Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

*** More O'Connor Propaganda ***

Expand Messages
  • JAIL4Judges
    J.A.I.L. News Journal ______________________________________________________ Los Angeles, California June 4, 2007
    Message 1 of 1 , Jun 4, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      J.A.I.L. News Journal 

      Los Angeles, California                                         June  4, 2007
      The Battle Lines are Drawn:  J.A.I.L. versus The Foreign Power 
      A Power Foreign to Our Constitution

      FAQs              What?MeWarden?

       More O'Connor Propaganda
      By Barbie, ACIC National J.A.I.L.
      "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce [the People] under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government..." Declaration of Independence.
      We must constantly pound this into the heads of the People from now 'til Kingdom come, because it is what the People must do for the sake of liberty and justice for all in this country. The Declaration admonishes the People of their duty "to throw off such government" when "a long train of abuses and usurpations" designed to place the People "under absolute despotism" comes along and does exactly that.
      The People must remember that, although the Declaration uses the term "such government" to describe the despotic entity operating by "abuses and usurpations," it is a non sequitur, for "such" government is not government at all.  At best, it is "such so-called government." The Declaration establishes the purpose of government thusly: "That to secure these [unalienable] rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."  Securing our unalienable rights does not equate with despotism, nor with abuses and usurpations. Nor do the latter terms comport with the consent of the governed.
      Part of discarding their cloak of ignorance, the People must come to realize that they don't have a government protecting their rights, and haven't had for a long time.  The "long train of abuses and usurpations" has pulled into the Station of America and has been docked there for at least the lifetimes of everyone reading this article. This "train" has been emitting poisonous fumes infecting everyone in this country-- some more than others-- and the longer it remains, the more toxic our lives become. It's been a poisoning gradual enough so that many people have grown accustomed to it and have even become somewhat immune, not even realizing that they have been poisoned. If we had a government in place, the People wouldn't be exposed to this plague of injustices that has now reached epidemic proportions. The People cannot afford to continue to sleep in ignorance. Its crippling effects have become unbearable.
      Our Constitution is designed to form a government that will function according to the purpose for which it was instituted by the People with power derived from their consent as set forth therein. However, the power in force has no regard for the Constitution as we can observe from its actions. It is foreign to the Constitution, and hence it is a foreign power. "Such government" is a foreign power that must be thrown off by the People if we are to restore America to health. 
      The People must further realize that our court system sits at the helm of this foreign power, operating its control panel and causing it to continue to emit its poisonous fumes of absolute despotism upon the People , not unlike the "wizard" behind the curtain in "The Wizard of Oz."  The top echelon operating the control panel in this country is the United States Supreme Court, the case precedents of which is the "Supreme Law" of the foreign power rather than the Constitution. As was stated by the Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, in the Right to Petition lawsuit by We The People Foundation, "We need not resolve this debate, however, because we must follow the binding Supreme Court precedent." 
      This, despite the fact that all judges take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution-- not "Supreme Court precedent." However, the proof is "in the pudding" when we read decisions like that one.
      Now, because of the threat of J.A.I.L. being passed by the People in carrying out their duty to throw off "such government," the foreign power has arranged to have an influential spokesperson to sell its poison --its "snake oil"-- to the People. And who better to fill that role than retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, that kindly grandmotherly-appearing image, dressed in a fashionable red dress to offset her silver coiffure, comfortably seated in an easy chair with her hands neatly relaxed in her lap? Would someone that lovely, so loving of her family, so concerned for the children in this country, LIE to the American people?
      Before even considering the content of that interview, the People should consider the fact that no equal time opportunity was offered to any spokesperson for J.A.I.L. No rebuttal to be allowed by a J.A.I.L. representative? Ask yourselves, is there something dishonest about that arrangement-- regardless of what was said?  How can the truth of O'Connor's word be tested without rebuttal? Is O'Connor's word presumed to be the truth simply by virtue of her high position? If that is so, then because of her high position, she was able to say anything she pleased --including LIE-- without the possibility of qualified rebuttal. That's exactly what happened!
      O'Connor has already been on the circuit during the South Dakota campaign, going around speaking against J.A.I.L. on the premise that in all her years on the bench she has never experienced such a broad negative attitude by society against the judiciary. She lays claim to that bewilderment on people "not liking the decisions that judges make." She then gives an example, bringing up the election in South Dakota where "there was a proposal on the ballot to amend the State's Constitution called jail for judges..."  She never explained the J.A.I.L. acronym. She said that this proposal would "punish" judges for decisions they would make, although J.A.I.L. says NOTHING about "decisions."  See JNJ dated November 22, 2006, titled "Decisions, Decisions, Decisions!" http://www.jail4judges.org/JNJ_Library/2006/2006-11-22.html.
      Now this lovely-appearing distinguished lady wouldn't deliberately state to the American people on national television that this proposal provided something that
      really wasn't in that proposal, would she? Did she have a copy of the proposal with her from which she could read aloud to the American people the portion she was discussing? Did the interviewer ask if she had a copy of it, or could provide it? I didn't see any direct reference to the J.A.I.L. Amendment at any time during that interview, and yet no rebuttal opportunity for J.A.I.L. was even offered.
      As a retired Supreme Court Justice, why wouldn't O'Connor provide evidence of what she was stating to the American people on national television? Her profession consisted of reviewing evidence to prove issues-- ergo, why wouldn't she, by virtue of her profession, automatically realize the importance of providing evidence of her issues regarding J.A.I.L.?  Would a retired Supreme Court Justice simply not think of it? or wouldn't it occur to her? This refined professional lady wouldn't allow such irresponsibility to mislead the American people on national television, would she?? Would a responsible national television news station, like FOX News, allow this misleading of its audience without any opportunity of rebuttal? How many times have you heard on television, "We invited XYZ to respond, but they declined"?  Was J.A.I.L. invited to respond?
      People, these are things to think about whenever you hear anything regarding J.A.I.L. Don't just assume that what you're hearing is the truth without PROOF, and the best proof --the only proof-- is the J.A.I.L. Amendment itself. The foreign power relies on you NOT requiring proof of its contentions against J.A.I.L. They relied on that in South Dakota, and because the People did not demand proof, the propaganda ruled the roost. Are the People of America going to jeopardize their future by continuing to allow this to happen?

      J.A.I.L. (Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges. org

      To be automatically added to future mailings, place the word Subscribe in the subject line and email to VictoryUSA@jail4jud ges.org 

      We are a ministry in great need of your financial support. Please donate to this important work at "J.A.I.L." P.O. Box 207, North Hollywood, CA 91603  

      J.A.I.L. is a unique addition to our Constitution heretofore unrealized.

      JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!  

      E-Group sign on at http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/jail4judge s/join

      Visit our active flash - http://www.jail4jud ges.org/national _001.htm 

      *   *   *

      He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation.    - Declaration of Independence
      "..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.."  - Samuel Adams
      "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
      striking at the root."   -- Henry David Thoreau                        <><



    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.