See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: Government thugs handcuff children, kill dog during $60 marijuana raid
Source:
Marijuana Policy Project
URL Source: http://www.mpp.org
Published: Sep 28, 2006
Author: Rob Kampia
Post Date: 2006-10-02 17:19:33 by Neil McIver
Ping List: *Marijuana Policy Project* Subscribe to *Marijuana Policy Project*
Keywords: None
Views: 3123
Comments: 194
I want to share with you a recent horrifying example of our government's war on marijuana users. Get ready to be outraged. The following is an excerpt from a September 20 article in the "Times Union" in Albany, New York: "A police strike team raided a woman's Prospect Street apartment and handcuffed her children and killed her dog early Tuesday in a $60 pot bust. The woman called it excessive force and a case of mistaken identity, but officers said they stormed the home for a good reason: One of her sons was selling marijuana there. The Police Department's tactical squad knocked down the front door of the upstairs apartment at 110 Prospect St. and flooded into the apartment shortly after 6 a.m. 'I heard a big boom. My first reaction was to jump out of bed. We were trying to find where our kids were at and all of a sudden we had guns in our faces,' said 40-year-old Anita Woodyear, who rents the second-floor flat. During the ensuing chaos, police handcuffed two of the woman's children, Elijah Bradley, 11, and 12-year-old Victoria Perez, and shot at her dog in the kitchen before killing it in the bathroom, Woodyear said. 'That seems like an awful lot of firepower for marijuana,' said Fred Clark of the Schenectady chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. 'That's like spending $125,000 for $5.' Woodyear said she suspected police had intended to search a neighboring home, but had the wrong address on the search warrant. Neighbors said they suspect illicit drugs are dealt at other homes on the block. 'No apology, no "sorry about your dog",' she said. But police said they have no reason to apologize. They said they raided the house because Woodyear's 18-year-old son, Israel M. Bradley, sold three plastic bags of marijuana there for $40 on Sept. 15. They allege he sold two other bags of marijuana in the house for $20 on Aug. 28, they said. In addition, police said Bradley was carrying marijuana in the home on Sept. 1. 'We had the absolute right house. We had the absolute right target,' said Assistant Chief Michael Seber." Visit http://ny.mpp.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=grKMIYPGIqE&b=1773617&ct=2947891 to read the entire article. Who do the police think they're helping by breaking down the front door of a family's home, pointing guns in their faces, murdering their dog, and handcuffing the children? Was this for the good of the children? The mother? The neighborhood? No one wins -- except perhaps for the government thugs who get jacked up on the adrenaline rush that comes from threatening and persecuting others. We have to stop this madness. We have to change the laws so that government thugs no longer have the legal authority to kick in people's doors to find marijuana. If you're as outraged by the above story as I am, please turn your anger into action by helping MPP restore sense to our nation's marijuana policies. Thank you for standing with us in this important fight. Sincerely, Rob Kampia P.S. As I've mentioned in previous alerts, a major philanthropist has committed to match the first $3.5 million that MPP can raise from the rest of the planet in 2006. This means that your donation today will be doubled.
Executive Director
Marijuana Policy Project
Washington, D.C.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-39) not displayed.
.
.
.
#40. To: wbales (#37)
on his homepage
Duty to know the law? All of it? What a hoot! Try this sometime: Speak with a judge, or a police officer, or a government worker, or a politician, or a lawyer, or anyone else for that matter and simply ask them how many laws there are on the books. They can't tell you. Nobody can. "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" the jackbooted thugs will mindlessly parrot, but not one of them can tell you how many laws are on the books that you have no right to be ignorant of.
#41. To: BTP Holdings (#36)
But, as with all of the rest of us out here, they have a duty to know the law, ALL OF IT, but they are only trained in enforcement and procedure. And they have failed in that duty to us, which means we must necessarily be well versed in the law ourselves. To not be so versed is a fools errand.
 | Gold and silver are real money, paper is but a promise. |
#42. To: wbales (#38) (Edited)
Oh, he wrote tickets alright. But, on the 2nd visit to the court, I had the chance to talk with the prosecutor. He told me "The Dept. of Revenue has no record your pickup has ever been registered." I told him that was interesting especially since I had bought the truck from someone in the state. and that I had it registered at one time besides the party I had bought it from having it registered. So, I gave him copies of all my paper work and said, "I'm sure they have a record in the archives, but I'll bet you did not ask them to look there, only in the computer database. My paper work has removed the registration, so they had no choice but to remove the record from the database. And I am certain that the Director of Revenue has a file on me in her office since it was with her that I had exchanged correspondence." When he realized I was onto something (which was leading to a 5th Amendment taking) he simply said, "I'll just dismiss this and we can save us both more time and expense." He was a smart man. ;0)
Did he write you a ticket or was there just a constitutional debate?
