Tag Archives: Tyranny

Inalienable

Odds are when you were in Public School you were not taught the definition of this very important word.

So here we go:

Inalienable

Not subject to sale or transfer; inseparable.

That which is inalienable cannot be bought, sold, or transferred from one individual to another. The personal rights to life and liberty guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States are inalienable. Similarly, various types of property are inalienable, such as rivers, streams, and highways.

West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.

inalienable

adjective incapable of being conveyed, incapable of being sold, incapable of being transferred, nontransferable, not able to be conveyed, quod abalienari non potest, secured by law, unable to be bought, unable to be disposed of, unforfeitable, untouchable
Associated concepts: inalienable lands, inalienable rights

I beg your pardon Justice Stevens, only as I’m polite, but the Second Amendment which is actually the Second Inalienable Right as listed in the Bill of Rights cannot be “Repealed”.  The only reason it appears as an Amendment to the Constitution is for recording purposes.  As you should know, Sir, there was a vociferous debate regarding the placement of them as Amendments rather than leaving them as a stand alone document for the very reason we are dealing with such idiocy today.  Many of the Founding Fathers knew that the remaining Monarchists (about 30% of the population), most of whom had surrendered to the inevitable and thrown in with the ‘Federalists’, would continue to try to position these Inalienable Rights as Amendable by Man.  The idea of one’s right being given to them by other men is the tenent of Monarchy as it is the foundation of Socialism/Communism.  Without one man being able to force another man to do what he wants there would be no governing paradigm resembling the above.  It is always about force, Mr. Stevens.  Our Freedom rests on being able to resist it.
This is exactly why Free Speech and an Armed Populace is integral to a Free Society.
The Bill of Rights was debated down to its simplest form so Every Man could understand it, rich and Poor alike.  Simple, Powerful and Direct.  The Bill of Rights is the Maxim for Human Freedom.
It has been proven over and over throughout history and continues to be illustrated around the World.
The absence of an armed population, given enough time, always ends in Tyranny.  We do not need to repeat the errors of the past which has demonstrably resulted in Oppression, Death and Destruction of Human life.
We should be past that here in the United States.
But, Mr. Stevens, thank you for your input.  It’s important for us to remember that people like you still exist… and always will.  It’s also important for all of us to recognize that such an oppressive mindset can rise to the highest levels of our government.  We need to be vigilant and more careful.

He has a Point about the Death Star.

 


4 out of 5 Socialists Recommend Controlling Speech

In a Recent unscientific Survey 4 out of 5 Socialists said they believe Offensive Speech should be Controlled.

Rather than stand on Principle and cast Sunshine on supposedly ‘deadly’ speech expressed in newspapers, television and the internet thus allowing All if Us to condemn it…  Our Government prefers to sidestep that argument and ask for Increased Control of all methods of expression.

Why?

Because controlling Speech is an important weapon employed by those in power to remain in power.

Think about it this way; If you’re doing things people hate you for, what better way to avoid their anger than to make sure they never know about it… and if they do find out, you can tell them whatever you want while making sure nobody can challenge your hogwash.  If anyone tries to shed light on your crappy behavior anyway… send some Force their way.

Brilliant!

Of course you need to convince enough people these controls ‘are for their own good’ or, in pure Irony, ‘to safeguard Free Speech’.  Those that support you, for whatever unimaginable reason, will nod in agreement.  They might even grab a Starbucks, Stop Bathing, Misspell a Sign and Sit in a Park.  Get enough Useful Types like these and you’ve inoculated yourself against all those who recognize the danger you represent.  Machiavelli would be Proud.

We are seeing this play out right in front of us.

New Controls are being created for the Internet.  Last time I checked the Internet has done pretty well without them…

It Keeps getting Faster…  It Keeps getting Better… all by Private Means.

But it represents all that Socialists believe is Evil.

Free Speech.

And that cannot be tolerated.

If you can’t make fun of someone’s Faith, what Can you make fun of?

And since Socialism/Populism/Liberalism often serves as Religion for Atheists… it’s not even a jump, leap or reach.

By the way, the Fifth Socialist who didn’t Approve of Controlling Speech is having his Mind made Right by the other 4 as I type this out.


Are AG Holder and Rep. Gohmert (R-TX) Buddies?

Or is Eric Holder just a Smug, Arrogant, Elitist who holds nothing but Contempt for the Separation of Powers?

You Decide.

Transcript of Exchange:

(Background:  At issue was a request for documents in the DOJ’s case against the Holy Land Foundation, a designated terrorist group based in Texas, whose founders were convicted and sentenced for funneling money to Hamas. The men are now asking for a new trial, blaming their lawyers for their convictions. In February, the DOJ disputed their attorney’s claim, saying there was a “mountain of evidence” that proves the Islamic charity was controlled by Hamas.)

