
Woman 2, thugs 0 after home invasion
One gun isn't enough.
That was what Linda Smith (a pseudonym) was thinking after two thugs broke into her Oklahoma apartment. One was holding a weapon (she initially thought it was a knife but it turned out to be a screwdriver) at her throat,
and the other was pacing back and forth while holding her purse and
demanding her money and valuables. She screamed, and was told if she
screamed again, she'd be dead.
[full story]
|
|
| Jul 10, 2010 |
|
Trueman Tuck speaks out about Bill C-6 Questions and Health Canada and your sovereign legal rights
Clink on the following picture to hear a short (10 excerpt - part 2
below) from the full 46 minute "Power to the People" lecture as a
primer to the questions and text below: "Focus entirely on the constitutional and charter violations of C-6.
Do NOT mention natural health products in any way, shape or form. If
you do, you will likely be dismissed with a reply that C-6 specifically
exempts NHPs. This is a bogus response. Schedule 1 of C-6 includes
foods, drugs, cosmetics, devices and explosive. Schedule 1 can be
revised at any time to include NHPs. Further, the Health Minister has
another
[full story]
|
|
| Jul 7, 2010 |
|
I Love the Smell of Napalm in the Morning...
I've got a copy of the Doctor's Data v Barrett Federal lawsuit attached to this article. Be careful when you handle it - it's HOT...
I was kind of mad at Darryl Hickok, the head of Doctor's Data laboratory a few months ago, for not walking out and legally punching sleazebag Stephen Barrett,
and his minions, in the face over their obvious intent to destroy Doctor's Data, and hence, a whole host of great US Doctors, with their activities.
[full story]
|
|
| Jun 28, 2010 |
|
Australian courts rule that Vioxx should never have been approved for sale
(NaturalNews) Australian courts recently ruled that Vioxx, a popular
prescription painkiller, should never have been approved and allowed on
the market.
[full story]
|
|
| Jun 28, 2010 |
|
Doctor's Data Laboratory Files Federal Lawsuit Against Barrett, Quackwatch, NCAHF, Consumer Health Digest...
Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen Friday, June 25th, 2010
Stephen Barrett, who has no income of his own, he claims, had to go
to his wife Judith the other day, I think, and say "Honey, I need an
increase in my allowance this month. I'm getting sued in Fed Court in
Chicago now, and I'm going to need $250,000 this month as a retainer,
and another $100,000 per month to pay for my Defense, for the next
year, or so."
On Friday June 18th, 2010 Doctor's Data Laboratory filed an eleven
count lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois against Stephen
[full story]
|
|
| Oct 30, 2009 |
|
Senate Mccoy requested to intervene and ensure that the Bill C-6 witnesses do not continue to be rigged
Dear Senator Elaine McCoy,
A very disturbing Edmonton Journal article published in today's paper, follows below. As Council Member of Canadian Coalition for Health Freedom, I wish to reiterate the following:
There appears to be a deliberate movement within the Senate Committee to ensure that the Canadian Coalition for Health Freedom does not get an opportunity to provide witness testimony in opposition to Bill C-6. That is not acceptable in a democratic society. We are one of the more knowledgeable groups in the country. I ask that you contact every member of the Senate Committee,
[full story]
|
|
| Jul 19, 2009 |
|
Supreme court quashes drug conviction over illegal search
Supreme court quashes drug conviction over illegal search
Last Updated: Friday, July 17, 2009 | 3:52 PM ET
Comments1036Recommend222
CBC News
A woman walks past the Supreme Court of Canada in Ottawa. (Tom Hanson/Canadian Press) Canada's
top court tossed out a drug conviction linked to the seizure of 35
kilograms of cocaine Friday, saying evidence obtained with "willful and
flagrant" disregard for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms can't be
used in trial.
The ruling was one of four handed down by the Supreme Court aimed at
clarifying
[full story]
|
|
| May 24, 2009 |
|
Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
UN Declaration of Human Rights On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Following this historic act, the Assembly called upon all Member countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and "to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories." Preamble Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of
[full story]
|
|
| May 24, 2009 |
|
s outlined by the majority the proper function of the implied bill of rights after the adoption of the Charter is to 'fill in the gaps' in the express terms of the constitutional texts.
Implied
Bill of Rights is a
judicial theory in Canadian jurisprudence that recognizes that certain basic
principles are underlying the Constitution of Canada. Invoked more often
before the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms was enacted it is nonetheless important when questions of parliamentary supremacy and the override
power come into play. It played a part in the reasons given in the Reference re Secession of Quebec
[1998] 2 S.C.R. 217.