“The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes, knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.” James Fenimore Cooper
#43. To: BTP Holdings, christine (#39)
OK. I decided to ignore this: These states are foreign governments with respect to the United States. They are also referred to as "foreign countries" in 28 U.S.C. §297 and 26 CFR §1.911- 2(h) and "foreign states" in 28 U.S.C. §1603. which is patently WRONG and get to this: Constitution of the United States Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17; 17. 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, dock-yards, and other needful buildings: And, The new Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 shall read; 17. 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, SUBJECT ONLY TO THE RESTRICTIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION, 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, dock-yards, and other needful buildings: And, So, Richard is proposing to add "SUBJECT ONLY TO THE RESTRICTIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION" to the constitutional clause establishing Washington, DC as the seat of the federal government and giving the federal government authority over its federal military bases, federal parks, lands, and so forth wherever so situate. For one, "SUBJECT ONLY TO THE RESTRICTIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION" seems superfluous. Second, it is arbitrary and vague. What is the intent of adding this language? That federal government controlled lands within the United States are subject to the authority of the US Constitution?? That any and all state law is invalid/inapplicable to and within such areas?? What, exactly and specifically, is attempting to be accomplished by adding this language? This is confusing.
In 1947, the UN created a perpetual war and named it Israel.
#44. To: BTP Holdings (#42)
Justice Department Announces William E. Moschella as New Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General
The faster the Aryan Nation mob at Freedom4um are caged and chained, the better off we'll be. I’ll cheering when they are forced to behave. - Aaron
#45. To: Elliott Jackalope (#41)
"Ignorance of the law is no excuse" the jackbooted thugs will mindlessly parrot, but not one of them can tell you how many laws are on the books that you have no right to be ignorant of. Don't be facetious. Of course they can't. But the cops are bound to obey ALL of the statutes. And you can bet your bippy they regularly violate loads of them, and all because of insufficient training and just plain old ignornace. Much of it is because they are only trained in certain aspects (enforcement and procedure). And it sure don't help that we go along because of our own ignorance and an unwillingness to sacrifice in the least to keep our liberty and freedom. Like that judge here said, there is injustice in the courts "because the people allow it." I caught a cop who arrested me lecturing me on the law and I said to him, "Deputy, are you lecturing me on the law?" He said, "Yes, I am." And I told him, "You may lecture me on enforcement and procedure, but don't ever lecture me on the law." Just so happens his procedure was faulty for the simple reason he did not know the law, not enough of it at any rate to protect my rights as is his duty under the public trust, which is known as a breach of fiducuiary duty. I really do hate the lying scum.
Duty to know the law? All of it? What a hoot! Try this sometime: Speak with a judge, or a police officer, or a government worker, or a politician, or a lawyer, or anyone else for that matter and simply ask them how many laws there are on the books. They can't tell you. Nobody can.
“The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes, knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.” James Fenimore Cooper
#46. To: AngelSpawn (#31)
I have been a political activist far longer then I was in Special Forces. And my four letter mobilization day code word was "REDS" which was a joke my A team did in all good nature based on my left leaning political stance. You see, they actually liked it, as Special Forces is different then the "warrior ethos of the Rangers or infantry. My political outlook gave them more tools to use in analyzing a situation and sizing a situation up. Low intensity conflict as I've been taught how to train people in it or conduct operations in a LEC situation does not involve political indoctrination. If you do anything in the way of that in Robin Sage, you get in trouble with the situation with the people playing the indigenous people right off the bat. I am very serious. One class had a Mormon officer given the "Village Elder's drink which was not poisonous, but was definitely alcoholic and obnoxiously horrible to taste. The fool piously started lecturing them about how as a Mormon he did not drink alcohol and the 'villager on the truck nearby started firing up that training team with blanks from a saw. The team had to go into retrograde movement mode and adiós the AO. You are taught to respect those you deal with culturally and politically. Which is EXACTLY why I went Spacial Forces in the first place.
"The ADL is in the business of political indoctrination, which blends with brainwashing in today's LE environment. I suspect that your "teaching in the military" makes you as unable to use critical thinking in this matter as the cops and their ADL/JINSA trainers."
#47. To: AngelSpawn (#31) (Edited)
Well that is your posturing on this. I have been more then nice, and more then fair. You are very arrogant, territorial in regards to this forum and what goes on it, and self righteous to the extreme. And I don't care if you believe me or not, but suffice it to say, I am not in here so many years using my own name because I am in the business of lying to anyone anyplace on the Internet I've been.
"As you appear incapable of discussing this topic without resorting to outright flames and smears, you'll excuse me if I still don't believe or trust your word."
