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

** Many Strategies, But Only One J.A.I.L. Agenda **

Expand Messages
  • jail4judges
    J.A.I.L. News Journal _____________________________________________________ Los Angeles, California August 23, 2003
    Message 1 of 1 , Aug 23, 2003
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      J.A.I.L. News Journal
      _____________________________________________________
      Los Angeles, California                                         August 23, 2003
       
      Many Strategies,
      But Only One J.A.I.L. Agenda
      Follow-Up to 8/21/03 JNJ J.A.I.L. Is That "Light"
       
      Hello Terry Fesler:
       
      Thank you for your remarks and enlightenment. I shall address them within your text in bold blue. (Barbie has a comment below in bold green)  -Ron-
      ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: eslerf
      Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 12:09 AM
      Subject: Re: J.A.I.L. Is That "Light"

      Dear Ron,

      When I managed the law office my employer once took an interest in some of the groups I was monitoring and he was interested in possibly speaking at one of these gatherings so he asked me to research who and what may be presented in public forums, gatherings and meetings.

      If I recall, there was this March on Washington D.C being planned, and something V.O.C.A.L. was doing in Las Vegas, and I was able to provide him with some other events that might be of interest to his inquiries.

      The first words out of his mouth was how foolish these people were who thought that they could compete for attention in Washington D.C. where there is news happening on a moments notice.

       
      This strategy is definitely appropriate! When everyone is planting corn, you want to plant wheat. When everyone is planting peas, you want to plant potatoes. When everyone is buying, it is generally 
      good advice to sell. 

      Prior to the existence of J.A.I.L., all eyes everywhere were fixed upon looking solely to elected officials within the legislative system for a cure. Then came along J.A.I.L. which has hammered away at another entirely different route, that of not looking to the system, but to looking to themselves to act with an exclusive focus upon the judiciary.

      We have come a long way since J.A.I.L. first started in which we are witnessing the sharp rise of judicial reform fronts in the last five years. I could name a number of people and organizations that have sprouted up due to the existence of J.A.I.L.'s focused message.

      He soon enough lost interest and I asked him what he thought would work better and he told me that everyone in Michigan should focus on one county, picket that courthouse and get that judge investigated and removed and then move on to the next county.

      As we know, J.A.I.L. operates upon several fronts. One nationally, the other within the states, and the final within each county. From my perspective here at headquarters, I primarily deal with general J.A.I.L. policies, internal media, and keeping single focus nationally. The only "national" front we have beside this is the Federal J.A.I.L. Bill directed squarely at Congress. Even there, we place this effort on very low priority in favor of a specific unique target state to start the domino process. We are ready to go and chomping at the bit, but lack one important ingredient, "financing." When our target state becomes obvious, and we have the resources to potentially carry this off, then I will instruct all other 49 states to focus on assisting in whatever way they can. But this state must be able to proceed with "True" J.A.I.L. as it is written to set our precedent. 

      In the meantime, all states are instructed, through their Wardens and counties, to recruit more and more JAILers through their activities. These activities would include targeting, exposing and seeking to remove a particular judge, and when we have done so, our own internal "media," if not the establishment media, will make the best of it.

      Obviously the entire nation of JAILers, or an entire state, could not physically attend a protest at a courthouse in a single county some place, and we want to discourage mere observers.  We want JAILers to be active participants. Our "targeting" practically must be done on the county level by the Warden, or multi-county level as organized by an Associate JAILer-In-Chief.  This would be their primary duty.

      Within National J.A.I.L., there are several fronts going on at the same time just as an overseer of an orange grove would be unwise to assign his entire crew to stripping just one tree in the orchard. 

      He mentioned that there would be no need to issue press releases because sooner, or later, the press is going to come snooping around and ask questions. All you have to do is pick a county where you will not have to compete with other news and half of the battle is won right there.

      Small victories are worthwhile successes to build upon and by the time you start on the next judge there will be a larger following and the job becomes easier.

      A steady presence is more effective than few and infrequent appearances, even if the steady presence starts out small. It is the long periods of silence that can kill most efforts because lack of communication creates confusion and saying "a little something" when there is nothing much to say is better than saying nothing at all because there is not "wonderful news" to offer.

      I agree with this policy as it pertains to Wardens. It is always our hope that the Wardens will direct their counties with persistence and diligence.

      I can remember a time when I thought my case and my cause was going to change the entire legal system and expose the injustices that I have suffered. I have since learned how much my own attorney encouraged this "misguided thinking" and led me to consider how sorry the other side was going to be when they found out who my attorney was.

      What a farce and what a show, just for my benefit, until the bill came due and the court order entered.

      I believe everyone goes through this "shock" of learning just how uniformly corrupt the entire judiciary is. I remember thinking that I had gotten hold of a uniquely corrupt judge, and the appellate court would swallow their Adam's apple and strongly rebuke this judge when they viewed my case.  What I learned in due time was that the entire judicial system was corrupt, and that the higher up one goes, the more corrupt it gets. This is why to this very day I receive emails from those who have "found a corrupt judge," and think J.A.I.L. should consider making a "poster-boy" example of their judge. As recent as yesterday we received information of a judge in the writer's case that should be made a "prime example" by National J.A.I.L.