The
concept of an implied bill of rights develops out of Canadian federalism. When provincial
legislation intrudes deeply into
[full story]
|
|
| May 24, 2009 |
|
Judges should feel "emboldened" to trump the written word of the constitution when protecting fundamental, unwritten principles and rights, says Canada's chief justice.
Monday, December 05, 2005 Judges should feel "emboldened" to trump the written word of the constitution when protecting fundamental, unwritten principles and rights, says Canada's chief justice. Beverley McLachlin, in a speech delivered in New Zealand, took on critics who say judges have no business going beyond the strict letter of the constitution to strike down laws and enforce rights. "The rule of law requires judges to uphold unwritten constitutional norms, even in the face of clearly enacted laws or hostile public opinion," said a prepared text of the lecture Chief Justice McLachlin
[full story]
|
|
| May 24, 2009 |
|
Judges should feel "emboldened" to trump the written word of the constitution when protecting fundamental, unwritten principles and rights, says Canada's chief justice.
Monday, December 05, 2005 Judges should feel "emboldened" to trump the written word of the constitution when protecting fundamental, unwritten principles and rights, says Canada's chief justice. Beverley McLachlin, in a speech delivered in New Zealand, took on critics who say judges have no business going beyond the strict letter of the constitution to strike down laws and enforce rights. "The rule of law requires judges to uphold unwritten constitutional norms, even in the face of clearly enacted laws or hostile public opinion," said a prepared text of the lecture Chief Justice McLachlin gave
[full story]
|
|
| May 24, 2009 |
|
Under Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491, the legislature does not have the power to abrogate the Citizen's Right to travel upon the public roads by passing legislation forcing the citizen to waive his Right and convert that Right into a privilege.
Under Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491, the legislature does not have the power to abrogate the Citizen's Right to travel upon the public roads by passing legislation forcing the citizen to waive his Right and convert that Right into a privilege. Furthermore, it was long since established that this "privilege" has been defined as applying only to those who are "conducting business in the streets" or "operating for-hire vehicles." The legislature has attempted (by legislative fiat) to deprive the Citizen of his Right to use the roads in the ordinary course of life and business, without affording
[full story]
|
|
| Mar 24, 2009 |
|
Trueman Tuck along with a delegation of Health Freedom Fighters will meet in Ottawa in an attempt to put to end Bills C-51, C-52 and the now Bill C-6 and Bill C-10 as well as the Drug Class Natural Health Products Regulations that have been strangling ..
We need our hopes and prayers behind the Ottawa meetings this March 30 and March 31.
Trueman Tuck along with a delegation of Health Freedom Fighters will meet in Ottawa in an attempt to put to end Bills C-51, C-52 and the now Bill C-6 and Bill C-10
as well as the Drug Class Natural Health Products Regulations that have been strangling the Natural Health Products Industry.
A Bit About Trueman Tuck:
Trueman Tuck who's office resides in Belleville Ontario is an upright walking, friend, advocate and defender of people, families and their small to medium business enterprises. Fighting
[full story]
|
|
| Mar 19, 2009 |
|
The issue of a 'People's Mandate' relates to advancing the position that the People are Sovereign over the Parliament.
The People's Mandate
The issue of a 'People's Mandate' relates to advancing
the position that the People are Sovereign over the Parliament. The government
of the day is the servant of the Sovereign People who create it. A petition by
the People to the government is but a plea, and carries no weight other than to
inform the government of the views of a group of people. A 'People's Mandate'
is quite different in that it is a direct order or instruction from the
Sovereign People to their servants, the government, to do or not to do a
specific thing. A government
[full story]
|
|
| Feb 10, 2009 |
|
"Man is free at the moment he wishes to be." - Voltaire
How To Become A Sovereign Individual -- "Man is free at the moment he wishes to be." - Voltaire You can create your own personal sovereignty. You can own your own life. It will not be utopia or without challenges, but you can start re-defining yourself today. Many are uncomfortable with personal choice and prefer others lead them -- personal choice does require personal responsibility. Even more are uncomfortable with others having personal choice -- and want to dictate their lives. If you desire liberty for yourself and others, first discover how it is being achieved today. There are people
[full story]
|
|
| Dec 5, 2008 |
|
Of course, it is NO LAW because no Act of Parliament can take away the Rights of the People...but it's what the traitorous Judges use against us in our Courts.