#48. To: wbales, christine (#43)
These states are foreign governments with respect to the United States. They are also referred to as "foreign countries" in 28 U.S.C. §297 and 26 CFR §1.911- 2(h) and "foreign states" in 28 U.S.C. §1603. which is patently WRONG I have not gone to check on those parts of the code. So I cannot say exactly what is in there. But it is a fact that we have two parallel jursidictions, one is for the federal state which encompasses the District of Colombia and all of the territories and other federal posessions, forts, federal buildings, etc. And the other is the jurisdiction for the several states of the union. This is a well founded fact of the law in this nation and there are many court cases which show this to be true. American Jurisprudence would be the place to look for this. For the purposes of distinguishing these two separate jurisdictions, there is a court case which I recall seeing that says specifically that the federal jurisdiction is foreign to that of the several states. Hence, the federal government is foreign to that of the states. The two jurisdictions cannot be mixed. And it is from this that there arises much confusion. The intent of Congress when it passes a law is that the jurisdiction is only for one or the other, or both. Any law which is applied to a jurisdiction to which it cannot be done under this constitutional separation, would be struck down by the courts. The problem is that many of these laws which are misapplied are never challenged in court. Therein lies the problem. And also the dishonest nature of the bureaucracy which does these things. BTW, this jurisdictional issue has been proven by the Congressional Research Bureau time and again. When the word "state" is used in legislation, it does not always have one meaning. The whole law must be read to bring this into context. What is the intent of adding this language? That federal government controlled lands within the United States are subject to the authority of the US Constitution?? That any and all state law is invalid/inapplicable to and within such areas?? What, exactly and specifically, is attempting to be accomplished by adding this language? This is confusing. That is what I thought also. Furthermore, the fact that the constitution and Bill of Rights are a compact between the states (as representatives of the people, who are not a party to that compact) and the federal government are between them only as a guarantee of our rights and the limitations of the federal government as it pertains to the states and the people. See my post #30 above also at the very end where I give my opinion of this.
I decided to ignore this:
For one, "SUBJECT ONLY TO THE RESTRICTIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION" seems superfluous. Second, it is arbitrary and vague.
“The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes, knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.” James Fenimore Cooper
#49. To: BTP Holdings (#48)
This is a well founded fact of the law in this nation and there are many court cases which show this to be true. American Jurisprudence would be the place to look for this. For the purposes of distinguishing these two separate jurisdictions, there is a court case which I recall seeing that says specifically that the federal jurisdiction is foreign to that of the several states. Hence, the federal government is foreign to that of the states. this is my understanding as well, but the feds are more and more blatantly and egregiously ignoring the lines/laws which separate jurisdiction just as it is becoming apparent that there is little to no separation of the three branches of government.
But it is a fact that we have two parallel jursidictions, one is for the federal state which encompasses the District of Colombia and all of the territories and other federal posessions, forts, federal buildings, etc. And the other is the jurisdiction for the several states of the union.
#50. To: christine (#49)
Apathy is the killer. All of this has been going on for some time. It will be up to the minority of the people to force the issue and make things right. “…Our destruction, should it ever come at all, will be from another quarter. From the inattention of the people to their concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence.” Daniel Webster
but the feds are more and more blatantly and egregiously ignoring the lines/laws which separate jurisdiction just as it is becoming apparent that there is little to no separation of the three branches of government.
“The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes, knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.” James Fenimore Cooper
#51. To: Ferret Mike (#46)
I have no doubt that you're well-versed in exopolitics.
Which is EXACTLY why I went Spacial Forces in the first place.
The ADL is training the New Gestapo
#52. To: Ferret Mike, Cynicom (#47)
You've been a font of name calling and you can't even answer a simple yes or no question as it relates to an Israeli spy organization. I am not in here so many years using my own name because I am in the business of lying to anyone anyplace on the Internet I've been. Cyni- Note the English slipping again. Also note that the meaning conveyed is the exact opposite of the meaning intended.
I have been more then nice, and more then fair.
The ADL is training the New Gestapo
#53. To: AngelSpawn (#52)
Heh, what are you inferring? That I don't speakie the English as a first language? And you say I am insulting? You have been nothing but hostile, insulting, and there is not a thing I can ever say that doesn't put a snarl on your little mug every bit as ugly as Cheney's. And as you have an agenda to try to serve, there is nothing it seems I can say to you anytime that doesn't turn into a hot taffy pull in a nudist camp. Later alligator, we done, home spun. You are in incommunicative fuckwit, and that is no insult, just a statement of fact.
"Note the English slipping again. Also note that the meaning conveyed is the exact opposite of the meaning intended."
#54. To: Ferret Mike, AngelSpawn (#47)
Mike... With writing such as this, any discerning person would have their suspicions raised. Your writings in other forums follows you here, namely, your connection to ADL. Normally this would be of no interest to me, however, you most often preach from a pulpit rather than discuss. If you insist on following the ADL anti-American line, it would be honest and incumbent upon you to state exactly your connection with ADL.
And I don't care if you believe me or not, but suffice it to say, I am not in here so many years using my own name because I am in the business of lying to anyone anyplace on the Internet I've been.