      Now I often see the same fire in many other eyes who have taken on a cause, but there is a lot of work to do, and too many people expect someone else to do it.

      A small victory and a small accomplishment does wonders for the soul, the cause, and the followers.

      Perhaps Douglas John Fitzgerald has at least made an offer worth trying, because it just might work after all, and that cannot be bad, nor cause any major setbacks I can see. Even a small State like Rhode Island, or Vermont, could be the straw that breaks the camel's back, or makes the first domino fall.

      At least as far as I read, this Douglas John Fitzgerald was not really speaking policy as much as he was offering strategy. It may be more worthwhile to include this strategy when and where it would offer the best results.

      Terry: This is Barbie. The statement you made above hit me especially because I must admit that I was under the impression that Fitzgerald was suggesting that J.A.I.L. change its mission (policy). That's why I responded by saying: "The main reason your suggestion is not conducive to the J.A.I.L. agenda and mission is that your idea must be implemented within the existing judicial system." Having read what you said and Ron's comments here, I now understand that Fitzgerald's idea might be a strategy that could be used at the local (county) level as a means of promoting J.A.I.L., but not changing J.A.I.L.'s national policy. That is similar to the distinction of the Oath of Office issue and J.A.I.L.'s national policy. While pursuing the Oath issue may be a strategy at the local level, it is not national policy. That may clear up a lot of misunderstanding that many of us have had. While J.A.I.L.'s policy is very narrow, and must be, there are several strategies that may be pursued in promoting J.A.I.L.  However, the strategies themselves are not the J.A.I.L. agenda. There is a distinction. Thanks Terry for bringing this to "light" (no pun intended).  I apologize for my misunderstanding-- I feel better now.  So far the feedback has been about 50-50 pro and con on that JNJ, but no one else has pointed out that distinction.  I think this is material enough to warrant sending this out as a follow-up JNJ.

      Many lawyers have told me: "Of course the courts are corrupt but the public doesn't know it, or seem to care, and besides there is an easier way to deal with these things!" It would be accurate to say that many attorneys who have become frustrated with the legal system have concluded:

      "It is useless to try to change these things, for it is so much simpler to conduct yourself in a manner so that these things don't affect you."

      It may be true that the problems many face are the ones they have accepted when there certainly are alternatives to consider.

      I myself, for one, am committed to seeing these changes come about, and if something works towards my own goals and will only make my task easier, then it is worth it in the long run, especially if it does not require that I stop what I am doing as a condition that it may work.

      I never saw my support of J.A.I.L. as a threat to what I was doing before I ever heard of J.A.I.L.

      In fact, I cannot think of any other groups, or advocacy issues, I could publicly endorse since I have been active in legal reform.! J.A.I.L. has been the one and only exception in this matter. Supporting J.A.I.L. has only required that I add to what I want to accomplish and has not demanded that I make any compromises for what I was doing before I became aware of J.A.I.L.

      J.A.I.L is another tool I could use, yet I do not have to, but I want this tool. J.A.I.L. has passed my own personal test a long time ago:

      Terry, I know I need not tell you this, but J.A.I.L. is the cause of all causes, the unifier of all agendas, the organization of all organizations, the coalition of all coalitions, and the summation of all right thinking. Without it, there can be no lasting freedom and liberty, nor can there be any positive future for this country.

      If what is decided to be right for Social Workers, Expert Witnesses, Courts, Prosecutors, Judges and the Parents, is wrong for the child, then it was not right to begin with!

      Even the mighty oak had to start out as a little nut.

      My Best Regards,

      Terry L. Fesler
      http://www.angelfire.com/mi/oaxamaxao/index.html
       


      J.A.I.L. News Journal
      _____________________________________________________
      Los Angeles, California                                         August 21, 2003

        
       J.A.I.L. Is That "Light"
       