Dear Fellow Australians,
Attached is a JPG of the last page of the NSW Supreme Court Act 1970 which contains s.85 saying there will be NO JURIES unless a Judge wants one.
Thanks go to Mr Wayne Merton (State Member for Baulkham Hills) and his staff for their efforts to obtain and photocopy it from the Archives.
The fellow who signed it was the late Sir Arthur Roden Cutler, VC.
I still can't believe that a much-loved and respected Victoria Cross winner would knowingly betray the People of Australia.
[full story]
|
|
| Oct 29, 2008 |
|
He said the public was justifiably outraged when people who committed the worst crimes were given soft sentences, or no jail at all.
Dear Col,
Trial by Jury is Democracy.
Subverting and/or extirpating the Right to Trial by Jury is TREASON.
Yours sincerely,
John Wilson.
----- Original Message ----- From: Col To: John Wilson Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 11:17 AM
Subject: Scrapping juries .................the wedge!
G'day John,
deja vu ??
Regards
Col
www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24564386-2862,00.html?referrer=email
Scrap some juries to speed justice - DPP Jeremy Rapke
Article from: Geoff Wilkinson
October 28, 2008 12:20pm
REMOVING juries in some criminal
[full story]
|
|
| Oct 23, 2008 |
|
Universal Declaration of Human Rights Adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948
On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights the full text of which appears in the following pages. Following this historic act the Assembly called upon all Member countries to publicize the text of the Declaration and "to cause it to be disseminated, displayed, read and expounded principally in schools and other educational institutions, without distinction based on the political status of countries or territories."
PREAMBLE
Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights
[full story]
|
|
| Oct 19, 2008 |
|
TRIAL BY JURY IS DEMOCRACY ....which means that People have Sovereignty and they exercise that ultimate authority to make and impose laws by way of the unanimous Judgments of twelve free and equal men
Dear Fellow Freedom Fighters,
WORLD PEACE means Peace between Nations and Peace within Nations.
TRIAL BY JURY means Justice, Equality, Freedom, and the Rule of Law.
I urge everyone to go and see the Magna Carta Monument in Canberra and to read the great works on Trial by Jury.
TRIAL BY JURY IS DEMOCRACY ....which means that People have Sovereignty and they exercise that ultimate authority to make and impose laws by way of the unanimous Judgments of twelve free and equal men who ask "SO HELP ME GOD" in order for them to administer Justice.
[full story]
|
|
| Oct 10, 2008 |
|
Thomas Jefferson wrote: "The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body
Thomas Jefferson wrote: "The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body - working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall render powerless the checks of one branch over the other and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.".
And Sir William Blackstone wrote: "UPON these accounts the trial by jury even has been, and I trust ever will be, looked upon as the glory of the English
[full story]
|
|
| Jun 22, 2008 |
|
It means that everyone is subject to the law; that no one, no matter how important or powerful, is above the law — not the government; not the Prime Minister, or any other Minister; not the Queen or the Governor General or any Lieutenant-Governor; not the
How Canadians Govern Themselves, 6th Edition - The Rule of Law and the Courts 1 Page 1 of I
Table of contents PDF Version) Print this Section )
The Rule of Law and the Courts
Responsible government and federalism are two cornerstones of our system of government. There is a third, without which neither of the first two would be safe: the rule of law.
What does the rule of law mean?
It means that everyone is subject to the law; that no one, no matter
[full story]
|
|
| Jun 22, 2008 |
|
In Canada the Rule of Law is equated with the Supremacy of God, per the preamble to its Constitution Act of 1982
Rule of law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page I of 4
Rule of law
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Politics series:
n Politics by country
n Political science
n Political history
· Political scientists
n Comparative government
a International relations
· Political economy
n Political philosophy
· Political psychology
n Form of government
n Sovereignty
· Public administration a Consent of the governed
a
[full story]
|
|
| Jun 22, 2008 |
|
the absolute predominance of regular law, so that the government has no arbitrary authority over the citizen; the equal subjection of all (including officials) to the ordinary law administered by the ordinary courts; and the fact that the citizen’s perso
Dear Gary,
I don't know what President George W. Bush is sprouting about "the rule of law", but here is what it really is:
RULE OF LAW:
1. The supremacy of law.
2. A feature attributed to the UK constitution by Professor Dicey (Law of the Constitution, 1885). It embodied three concepts: the absolute predominance of regular law, so that the government has no arbitrary authority over the citizen; the equal subjection of all (including officials) to the ordinary law administered by the ordinary courts; and the fact that the citizen’s personal freedoms are formulated and protected
[full story]
|
|