#55. To: Ferret Mike (#53)
That you unintentionally speak the truth when you attempt to lie. It's the very mark of corruption. Had you the honesty to either denounce or embrace the ADL in public, you'd get less abuse here. Pick a side and quit riding the shadows. You'll get no respect for cravenness.
what are you inferring?
The ADL is training the New Gestapo "I am not in here so many years using my own name because I am in the business of lying to anyone anyplace on the Internet I've been." Ferret Mike
#56. To: Cynicom (#54)
It's also great sig material. ; )
With writing such as this, any discerning person would have their suspicions raised.
The ADL is training the New Gestapo "I am not in here so many years using my own name because I am in the business of lying to anyone anyplace on the Internet I've been." Ferret Mike
#57. To: Cynicom (#54) (Edited)
I have no stinking connection with them. I merely refuse to be badgered by this jerk into a modus where I am on the stand, and he is a cross examining attorney. As for my posting style, it is what it is and I post to dialog in a way that helps my thought process as well as to enjoy a virtual community. This crap is all about me not going along with AS's opinion of the ADL. My opinion of them is based on having found their website valuable from time to time as a research tool to craft posts answering others in lively discussion. I make no apologies as I don't owe one. And just because this little fella has a bogeyman view of them does not mean I have to as well. I am also being attacked by this person for using 'monitor' instead of lurk in regards to my checking back occasionally to see what Charles Lindberg and others have posted in Storm front's E activism section. Jesus fucking A, Christ on a Popsicle stick, I was a Special Operations Communication Sergeant. I had to take the CEOI, antenna wire, PRC 70, leg key etc etc and hoof it a couple of clicks from the PB to make commo at all hours of the 24 hour day cycle. I also have ham gear and talk in International Morse Code at home now. I MONITOR M-O-N-I-T-O-R the goddamn radio, and do not, absolutely fucking do no apologize because I use that word instead of LURK every time online I can. He is grasping at straws, and being an asshole, As well you should know I am not the only goddamn 52 year old with either outdated slang or jargon, or whose life experience and words I've used in it are different then with others who have just talked this and that on the cute little cell phones I fucking loathe with purple passion, or have spent their entire adult life on the Internet. I am not into this character's polished use of McCarthyism, especially as my name is Michael JOSEPH McCarthy myself. I have had it up to here with this shit. Period.
#58. To: Ferret Mike, Cynicom (#57)
I've never met an intellectually honest person that had any respect for the ADL. Again, it's that element of corruption I mentioned earlier.
And just because this little fella has a bogeyman view of them does not mean I have to as well.
The ADL is training the New Gestapo "I am not in here so many years using my own name because I am in the business of lying to anyone anyplace on the Internet I've been." Ferret Mike
#59. To: Ferret Mike (#57)
Mike... It is difficult if not impossible to reconcile your stated background with being a staunch supporter of an anti-American group such as the ADL. How can one be a member or supporter of ADL and not be anti-American?
I was a Special Operations Communication Sergeant.
#60. To: Cynicom (#59) (Edited)
Staunch? Who said I was a supporter never mind a staunch one? All I said was I admired them for their good work. And all this has been spun by ASpawn because I've enjoyed reading their website, used information on it, and have heard good things about them. I am about as much a 'supporter' of them as I am a supporter of the Washington Post whose site I enjoy going to far more then the ADL's. I don't care if ASpawn likes them or not. I don't automatically adopt the world view others have of an entity like this organization just because they feel the way they do about it. He obviously hungers for an avatar of this bogeyman group of his and has decided I'm 'it.' I am not into playing 'tag, you're it,' 'hide and seek,' 'red light/green light,' or any other damn child's games in here. I view his anti ADL view with a huge amount of skepticism as I hear him spew hatred, loathing and anger all the time, and the vaudeville act of him nailing himself up on a cross is quite maudlin a spectacle that I am not impressed by. You are more then welcome to stop by and see me anytime in Eugene, Oregon. You can also write the Register Guard and get the entire stack of articles with my name in them regarding forest activism to those about the times I was robbed at gunpoint at 7 Eleven too for all I care. I am only exactly who I say I am and the proof of this is absolutely not hidden. I am well known locally, and I don't bother hiding partially because of that, and partially because I have already had ID theft blight my existence, and I have made it impossible to touch me like that anymore. I have been on the Internet a long time, and this little old forum is the only one in my experience I have posted on where some on it turn purple with rage and contempt at the mere mention of the word 'Jew.' Well Cyni, I ain't one of those people, OK? And I am not interested in being one either. I also do not want to work for the ADL anymore then I want to play games that are great for terminally insulting Holocaust victims and families touched by that genocide. You may find this a myopic and shallow view of issues near and dear to your heart, but as people are different with different life experiences and educational backgrounds, you know damn well this is always going to be the case. I find all too many people don't have near enough concern for environmental issues of all kinds, but I don't pick on the ones I feel an easy target for abuse to take my frustrations out on because of that. I have clearly and repeatedly said I listen to what people say in here, and I respect the intentions people have with their messages - especially pet ones - but I do not buy into them without a great deal of thought, research and experience that tells me what they say is true. That is just how it is.
