I never get tired of revisiting the hijacking of the 4th amendment by Bush, Cheney, Gonzales and the rest of the outlaws.
It's not surprising that Addington, Yoo, Tenet and Bybee declined information and inteviews fo the report. Anyway it's a slam dunk confirmation of the slimey reptiles slithering into the hospital room of an Attorney General who would not sign off on treason. But that never stopped the serpents from a sneak attack on a man with a debilitating illness. Great bathroom reading here.
___________________________________________________
National Security Inspectors General Release Critique of Warrantless Surveillance Program
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20090710/index.htm
For more information contact:
Meredith Fuchs - 202/994-7000
Washington, DC, July 10, 2009 - Today’s release of a report by several agency inspectors general reinforces the National Security Archive’s argument in our Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that the Justice Department should declassify and release the legal justifications for the surveillance program authorized by President Bush after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
The new reportfrom the inspectors general of the Department of Defense, Department of Justice, Central Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, and Office of the Director of National Intelligence, criticizes the OLC memoranda that were used to justify warrantless surveillance of US citizens, several of which remain secret and are subject to the Archive’s lawsuit. The IGs state that there were “deficiencies” in the OLC memos, drafted by Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo, and that the memos “raise[d] serious concerns” at DOJ because they omitted analysis of key cases and legal provisions and were not subject to the ordinary “rigorous peer review process.”
According to Archive General Counsel Meredith Fuchs, “The IG report shows why it is important to release the underlying legal opinions to the public so we don’t make the same mistakes again.”
The National Security Archive, along with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), filed a FOIA lawsuit in 2006 seeking records related to the warrantless surveillance program, including relevant OLC legal opinions. In November 2008, 10 of those opinions were submitted to District Judge Henry Kennedy for in camera review after the court held that the government had not sufficiently justified withholding the opinions in their entirety. The case is pending Judge Kennedy’s review.
[ This will be important to know ]
ReplyDeletehuman - A human is a member of a species of bipedal primates in the family Hominidae (taxonomically Homo sapiens—Latin: "wise man" or "knowing man")
human being - a man, woman, or child, any living or extinct member of the family Hominidae
entity - that which is perceived or known or inferred to have its own distinct existence (living or nonliving), Something that exists as a particular and discrete unit: Persons and corporations are equivalent entities under the law.
Black's defines "natural person" as:
A human being, as distinguished from an artificial person created by law.
Black's defines "artificial person" as:
An entity, such as a corporation, created by law and given certain legal rights and duties of a human being.
From Wikipedia,
In jurisprudence, a natural person is a human being, as opposed to an artificial, legal or juristic person, i.e., an organization that the law treats for some purposes as if it were a person distinct from its members or owner.
A legal person, also called juridical person or juristic person, is a legal entity through which the law allows a group of natural persons to act as if they were a single composite individual for certain purposes, or in some jurisdictions, for a single person to have a separate legal personality other than their own. This legal fiction does not mean these entities are human beings, but rather means that the law allows them to act as persons for certain limited purposes—most commonly lawsuits, property ownership, and contracts.
Funny You should mention that. When I am accused and go to court the complaint has My name in all upper-case letters,meaning I am not a person but a corporation or institution. Corporations are given personhood and persons are rendered property.
ReplyDeleteWith the Congressional document known as an Act for the Gradual Abolition of Slavery 1850s and the above purported case laws that show that a mother passes on the so call slave ownership from children to children as defined by Edward Mandell House’ statements. This goes to show the true intent of the accusers to defraud not only this America Citizen but every America Citizen that comes before such Administrative hearing board. The accusers are misrepresenting the nature of the crime through the use of false allegations and other fraudulent statements in order to defraud this Party. By misusing the true terms of the English language by this fraud and deceit and misrepresentation of the language, the accusers are in violation of The Emergency War Powers Act and the Trading with the Enemy Act before this administrative hearing board. The people of this nation has been told and allowed to be believe slavery has been abolished , but yet the accusers are misusing an act that has been repealed in 1820 in order to enslave this party and all others who appear before these administrative hearing boards.
As an America Citizen I hold the inherent right of the 11th amendment immunity. The judicial power shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted by a Foreign State. If this FOREIGN STATE is misusing the name of this America Citizen by claims of slave ownership or placing it in all caps or misusing the last name or using the term “person” as a CORPORATION all complaints and suits against such CORPORATION fall under the FSIA and the DEPT OF STATE OFFICES in Washington DC. DC now has to be notified pursuant to 22 CFR 93.1 -93.2. A copy of the FSIA has to be filed with the complaint to the defendant’s chief executive officer of such CORPORATION.
MUNICIPAL, COUNTY, OR STATE COURTS lack jurisdiction to hear any case under the FOREIGN STATE definitions. This jurisdiction lies with the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT under the FSIA Statutes pursuant to 28 USC 1330.
Because the Defendant is a non corporate entity and not a slave owner nor registered with any Secretary of State as a CORPORATION the Accuser has FAILED to state a claim to which relief can be granted under 12(b) (6). This matter must be dismissed for lack of political, personam, and subject matter jurisdiction and venue as applied to the America citizen as not being subject to a foreign state under the 11th amendment.
link http://www.futureamericanhistory.net/updatedcourtdocuments.htm
I find this all very interesting.
This is great reading
ReplyDeletehttp://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1399703
http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1399703
ReplyDelete[Article 1 section 1] U.S. constitution
ReplyDeleteAll legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
from wikipedia -
As provided by the Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, the seat of the United States government is a federal district known as the District of Columbia. When created in 1790, the District comprised 100 square miles (260 km2) of land donated by the states of Maryland and Virginia. Columbia was a poetic name for the United States used at the time.
The City of Washington was built in the center of the District, but other towns were also located in the territory such as Georgetown and Alexandria. The United States Congress returned the Virginia portion of the District back to that state in 1846. The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 revoked the charters of the individuals cities of Washington and Georgetown, and instead created a single government for the whole District of Columbia. The City of Washington no longer exists; however, the name continues in use and the city is often referred to as just Washington, D.C.
Since the Home Rule Act of 1973, the District of Columbia has been run by an elected mayor and city council. Congress retains ultimate authority over the District and has the right to review the local budget and taxes, overturn laws passed by the city council, and terminate home rule. District residents pay federal taxes and are represented by a single, non-voting member in the United States House of Representatives.
Because of the Twenty-third Amendment to the United States Constitution, the people of the District of Columbia are allowed to vote for President of the United States. The District is allotted three electoral votes, equal to that of the least populous state. Before this, the residents of the District were not afforded the right to vote for the President who resides within their territory. The District still does not have voting representation in Congress, however.
[article 1 section 8] U.S. constitution
To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;—And
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.
http://www.constitution.org/constit_.htm
The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 (41st Congress, 3d Sess., ch. 62, 16 Stat. 419, enacted 1871-02-21
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_Organic_Act_of_1871
The District of Columbia Home Rule Act is a United States federal law passed in December 24, 1973
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_Home_Rule_Act
Representative Louis T. McFadden brought formal charges on May 23, 1933 . against the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Bank system, the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Secretary of the United States Treasury (Congressional Record May 23, 1933 page 4055-4058). HJR 192 passed on June 3, 1933. Mr. MaFadden claimed on June 10, 1933: “Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks…” HJR 192 is the insurance policy that protects the legislators from conviction for fraud and treason against the American people. It also protects the American people from damages caused by the actions of the United States.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.copyright-name.com/ucc-filing-1933.htm