“I was fairly specific to make sure that I got the documents that the Department of Justice handed over to people convicted of supporting terrorism. They’re terrorists. We’ve given them the documents,” Gohmert said. Gohmert said the committee sent the Justice Department repeated requests for the documents that had been used to prosecute them but were only provided a link to “nearly 500 publicly available exhibits that were admitted into evidence” and instructed “to check the public access to court electronic records.” Meanwhile, the requested documents were “put on discs and sent to Illinois,” so they are easily available – “just not to members of Congress,” Gohmert said.

“Attorney General, I’ve read in the 5th Circuit opinion, about 9600 summaries of transcripts of conversations that the Justice Department had that were made available to attorneys for the terrorists,” Gohmert said. “I still do not understand why your department can provide documents to terrorists’ lawyers, and many of them to four out of eight of the terrorists, and not provide them to members of Congress.” “Sir, I’ve read you what your department promised, and it is inadequate, and I realize that contempt is not a big deal to our attorney general, but it is important that we have proper oversight,” Gohmert said.

Holder: “You don’t want to go there, buddy. You don’t want to go there, okay?”

Gohmert: “I don’t want to go there?”

Holder: “No.” Gohmert: “About the contempt?”

Holder: “You should not assume that that is not a big deal to me. I think that it was inappropriate. I think it was unjust, but never think that that was not a big deal to me. Don’t ever think that.”

Gohmert: “Well I’m just looking for evidence, and normally we’re known by our fruits, and there have been no indications that it was a big deal, because your department has still not been forthcoming in producing the documents that were the subject of the contempt.”

Holder: “The documents that we were prepared to make available then, we’re prepared to make available now that would have obviated the whole need. This was all about the gun lobby and a desire to have a—

Gohmert: “Sir, we’ve been trying to get to the bottom of Fast and Furious where people died, where at least a couple hundred Mexicans died, and we can’t get the information to get to the bottom of that, so I don’t need lectures from you about contempt, because it is very difficult to deal with asking questions.”

Holder: “And I don’t need lectures from you either.”

Gohmert: “As a former judge, I’d never have asked questions of someone who’s been held in contempt. We waited ‘til the contempt was purged, and then we asked questions.”

(H/T Melanie Hunter at CNS News)

So either AG Holder and Congressman Louie Gohmert are “Buddies” or Eric Holder is an Arrogant A-Hole.  May be both.

Hmmm…

Considering We the People wish to see Lois Lerner of IRS Targeting Political Enemies Fame placed in Contempt… it’s worth wondering what power that charge actually has?

If you’re found guilty of Contempt of Congress such as Eric Holder has been, So What?

I’m pretty sure I would be put in Jail.

I guess if you’re associated with Government, you become Buddies.  You also Demonstrate for all of us out here Who still Give a Crap that you’re Above the Law.

And when You’re the one in charge of Enforcing the Law where does that leave us?


Declaration and Exemption

How do those we disagree with secure power over us?

They declare onerous rules and then exempt everyone, particularly themselves and their associates, from them.  (Can you think of any current examples?)

Why do they do this?

Because in doing so they secure the authority to create the rules… with your acquiescence as demonstrated by your silence.

When they begin making decisions exercising Control over you and you object, they act surprised.  When the time comes to challenge these people, it’s too late.
You have already been marginalized.

Silence is Consent… whether you mean it to be or not.

Unless you confront our leaders whenever they step outside the boundaries set by the U.S. Constitution, you concede your Freedom to them.  You promote your own slavery.  This, of course, requires you knowing what’s in the U.S. Constitution.  You might want to take the five minutes needed to read it.  Then repeat that exercise often.  I do.

By the way, I Declare that I am King of the World.  However, for two years none of you will be effected.

 


If They Can Stop Just One Terrorist Attack, It Is Worth It

I’ve always had a soft spot for Stormtroopers… Good Guys Wear White right?

Real Science

ScreenHunter_09 Jun. 19 20.28

View original post


We Did it to Protect You.

This has been the marketing line for every Security Apparatus every created.

It is the claim of Tyrants, and the refuge for Criminals.

There has never been a Government who built a Security Apparatus which it marketed to its population with the tag line of “We are Doing it to Oppress you.”

Evil is never so overt… unless you write scripts in Hollywood.

The idea that we can suddenly trust the words of those who are angry they are being forced with stating them openly, is inane.

What should be remembered is that those who did the lying were comfortable doing the lying. It is a Culture.  They do what they want, then openly deny it… comfortable that nothing ill will happen to them for doing so.

This is the point.

The United States Government answers to the Citizenry. It is a “bottom up” model.  Because of this, we are Unique in the World.

When those we elect, and those we appoint, suffer no genuine consequence for their malfeasance regardless of their supposed intentions, We have wandered far away from the above.

When people like me express concern regarding where this country is headed… and where we are now… we mean it.

No Black Helicopters here. Simply distress based on plenty of history and observation.