"It is difficult if not impossible to reconcile your stated background with being a staunch supporter of an anti-American group such as the ADL."
#61. To: BTP Holdings, christine (#48)
The two jurisdictions cannot be mixed. And it is from this that there arises much confusion. They can be mixed and are every day--its called concurrent jurisdiction. There is not that much confusion. Whether federal jurisdiction or state jurisdiction attaches and/or which jurisdiction's law takes precedence is generally well settled. The US Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land. The US Supreme Court is the court of last resort in the United States. In some situations, a state Supreme Court is the court of last resort. This all seems to be much ado about nothing. The focus of concerned Americans should be on removing the traitors and idiots, special interests, and a particular foreign country running the American federal government AND geeting government to recognize, enforce and follow laws which are on the books. And, I'll say again: Richard's proposed amendment makes NO sense to me.
Hence, the federal government is foreign to that of the states.
In 1947, the UN created a perpetual war and named it Israel.
#62. To: christine (#49)
And I don't disagree with that. And the federal judiciary has abused and tortured the Commerce Clause in this effort. Perhaps Richard's goals would be served by merely re-affirming the Ninth and Tenth Amendments which were descimated--effectively repealed by military action/violence 1860-1865.
this is my understanding as well, but the feds are more and more blatantly and egregiously ignoring the lines/laws which separate jurisdiction just as it is becoming apparent that there is little to no separation of the three branches of government.
In 1947, the UN created a perpetual war and named it Israel.
#63. To: BTP Holdings (#30)
Love that quote, BTW.
"Now more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness, and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave, and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature." James Garfield
In 1947, the UN created a perpetual war and named it Israel.
#64. To: Ferret Mike (#57)
I've followed your postings for years on forums and have noticed the consistancy with which you present yourself and your ideas. Why someone would try to discredit you is not only offtopic, but is suspect in itself.
#65. To: wbales (#61)
Concurrent means they exist side by side. Generally speaking, they do not mix. But, FEDGOV has been trying to mix them more and more as is shown by the attempts to federalize crimes which should be solely in state jurisdiction. You know what I mean, all of this baloney about hate crimes and other nonsense. But, I was referring also to the two concurrent federal jurisdictions, rather than the state and federal jurisdictions. That is where there is real confusion since the word state is used in both but there are two meanings.
They can be mixed and are every day--its called concurrent jurisdiction. There is not that much confusion. Whether federal jurisdiction or state jurisdiction attaches and/or which jurisdiction's law takes precedence is generally well settled.
“The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes, knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.” James Fenimore Cooper
#66. To: angle, AngelSpawn, christine (#64)
Thank you for the kind words. I understand why he is engaged in sport of this nature. I was the short, skinny shy type who got bullied in school. I survived because I am stronger and smarter then they were. The serendipity of the experience of dealing with bullies is spoken in that old saw, "If something doesn't kill you, it makes you stronger." I have quite enough tempering, strength both physical and intellectually to handle small fry like AngelSpawn who does his work behind an anonymous account name. He is trying to get me to vent in rage right now. Unfortunately for him, I am wise to the game. I am even appreciative too. You see, he proves definitively that his passion for Jew hating and baiting has more the malicious intent of bullying behind it then intellectual or factual basis. He proves he is only in it to cause grief, not promote social or political justice. I no longer have to give his viewpoint the benefit of doubt, and I won't. ;-)
"I've followed your postings for years on forums and have noticed the consistency with which you present yourself and your ideas. Why someone would try to discredit you is not only off topic, but is suspect in itself."
#67. To: all, Cynicom, AngelSpawn, christine (#59) (Edited)
Michael McCarthy The above is an E mail I sent to Christine today. I feel it beneath my dignity to respond to McCarthyistic accusations that once denied are attacked with even greater fervor and maliciousness when the baiter thinks they have smelled blood. It was sent to her under the auspices as a legal notice, as I do not like the revolting games of accuse then attack the denial when the baiter thinks they have someone on the defensive. I post it here solely at her suggestion. This game is why the alleged question in good faith regarding alleged ADL training of police in this country I ignore is not in good faith. It is why I look down my nose at it. I recognize the game. I have only seen it played a million times over the years online in different forums. And yes, it always amazes me people do this and then act like they invented a new and original game. As for that training, I have no idea whether or not it exists, I do not have a clue what they teach if in fact they do, and furthermore, at this point I don't give a damn what they are doing. I don't know anyone in or associated with the ADL, and I have never gotten any indication they know who I am.
I Michael McCarthy have never engaged in negotiation with, or worked for the ADL in any manner. I have zero knowledge of even the names of a single person in that organization.