      Our thanks to Douglas John, Fitzgerald, a recent subscriber to the JNJ list, for showing his interest in J.A.I.L. by making his suggestion on how to improve our methods of promoting J.A.I.L. We appreciate his taking the time to do so. Below his original message is Barbie's response to Doug which is self-explanatory. It is true, as Doug says, that we are to bring light of judicial corruption to public scrutiny. J.A.I.L. is that light.
      Any comments to Doug may be sent to him at fellowship2u@...
      *   *   *
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Doug
      Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 9:41 PM
       Dear Ron, As one who has spent his entire business career motivating and promoting causes, I am qualified to tell you that what you are attempting to do is a fabulously complicated goal requiring supreme organizational skills which are severely lacking in the fact you are recruiting common folks and directing others to folks who are lost as to how to effectively organize an area.  This is not a critical message.... simply a professional observation.  My qualifications include a lifetime of buying and using electronic media to both inform and motivate the public to react. You need to redirect your efforts from attempting to create another political faction in the already fractured political landscape. Instead I recommend that you focus all your attention on selectively focusing on a corrupt judge and removing him. Advertise the fact of the removal and ask for examples of judicial corruption from those experiencing the wrath of the corruption. Bringing light on the subject (judge) and his corruption to the scrutiny of the general public will result in publicity that you will have for free that you never could afford to purchase.   Your effect will be greater, your voice will be louder, and the results will be guaranteed. Bringing light - lots of light to the situation will bring the desired result.  Use your resources to do super sleuthing on the intended target and you'll become a much more effective force. Publicity will be free bringing light to the table... Good luckDouglas John, FitzGeraldfellowship2u@...
      ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(Barbie's response): Dear Doug: Thank you very much for taking the time to offer your sincere and professional suggestion in the interest of helping the J.A.I.L. cause. We appreciate your concern. This is Barbie responding, since your message came in on my computer  and Ron isn't available at the moment. However, I'll be able to address what you have suggested here. The main reason your suggestion is not conducive to the J.A.I.L. agenda and mission is that your idea must be implemented within the existing judicial system. ["Instead I recommend that you focus all your attention on selectively focusing on a corrupt judge and removing him."]  The only way that could be done at this time is through the judicial system-- other judges. That does not solve the root problem we're faced with. The entire judicial system is corrupt, despite the fact that there may be an occasional case here and there that may have been adjudicated according to constitutional mandates. And if there are any such cases, they are few and far between (if they exist at all). The objective of J.A.I.L. is to create a forum operated by the People-- not by government-- in which to hold judges accountable under constitutional standards. Operating on an independent turf (jurisdiction, if you will) from any government entity is a necessary ingredient for J.A.I.L. to carry out its intended function. To explain this concept more clearly, the Declaration of Independence acknowledges the fact that all men (people) are born with certain unalienable rights; and that in order to protect the free exercise of those rights, the people have to create a government empowered to carry out that protection by guaranteeing that free exercise, deriving such power from the "protectees," if you will, (the recipients of the protection). The government is there to serve and protect the people (in reality-- and not just a slogan on police cars). In the creation of government in this country, the people established the Constitution setting forth the particulars defining their consent under and within which government was to function. This was and is an elaborate scheme authorizing the means by which government was to protect and guarantee the free exercise of the people's natural rights. But what means were provided in the Constitution for the people to protect and guarantee the enforcement of the terms of their consent set forth therein?  NONE! That fatal omission from the Constitution spelled the inevitable demise of the free exercise of rights that the people were born with, and accordingly they lost those rights by default --by failing to act in establishing a constitutional means by which they (the people) could enforce government obedience to those terms of consent. It was clearly in their own interest that the people do so, and by their failure to protect their own interests, the people have been the losers. Regarding rights-- "Use them or lose them" which has borne out as truth. The people (now the posterity), are reaping what they have sown-- a non-enforceable Constitution that is merely words on paper sealed under glass. Accordingly our American way of life has been turned on its head-- government has arbitrarily usurped power to become master over the people who have become its slaves, without recourse for the people. By nature, the people are sovereign and government the servant; however the means by which the people may exercise their sovereignty over government are non-existent. We are witnessing the chaotic result of that situation now, and it shall only get worse under present circumstances. After spending eighteen years trying to get justice with several cases in the judicial system, and getting senselessly chewed up by the system without reason, Mr. Branson had to sit back and take a good look at what was happening. Taking everything into consideration over the past several years of constant dead-ends and stone-walling in trying to get his cases addressed in court according to the facts as he clearly presented them in black and white and the law(s) applicable to those facts, he realized that the problem was systemic. Mr. Branson turned to the California Constitution and found Article II, Section 1 which states "All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their protection, security, and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform it when the public good may require."  He then realized that the problem had to be taken directly to the people --by-passing the Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary-- because government IS the problem. It was then that J.A.I.L. was conceived (originally called "The Judicial Reform Act of 1996.") In a nutshell, J.A.I.L. is designed for the purpose of filling that gap in the Constitution.  J.A.I.L. will work through the states by amending their Constitutions to provide a means by which the people can enforce the terms of the U.S. Constitution on government through holding state judges accountable to those terms. J.A.I.L. is not designed to change the judicial system itself, only to provide that unique means by which the people can enforce obedience of the system (judges) to the terms set forth in the U.S. Constitution and existing laws in pursuance thereof.  J.A.I.L. restores the ability of the people to exercise its sovereign power over government, as was the original intent of the Founding Fathers. This enforcement will be done through the judiciary which is the capstone, ultimate authority, of government action. Restoring sovereign power to the people is the only way we can restore our Constitutional Republic. J.A.I.L. is the only measure providing that need. Without J.A.I.L., nothing else will matter because we will continue to live in chaos and tyranny. J.A.I.L. is the "light" that is needed. -Barbie-victoryusa@... Ron BransonAuthor/Founder 
      J.A.I.L.= Judicial Accountability Initiative Law - www.jail4judges.org
      JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore unrealized.
      JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
      JAIL is taking America like a wildfire! AddRemove@...
      JAIL is making inroads into Congress for federal accountability!
      E-Groups sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
      Get involved at JAIL_SALE_USA-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      Send donations to J.A.I.L., P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603 "Those who say it cannot be done should not interfere with those of us who are doing it."                                       --S. Hickman

      "..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.