#68. To: Ferret Mike, christine, Cynicom (#67)
Your dishonesty is quite glaring.
alleged ADL training of police in this country
The ADL is training the New Gestapo "I am not in here so many years using my own name because I am in the business of lying to anyone anyplace on the Internet I've been." Ferret Mike
#69. To: christine (#68)
I rest my case, here is the response I predicted would come in answer to anything I say. ;-)
#70. To: Ferret Mike (#69)
The ADL's training of jackboots is a fact, not "alleged".
The ADL is training the New Gestapo "I am not in here so many years using my own name because I am in the business of lying to anyone anyplace on the Internet I've been." Ferret Mike
#71. To: AngelSpawn (#70)
I don't care what you allege. It is your problem, go find another mark. I am not playing your silly game.
"The ADL's training of jackboots is a fact, not "alleged"."
#72. To: BTP Holdings, christine, richard9151, Zoroaster, robin, Eoghan, tom007, Jethro Tull, Neil McIver (#65)
So from Richard's PM and the statement above, I garner more enlightenment. There is, according to Richard and BTP as well, two concurrent federal jurisdictions: one up front and out in the open and one, ostensibly, behind the scenes really running the show, extraconstituional, so to speak. First off, I do not necessarily disagree that there is a shadow government: the Big Business Elite and Zionists who are calling the shots. In fact, that is probably the case. However, that such rises to the level of an "official" secondary, parallel federal government, I am dubious. That the enactment of Richard's proposed contitutional language would expose and bring this secondary federal jurisdiction to a halt, I am MUCH more skeptical (laughing is more like it). After all, do you all really think these people would be worried about a change in the constitution's wording: "Well, it's been amended boys, time to close up shop." Oh yeah, the Zionists and thier ass kissing lackeys in the American federal government would be sure to say that. Do you really need reminding of how Bush, et. al., regard the US Constitution?? ACK. ACK. GAG. GAG. No, we don't need no constitutional amendments. We need no more laws. What is needed is an informed citizenry who shall no longer tolerate ignorance, recklessness, and corruption and the influence and control of a small cult centered in Israel over and in Washington, DC. The typical and far too numerous apathetic, un- and mis-informed, lazy, intimidated, stupid, and gullible American is the real problem. That is what needs to fixed. No more voting for anyone with an R or a D attached to thier name--more attending street corner protests--more letters to the editor--more bumper stickers--more blurting out at cocktail parties and backyard BBQs that Israel runs the US and Bush sucks--more calling into radio and TV talk shows--more telling your close friends and relatives that they are braindead MFers if they support Bush, this federal government, and/or Israel, grass roots sort of action, so to speak, again. Well...IMHO.
But, I was referring also to the two concurrent federal jurisdictions, rather than the state and federal jurisdictions. That is where there is real confusion since the word state is used in both but there are two meanings.
In 1947, the UN created a perpetual war and named it Israel.
#73. To: wbales (#72)
bales, I couldn't agree more. *Any* attempt to deal with this system with amendments, motions and legal action is like pissing in the wind. It's gone rogue; a judge doesn't follow law, h/she follows whims. We need snipers, like the dude who put a hole a that black robed thug in Reno.
That the enactment of Richard's proposed contitutional language would expose and bring this secondary federal jurisdiction to a halt, I am MUCH more skeptical (laughing is more like it).
#74. To: wbales (#72)
yahoo! i agree. hehehehehehe. good post, wes.
--more telling your close friends and relatives that they are braindead MFers if they support Bush, this federal government,
#75. To: wbales (#72)
Israel has undue influence, for sure. They even have their own senator, who lost the Dem nomination, but will probably win anyway, and should have after his name (I-Israel). But they don't run our country, they just get away with murder. Sometimes literally. Otherwise, I agree with you 100 percent. Particularly the cocktail party stuff; the Repukes have managed to alter the debate so that if you attack Smirk n Snarl or their handlers, you support the terrorist, you are a bush hater, you hate Merka. These are the opinions of a small minority, but they have managed to intimidate the majority. When you mention that a cabal involving the Supreme Court and the high levels of the GOP stole the 2000 election, you're Sore Loserman. When you point out that the GOP in Florida deliberately excluded legal voters, that even Choicepoint told the GOP that innocent people were caught in their list of felons, you're a conspiracy nut. The main problem here is the so-called liberal press. The people who own the ink are almost 100 percent plutocrat Republicans, and just because most journalists are more or less like me, fiscally conservative but socially very liberal, doesn't mean that they decide what to write or edit their own stories. And the most powerful of those journalists are regularly coopted, sent to the rat warren called DC, where if you write an honest story, you no longer get the juicy gossip, the "get" that shows your boss you have the juice to get exclusive interviews (almost always anonymous and almost always dishonest). The fortunate thing is that this is a self-correcting problem. Judy Miller is now a well-paid outcast, revealed as a government dupe. Bob Woodward, after two sycophantic books, suddenly remembered that the political end of the government is generally a pack of liars, and may have saved his rapidly dwindling reputation. Others are doing public mea culpae, admitting they got seduced or intimidated by a lockstep pack of nazis.
No more voting for anyone with an R or a D attached to thier name--more attending street corner protests--more letters to the editor--more bumper stickers--more blurting out at cocktail parties and backyard BBQs that Israel runs the US and Bush sucks--more calling into radio and TV talk shows--more telling your close friends and relatives that they are braindead MFers if they support Bush, this federal government, and/or Israel, grass roots sort of action, so to speak, again.
#76. To: wbales, christine, All (#72)
This is basically correct. The two federal juridictions occur in how Congress writes legislation. One jurisdiction is the for federal zone and the other is for the several states. The hang up is that federal agencies administer things as if they are one and the same. They are not! This highlights the tyranny of the bureaucracy, and the ignorance and dishonesty of our public servants. Additionally, the extra-constitutional nature of the administrative laws (both state and federal) is based on the part of the constitution which says the right of contract shall not be impaired. Think about that when your drivers license is up for renewal, especially if you are not engaged in commercial activity which requires you to have one. The common law is still in effect, unless you have waived your rights under the contract. Most people have been bamboozled because the banksters have had their lackeys in government arrange things to suit their needs, collecting the debt under the bankruptcy and registering themselves and their property, which gives the state a legal interest. Much more to this than we can cover here and now. The plutocrats (banksters, CFR, Bilderberg, Trilateralists, Zionists and neocons) have been the the power behind the scenes for some time. As for the secondary, parallel government, that is only evident in the CIA black operations, from which the rogue operation which initiated and carried out the events of 9-11-2001 is based. And that could never exist without the money power behind it. The solution lies in awakening the people. We need more extremism to accomplish that task, and if that means some people get a rude awakening by some gruff conversation, better that than if they lose everything when the whole rotten mess goes down the tubes at a later date. Good post, though. Keep on 'em. ;0)
There is, according to Richard and BTP as well, two concurrent federal jurisdictions: one up front and out in the open and one, ostensibly, behind the scenes really running the show, extraconstituional, so to speak.
First off, I do not necessarily disagree that there is a shadow government: the Big Business Elite and Zionists who are calling the shots. In fact, that is probably the case. However, that such rises to the level of an "official" secondary, parallel federal government, I am dubious.
“The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes, knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.” James Fenimore Cooper
#77. To: wbales, Tausero, BTP Holdings, christine, jessejane, RickyJ, mehtable, Zoroaster, robin, Eoghan, tom007, Jethro Tull, Neil McIver, lodwick, angel, AngelSpawn, , range, all (#72)
THERE ARE NOT TWO CONCURRENT FEDERAL JUISDICTIONS! Why is it so difficult to read and understand? This is from the letter I sent to YOU, wbales; ... that we have in this country substantially or practically two national governments ... THAT STATEMENT WAS MADE BY A FEDERAL SUPREME COURT JUSTICE! Are you going to argue with him? Do you know more than he does? And when did he say that? ONE HUNDRED AND FIVE YEARS AGO IN 1901!!!! I also sent you another law site which is, slightly older.... When is that dated, wbaled? 1819? Ring a bell? ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY-SEVEN YEARS AGO!!! Here is Rule No. 1, NOBODY IS VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION! Here is Rule No. 2, NOBODY IS VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION! Here is Rule No. 3, NOBODY IS VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION! Here is Rule No. 4, NOBODY IS VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION! Here is Rule No. 5, NOBODY IS VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION! Here is Rule No. 6, NOBODY IS VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION! Here is Rule No. 7, NOBODY IS VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION! Here is Rule No. 8, NOBODY IS VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION! Here is Rule No. 9, NOBODY IS VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION! Here is Rule No. 10, NOBODY IS VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION! Do you get it yet? Nobody is violating the Constitution, because they do not have to! From the letter that I sent to YOU; (In Downes v. Bidwell, the Court ruled that "exclusive" meant "without consideration of the Constitutional restraints...") Do you get that? The purpose of the Constitution was to establish a CITY STATE DEMOCRACY on land selected by the Jesuits, and donated by them for the purpose of establing the District of Columbia. There are two other City States in the world; the City, i.e., the City of London financial district which is separate from England and not subject to the legislature of England (Yes, I can prove it), and the Vatican...... see any possible clues here? That means that there were two SEPARATE national governments established, one, guarenteed a Repbulic, the other WITHOUT LAW and by definition, a Democracy. FROM THE BEGINNING. What was the purpose of the Civil War (See the post, The New Draft)? A City State is limited in its power by its lack of people, or, if you prefer, citizens to both tax and to fight its battles. Bingo! The so-called 14th Amendment, which was never LAWFULLY ratified, and was declared ADOPTED. If you do not understand this, see adoptive act in a legal dictionary. For reference see the so-called 16th Amndment, whcih was never LAWFULLY ratified, and was declared ADOPTED. Here is a rule; if there are two national governments, THERE ARE TWO CONSTITUTIONS! Following the Civil War, the so-claaed freed slaves were turned over to the Federal government as prize property through the 14th Amendment, when the federal government told them to take a number, or leave. Starting in 1876, 9 diget ID numbers were issed to these new slaves-of-the-state. Ummmmm, do you, Mr. wbales, happen to have a government issued 9-diget ID number? By... any.... chance? See the Post, Who Controls the United States, Part 2. Oh, and by the way, Social Security is now in 173 nations world wide (umm, not in the axis of evil nations? How odd), is controlled from The City (London) by the Crown of England, and a portion of the taxes that you pay goes to the Crown of England. See the Post, Who Controls the United States, Part II. Oh, and I quote Robin; I don´t see anything wrong with a marriage lic. (See the Post, There is no Separation of church and state). A marriage Lic. is issued for purposes of INTERMARRIAGE. When you became a United States citizen, you took on the same STATUS as a colored PERSON, and traded in your natural rights (see the Declaration of Independence) for the Civil Rights given to the new slaves-US citizens after the Civil War. Now, I understand that all of this is just mumbo-jumbo, and it has no bearing on what is going on today because it is all so old!!!!! And anyway, who cares, right? Children, are you listening? Because I repeat, no one is violating the Constitution. And yes, I understand, it is so easy to just go out and kill someone.... well, friend wbales, THEY SHOOT BACK! And any action such as that would completely polorize the people of America, and A MAJORITY OF THEM WOULD SUPPORT THE US GOVERNMENT BECAUSE THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND... just like you. And they are not angry, yet. And what you are talking about is what THEY want! The US government signed a population compact in the 1960s in which it is the stated purpose of the US government to reduce the population of the United States to 50 million by 2050. Go ahead, they are waiting for you to start something. And in what you want to do, A MIN. OF 25-30 MILLION WOULD DIE, most of them starving to death because you now live in a nation, the United States, which, for the first time in its history, can no longer feed itself without imports, which, I may add, are controlled by the US government. So, how do you change this, well, I was going to explain that in Who Controls the United States, Part 5, BUT I DON´T THINK SO! You do it by word-of-mouth; an educational program that goes person to person (that is a legal term, by the way), explaining what happened, why, and what is needed to change it. Will the powers-that-be stand by and accept that. Probably not, and the odds are 80% or better that you will get your Civl War II, as I would have explained in Part 5, BUT, you would begin to build a concenus by and amoung Americans, which is all that matters that we may come together against THEM, and today, that is possible because of the anger that prevades America about vote stealing, 9/11, Iraq and the rest of it. But hey, what do I know? (Do not bother telling me that I write to much; it is very difficult dealing with people who have so little knowledge and understanding. Things happening today are based on actions from the past; why is that so hard to understand?)
two concurrent federal jurisdictions:
The Talmudic Khazar-Jew dream; Christians killing Muslims and Muslims killing Christians. What could be better than that? Well, Whites killing non-Whites and non-Whites killing Whites, of course.
#78. To: richard9151 (#77)
1) Can I use this defense when and if I'm ever arrested? 2) Will it work? If yes, please provide case law. G*d bless....
The purpose of the Constitution was to establish a CITY STATE DEMOCRACY on land selected by the Jesuits,
#79. To: BTP Holdings, wbales, Tausero, christine, jessejane, RickyJ, mehtable, Zoroaster, robin, Eoghan, tom007, Jethro Tull, Neil McIver, lodwick, angel, AngelSpawn, , range, all (#76)
Hogwash and balderdash. From the Post, More Blonde Jokes II; "A canon of construction which teaches that of Congress, unless a contrary intent appears, is meant to apply only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States." U.S. v. Spelar, 338 U.S. 217 at 222 (1949); in other words, only within the Federal Zone. (When you see a term that says ´within the United States, now you know that it is a LEGAL term and you know what it means.´) Please pay attention to the law site above, which comes from a court case. From More Blonde Jokes II; Unless expressly provided otherwise in the law itself, all laws passed by the U.S. Congress shall conclusively be presumed to apply only within the former, or first of the two jurisdictions, called the federal zone, above. That means, in the Democracy, where the restrictions of the Constitution does not apply. From More Blonde Jokes II; (In Downes v. Bidwell, the Court ruled that "exclusive" meant "without consideration of the Constitutional restraints...") THERE IS NO SHADOW GOVERNMENT!!!! ALL OF YOU ARE UNITED STATES CITIZENS!!!!! WHAT IS SO HIDDEN ABOUT THAT???????????? I GUESS I JUST DON´T GET IT!!!!!!!!!
The two federal juridictions occur in how Congress writes legislation.
The Talmudic Khazar-Jew dream; Christians killing Muslims and Muslims killing Christians. What could be better than that? Well, Whites killing non-Whites and non-Whites killing Whites, of course.
.
.
.
Comments (80 - 194) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest