Corruption Doesn't Get More Serious, Or More Transparent, Than This

Corruption Doesn't Get More Serious, Or More Transparent, Than This

“The federal government has descended to a new depth of despotic corruption.”

Below is the most recent weekly newsletter from Peter Hendrickson, author of the book titled “Cracking the Code” (CtC) which lays out the incredible hoax being perpetrated by the IRS to falsely convince Americans of a tax liability which does not exist under the tax provisions of the United States Constitution, nor under current law and the relevant Supreme Court decisions.

This latest tactic being employed by the IRS to bludgeon Americans into submission to IRS intimidation and bullying is an outrageous example of what happens when Constitutional authority and limitations are ignored. This is the very reason that we need some form of absolute authority which is not subject to arbitrary re-interpretation or dismissal to suit the convenience of the time. But that authority can only be preserved when the judicial system is free of corruption. Unfortunately, our once-great nation is now burdened with what may be the most corrupt judicial system in its entire history.

If you don’t believe this, read William Windsor’s story, and read about what he  has uncovered at: http://www.lawlessamerica.com/

Many of us thought that we were under the authority of a Constitution that was honored and respected, but we have learned sadly that the manner in which it is being abused is nothing less than shameful. For all practical purposes we no longer have a rule of law in the United States of America. The Constitution is being treated as an historical artifact of no particular significance to the issues of the day. This is true not only with respect to income taxes, but also, for example, with respect to the presidential eligibility provisions of Article I; as well as to a host of separation of powers issues relating to the appointment by Obama of unaccountable “czars” and to his issuance of an unprecedented number of Executive Orders (now numbering almost one thousand) which intentionally evade constitutional restrictions on his actions.

“For this man to be our president is downright scary.”

During (the 2008) campaign, WorldNet Daily found a tape of an interview Barack Obama gave to Chicago's public radio station WBEZ-FM in 2001. In the interview, then-State Sen. Obama maintained that the Warren Court's decisions on civil rights in the 1960s failed to go far enough -- that they should also have sought "redistributive justice." His opinion was that the court needed to break from the "essential restraints" of the Constitution:

This is what Barack Obama had to say about the Constitution:

“If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be OK .

But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.

And that hasn't shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.”

http://ohiorepublic.blogspot.com/2009/12/president-obama-constitution-is-charter.html

What Obama identifies as a “defect” in the Constitution, that it “doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf”, is actually the cause of  exploding deficits which now threaten to drag this nation into bankruptcy and economic collapse.

The fact is that the federal government has grown into a monster, far exceeding the constitutional limits placed on it by the Founders, while running rough-shod over the rights of the states protected in the Tenth Amendment. And there seems to be no practical limit to the power and control which Obama believes should properly be exercised by the federal government.  

More Obama criticism of the Constitution:

"It is an imperfect document", "A document that reflects some deep flaws in American culture", and "the constitution reflected an enormous blind-spot in this culture that carries on into this day".

“For this man to be our president or even have any kind of power over the people is downright scary. Did he not swear to uphold and protect the Constitution or was he crossing his fingers or something?”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_xNyrzB0xI

For those who are not familiar with the income tax hoax exposed by Peter Hendrickson and others, an introduction to the CtC revelations is available on the Lost Horizons web site at the following link:

http://losthorizons.com/Intro.pdf

Here is the full article from the newsletter:

FOREWORD

This is just for those in the "tax honesty" community...

"It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." -Samuel Adams Corruption Doesn't Get More Serious, Or More Transparent, Than This "Freedom of thought... is the matrix, the indispensable condition, of nearly every other form of freedom." -Benjamin Cardozo FACED BY A GROWING HOST of American men and women withdrawing consent and support in the manner intended by the Founders and as provided for by law, and yet unwilling to abide the re-imposition of Constitutional restraints on its power, the federal government has descended to a new depth of despotic corruption. In an effort to beat these men and women into subordination and silence, and to discourage others from joining their ranks, the feds have begun levying fines on Americans who fail to affirm a government-dictated orthodoxy under oath. Nothing like this has ever happened before in our history. Even during the dark days of the Wilson administration, when those arguing against the legality of the World War I draft were punished for doing so, no one was fined or otherwise punished for refusing to declare a belief that the draft was legal and proper. Even those who chose to evade the draft themselves, and were punished for doing so, were not faced with demands that they declare themselves properly subject to the conscription, on pain of further harm for refusing the Orwellian edict. But that's exactly what's being done now. This new crime being committed by the feds is prompted by the fact that large numbers of Americans have learned the actual Constitutional and statutory limits of federal taxing authority over the last decade. Tens of thousands of these folks, at least, have been applying that understanding in making simple testimonial declarations as to whether their earnings qualify as subject to federal (tax) claims. These declarations are made on legal instruments specifically designed by the US Treasury Department for the purpose of making exactly these personal-belief statements. The declarations of personal belief made by these educated Americans impose no obligation or hindrance on the government-- unless the declarant's beliefs are correct. When this is so, the government is prevented from claiming ownership of a portion of the declarant's earnings. But this is only so in these cases because the government has no legitimate claim to pursue. On the other hand, when the declarant's belief is NOT correct, there is no imposition or hindrance on the government whatever. The law provides an authority (and obligation) for the government to create its own contrary sworn declaration in such cases, by virtue of which the state is permitted to exercise its legitimate claims as though the original declaration had never been made. In short, not only is the right of the citizen to declare his own belief inherent under the most basic legal principles and fully provided for by law, but his doing so is not the least hindrance to the government in doing anything it is legally authorized to do. Further, his doing so is necessary in order to keep the government from possibly imposing a tax where it really doesn't belong, even while in no way preventing taxes from being imposed where they DO belong. There's the rub, of course. The fact is, the government frequently pursues tax claims where they do not really apply. It has been able to do this because most Americans have failed to register educated conclusions about the tax-related character of their earnings, and have instead let themselves be herded into making government-claim-favoring declarations. Now that understanding of the declaration process and its effects, and of the actual limits to which the federal taxing power is subject, is spreading, more and more Americans are testifying more thoughtfully. The government's response is to corruptly demand that these folks continue to declare what is convenient for the state's purse, even though the declarant no longer believes it to be true. Like heretics facing the Inquisition, those failing to profess as the state wishes face punishment simply for exercising freedom of conscience. The pretenses used by the state for "justifying" the fines are so patently and self-evidently absurd as to underscore the fact that the punishment is being used purely for the illegitimate purposes of evading the declarant's claims and coercing testimony convenient to the state. These include (among other, equally specious nonsense):                 that "zero" is not a number (at least, not if it appears on the "income received" line of a declaration)1;                 that a payer's assertions that a payment is of "taxable income" has to be simply accepted as true (because the payer COULDN'T have been wrong...)2; or                 that these inconvenient attestors don't really believe what they say (because they said something different in previous years)3. These ridiculous justifications could only be made more transparently crocodilian than by their simple recital if the smirks with which they are doubtless typed out in the "determinations" in which they appear were seen as well. Indeed, even the notices by which these fines are first threatened (along with an outright invitation to the target to spare himself the pain by changing his testimony) are exercises in studied mendacity. No effort is ever made at any point in the process to dispute the content of the testimony (as in disputing the conclusions by these folks that their earnings don't qualify as subject to the federal tax authority), even though that is the whole and sole issue actually relevant to the matter. After all,                 Isn't the real question whether "zero" IS the correct number? (And isn't the ludicrous assertion that "zero" is not a number just an obvious evasion of this real question?)                 Isn't the real question whether the payment really WAS of "taxable income"? (And isn't arguing that a mere assertion that it is should be simply taken as gospel just a blatant evasion of that real question?)                 Isn't the real question whether what the attestor says is TRUE? (And isn't the unprovable and grossly impertinent assertion that the attestor doesn't believe his sworn declaration just an evasion of that plainly- and exclusively-relevant real question?) In fact, even while these fines for disfavored testimony are threatened, the government routinely honors the claims being made by the very same testimony. Indeed, those chosen for these corrective whippings are from among a much greater host of educated declarants whose testimonial declarations have been being steadily acknowledged as correct for years and years now by the same government meting out this abuse (as well as by 33 state governments). To heighten the irony, the very fact that the government finds necessary the punishment of people who fail to attest as it wishes in furtherance of its purpose proves the illegitimacy of that purpose. After all, if the government had legitimate issues with the testimony it disfavors, there would be no bothering with efforts to discourage (especially in light of the inherent illegitimacy of any state effort to punish, inhibit or control speech). As noted, the government has statutory provisions equipping it to make and pursue its own claims contrary to testimony which it believes to be incorrect. The government seeking to discourage Americans from testifying as to what they believe if it really believes otherwise is like a litigant in a lawsuit spending a sweaty hour trying to browbeat his opponent into surrender to save himself the slight effort of opening his briefcase and producing evidence proving his case. No one would do that-- unless they didn't actually have the evidence... Here, the government simply wants what it isn't entitled to have-- control over the professed beliefs of all Americans, so that it can exercise control over the resources of all Americans. To get this, it has stepped into a real cesspool of corruption, and seeks to use its ugly threats to coerce itself some company down there. Everyone should be on their feet shouting "NO!", and denouncing this monstrous step across the line of decency and the law. Everyone should be ringing the phone off the hook at the ACLU, the "alt media", and every public interest legal group that can be found, raising the roof over this assault on the most fundamental rights of a human being (and rights explicitly secured by the United States Constitution). If an American can be punished for not declaring his earnings to be subject to a tax, he can be punished for not declaring himself an unfit parent, or guilty of a crime, or anything at all. In any event, being punishable for not declaring a government ownership interest in one's property is bad enough all on its own. Raise the roof. "Never do anything against conscience even if the state demands it. " -Albert Einstein "I cannot and will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand, I can do no other, so help me God. Amen." -Martin Luther "But it is necessary to the happiness of man, that he be mentally faithful to himself. Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe... When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime." -Thomas Paine 1"[A] Form 1040 ... which ... indicate[s] zero income ... [does] not constitute a return “because [it fails] to include any information upon which tax could be calculated"." 2"Here, taxpayers submitted amended returns for 2004, 2005, and 2006 in which they replaced the income they previously reported, which was consistent with third-party information provided to the IRS, with zeros ... that directly contradicted W-2s and other forms submitted by third parties to the IRS. The taxpayers admittedly took no action to obtain “corrected” third party forms that would corroborate their claims of zero taxable income." (Note the court's careful use of the phrase "taxable income" rather than "money", in implicit acknowledgement of the distinction... Note further that not only is the court "reasoning" that the "third party forms" are to be accepted as correct unless the same "third parties" change them, but it simultaneously suggests that the claimants in the case bear a burden of corroborating their testimony. The first of these is, as already noted, absurd on its face. The other is directly contrary to specific statutory mandates placing on the government the burden of attempting to prove that the such claimants are wrong. Here the government must prove that what these folks received actually DID qualify as "taxable income". No attempt whatever was made to bear this burden, which is why the complicit court resorts to this nonsense instead of what any rational person recognizes it must be able to declare in order to rule against the couple: "The government has proven that what the claimants received was, in fact, "taxable income" in the amounts reported.") 3"Thus, the taxpayers' amended returns for 2004, 2005, and 2006, ... do not implicate an honest and reasonable intent to supply information required by the tax code." All of these examples are from the ruling in a 2011 suit brought in the Federal Court of Claims to compel the IRS/Treasury Dept. to issue refunds owed to an educated couple over their amended declarations for 2004, '05 and'06. The court ultimately denied the claims in a 42-page ruling which distilled down to the contorted rationale that if the amended returns could be taken to be "frivolous" (by deeming the "third-party" assertions to be gospel and therefore the "zeros" self-evidently wrong-- with the absurd "zero is not a number" thing thrown in as a fallback pretext; and that in light of the foregoing the sincerity of their claim was impeached-- with the nonsense implication that the change from their previous declarations evinces the insincerity of their newly-professed belief thrown in as a fallback pretext), then the court lacked jurisdiction to hear what would therefore be an invalid claim. The IRS is now seeking to collect "frivolous return" penalties from these folks, citing the outcome of this case as having established that the declarations qualify for that status. Other educated claimants have been or are being threatened with these penalties-- and some have even had property seized-- but usually without any rationalization/explanation whatever. Instead, the government simply alleges that the penalty applies to the disfavored testimony using a carefully-designed mis-statement of the statutory provisions involved. It invites the target to recant and be spared the punishment, and then bulls ahead with "collections" protocols when the upstanding, rights-valuing target sticks to his or her testimony. Usually these assaults simply stop when faced with adamant refusal to be taken-in or intimidated. See examples of how this plays out in the 'Every Which Way But Loose' collection. But lately is appears that desperation in the face of the growing host of CtC-truth-tellers has prompted an abandonment of all restraint, as in the case discussed above. Gandhi explained to us: "First, they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." It seems we're in the "fight you" stage.

From: Pete Hendrickson [mailto:46@losthorizons.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 11:23 AM
To: America
Subject: The Lost Horizons News for Oct. 12 is posted!

 Corruption Doesn't Get More Serious, Or More Transparent, Than This

"Freedom of thought... is the matrix, the indispensable condition, of nearly every other form of freedom."

-Benjamin Cardozo

FACED BY A GROWING HOST of American men and women withdrawing consent and support in the manner intended by the Founders and as provided for by law, and yet unwilling to abide the re-imposition of Constitutional restraints on its power, the federal government has descended to a new depth of despotic corruption. In an effort to beat these men and women into subordination and silence, and to discourage others from joining their ranks, the feds have begun levying fines on Americans who fail to affirm a government-dictated orthodoxy under oath.

Nothing like this has ever happened before in our history.

Even during the dark days of the Wilson administration, when those arguing against the legality of the World War I draft were punished for doing so, no one was fined or otherwise punished for refusing to declare a belief that the draft was legal and proper. Even those who chose to evade the draft themselves, and were punished for doing so, were not faced with demands that they declare themselves properly subject to the conscription, on pain of further harm for refusing the Orwellian edict. But that's exactly what's being done now.

This new crime being committed by the feds is prompted by the fact that large numbers of Americans have learned the actual Constitutional and statutory limits of federal taxing authority over the last decade. Tens of thousands of these folks, at least, have been applying that understanding in making simple testimonial declarations as to whether their earnings qualify as subject to federal claims. These declarations are made on legal instruments specifically designed by the US Treasury Department for the purpose of making exactly these personal-belief statements.

The declarations of personal belief made by these educated Americans impose no obligation or hindrance on the government-- unless the declarant's beliefs are correct. When this is so, the government is prevented from claiming ownership of a portion of the declarant's earnings. But this is only so in these cases because the government has no legitimate claim to pursue.

On the other hand, when the declarant's belief is NOT correct, there is no imposition or hindrance on the government whatever. The law provides an authority (and obligation) for the government to create its own contrary sworn declaration in such cases, by virtue of which the state is permitted to exercise its legitimate claims as though the original declaration had never been made. In short...

CONTINUED...

To read the rest of this article, click below and get

The Lost Horizons News

for October 12, 2012

Also featured in this edition:

The Robot Flails, But The Patriot Prevails!

Episode XLII of the 'Every Which Way But Loose' series!

This one's a doozy!

***

From the "Candles Shining Brightly" Department

We ARE In A Transformational Moment!

***

Are You Still In Denial? Or Frightened Out Of Your Rights?

Posted Victories Pass A New Milestone!

Shared this week: A sixth victory for a happy warrior; a sixth for another as well; a third victory for one warrior couple and a fourth for another; a fourth victory for another veteran; and a debut victory for one more upstanding American grown-up!

***

A New Reading Recommendation

Subject line: IRS concedes my earnings do NOT constitute "gross income"...

***

Spotlights on the past that help bring clarity to the present:

Illuminating Anniversaries for this week

***

...and much, much more!

losthorizons.com

The place for people who are serious about restoring the Rule of Law in America.

If you are serious about the restoration of liberty and the rule of law in our lifetime, please forward this email to everyone you know!

The Wes Penre Papers - MUST READ

The Wes Penre Papers(A Journey Through the Multiverse)The Second Level of Learning[http://wespenre.com]

---

Prophecy Paper #2:
The Closing of the Nano-Secondby Wes Penre, Saturday, October 13, 2012(http://wespenre.com)
 

Table of Contents:

1. Sirian Preparation in Modern Time for the Return of the Gods, and their Primary Message That They Come As Liberators

2. A Pleiadian Perspective on the Return of the Sirians

3. One on One with Prince Utu Shamash

4. Attack from the Nano World

5. Satan and the Anti-Christ

6. The Building of Alternative Timelines, Changing the Course of the Entire Universe

7. The Importance of Understanding the Real Meaning Behind 'Service to Self' and 'Service to Others'

7.1. The Term 'Unconditional Love' Misunderstood

7.2. The Term 'Catalyst' Misunderstood

7.3 The Importance of 'Love of Self' (STO vs. STS Revisited for the Last Time)

8. The Atlantic Karma, Triple Helix DNA, and the Cleansing of the Planet

9. The Silent Invasion

10. The Superwave as a Positive Event

 http://wespenre.com/2/closing-of-the-nano-second.htm

Galactic Codex

Wednesday, April 4, 2012

Galactic Codex

Planet Earth is the last planet in this universe under the occupation of the Dark Forces, the last relic of galactic wars that raged throughout the galaxy for millions of years.

As the Galaxy was being liberated form the grip of the Dark Forces, the Forces of Light have been evolving from a military force created in the urgent need to defend basic liberties of sentient beings towards a harmonious galactic and cosmic society. As beings within the Galactic Confederation have evolved spiritually and made their alignment and union with the Ascended Masters, they have discovered an inner codex that regulates all inter-relationships between beings of Light and their relation towards the Dark Forces and occupied planets. This codex is called the Galactic Codex and represents the legal basis for all actions of the Confederation in this and other galaxies. This Codex is not a rigid set of external laws but a systematized code of inner ethics of all souls of Light that all beings of Light accept with their free will because it reflects their inner truth.

We will now state the Galactic Codex in a form that is understandable to an average awakened being in a human society.

Section  I: The Law of Divine Grace

Each sentient being has an inalienable and unconditional right to positive life experience

To explain Section I we need to understand that suffering and pain have no value in enlightened Galactic society liberated from the influence of Dark Forces and other aspects of cosmic anomaly. To value pain, suffering and sacrifice as a part of the growth experience was a part of the programming from the Dark Forces in order to enslave the population of the occupied planets more easily.

Unconditional positive life experience of every sentient being in the liberated universe is guaranteed from the inner connection of every living being with the Source and strengthened by the power of Ascended Masters over matter which allows them to assist all living beings in their aspirations towards the Source and provide them with necessities of life.  Life was never meant to be hard work and struggle but rather a journey of joy and creativity.   Different subsections of Section I regulate all life in a liberated universe and all relationships between beings of Light so that conflicts never need to occur.  Let us explain the subsections:

Section I/1: Each sentient being has an inalienable and unconditional right to physical and spiritual abundance

This subsection guarantees a positive life experience for every being in the liberated universe. The Ascended Masters provide for all necessities of living and for physical and spiritual richness and beauty using the power they have over redeemed matter of the liberated universe.

Section I/2: Each sentient being has an inalienable and unconditional right to Ascension

This subsection explains how the Ascended Masters use their advanced understanding of spiritual technology of Ascension and by utilizing the Electric Fire of redemption assist all beings that free-willingly choose Ascension.

Section I/3: Each sentient being has an inalienable and unconditional right to merge with other beings in proportion with his/her position in the Soul Family Mandala

This subsection is an instrument of regulation of all relationships inside a Soul Family. It guarantees the merging of beings of opposite polarity (twin souls, soulmates) and alignment of all other beings regardless of their state of development and outer conditions.

Section I/4: Each sentient being has an inalienable and unconditional right to all information

This subsection is a guarantee that all beings receive all pieces of information they need to understand their role in the universe, greater perspective of evolution and all other pieces they need for their decisions, growth and well being. All this data is provided by Ascended Masters or other beings that supervise the evolutions of various races and civilizations.

Section I/5: Each sentient being has an inalienable and unconditional right to freedom

This subsection provides that every being has an unlimited potential of growth and life experience. Since all beings in the liberated universe create only positivism, their freedom never opposes the freedom of other beings.

Section II: The Law of Dividing the Conflicting Parties

Each sentient being has an inalienable and unconditional right to be divided and protected from the negative actions of other sentient beings

This section regulates the conditions in those sections of the universe that have just been liberated from the influence of the Dark Forces but that have not yet been accepted in the Confederation. It requires that the Forces of Light always divide the parties in conflict to protect them from producing mutual harm to each other. Then the Light Forces mediate the conflict until it is resolved. This section is often used to end wars and other armed conflicts.

Section III: The Law of Balance

Each sentient being that has chosen to live and act against the principles of Galactic Codex and refuses to, or is not able to, accept them now and balance the consequences of the past actions will be taken to the Central Sun, restructured into the basic elemental essence and begin a new cycle of evolution afresh

This section regulates the relations between the Forces of Light and the Forces of Darkness. When defeated, beings that belong to the Forces of Darkness are given the opportunity to accept the Galactic Codex, do the best they can to correct the mistakes they made and to live positively afterwards. If they accept, they are forgiven and join the Confederation. If they are unable or unwilling to accept, they are taken to the Central Sun, their personalities and soul essences are restructured with the Electric Fire and their divine spark begin a new cycle of evolution.

Section IV: The Law of Intervention

The Galactic Confederation has an inalienable and unconditional right to the intervention in all situations where the Galactic Codex is violated, regardless of the local laws

This section describes the policy of the Light Forces regarding occupied planets. The Confederation reserves the right to intervene in all areas, civilizations, planets or solar systems where the Galactic Codex is violated. It has the right to do so regardless of the position of the local civilizations about this intervention. It always has the right to use all peaceful means of education and regulation. If the critical mass of the Galactic Codex principles is violated, it has the right to use military force. Special cases are planets under direct occupation of the Dark Forces.  The Dark Forces usually take the local population hostage to hinder the progress of the Forces of Light.  On Earth they have threatened with nuclear war if the Light Forces would intervene.  This is the main reason why the Light Forces have not yet liberated this planet (and not the so called we-will-not-intervene-because-we-respect-free-will, we-will-just-watch-as-the-suffering-goes-on nonsense). As in any hostage situation, this requires a lot of skillful negotiation and tactical approach. This situation is now being resolved and planet Earth will be liberated soon.

Section IV/1: Each sentient being has an inalienable and unconditional right of calling upon the Galactic Confederation in need and the Galactic Confederation has the right to assist, regardless of local laws

This subsection gives a legal basis for intervention and assistance to all hostages of the Dark Forces.  The Forces of Light always do the best they can to assist and improve the living conditions of all sentient beings, even on Earth.  The situation on planet Earth just indicates how much more power  darkness had over  Light on this planet. Fortunately, this is changing now.

Section IV/2: The Galactic Confederation has an inalienable and unconditional right to the implementation of the Galactic Codex and of conquering the areas of Galactic Codex violation with military force if necessary

This subsection gives a legal basis for the liberation of the occupied planets with military force.  The military forces of the Confederation remove or give assistance in removal of the representatives of the Dark Forces and set the hostages free. Then other Confederation forces guide the process of acceptance of the planet into the Confederation by instructing the local population.

Perhaps some humans feel that the Confederation has no right to intervene and that humanity has the right to solve its problems by itself. This is simply not true. Many wars all over the planet and constant abuse of basic human rights have proven that humanity is not capable of handling its own situation.  So it is much better that it receives wise guardians to guide it. The Confederation will give assistance in replacing  current masters of the puppets (Dark Forces) that humanity has invited long ago in Atlantis. Then the Galactic Codex will finally become the universal code of ethics throughout the universe and darkness will be no more.

Tolec Update 10-4-12…”UFO War in the Pacific? (again?)”…No

Tolec Update 10-4-12…”UFO War in the Pacific? (again?)”…No, No, No, No, No, No, No!!!

Posted on 2012/10/07 by kauilapele

Once again, as in September (see this KP blog post) a mention of a potential anti-UFO operation has come up (apparently referring to this 10-2-12 John Kettler post), Tolec tells us that this is again a false flag attempt. Here is what Tolec said.

—————————————————————————

“UFO War In The Pacific”
October 4, 2012

ANSWER: Again, no, no, no. There is not a UFO war going on against the U.S {and/or China} Navy off of the coast of California. Again, look below at the cite regarding the Cabal / Illuminati attempt to hold power, “…the last card is the alien card… we’re going to have to build space based weapons… against the aliens… and it will all be a lie“, “…the last card will be the extraterrestrial threat.” Do you see those words, “… it will all be a lie.”
And now, look at the source of this material dated October 2, 2012, and the words they use, “…the U.S Air Force has entered the fray launching a bunch of payloads… space based weapons… formed the payloads launched.” Really. Is there not a pattern here? Does any of this look familiar? Decide for yourselves.
https://kauilapele.wordpress.com/2012/10/07/tolec-update-10-4-12-ufo-war-in-the-pacific-again-no-no-no-no-no-no-no/

Promising: Andrea Rossi's E-Cat Energy Device Could Be THE Answer

The Rumor Mill News Reading Room 

Promising: Andrea Rossi's E-Cat Energy Device Could Be THE Answer

Posted By: LetFreedomRing
Date: Sunday, 14-Oct-2012 09:40:19

http://www.e-catworld.com/what-is-the-e-cat/ >>> ((snip)) What is the E-Cat? June 3, 2011 The following information about the E-Cat has been gathered over the past year from statements by Andrea Rossi and Sergio Focardi, Rossi’s collaborator. So far, no thorough independent examination of the E-Cat has been permitted — but numerous tests have taken place in which outside observers have been involved in and have their reports have been published. E-Cat is short for the term “energy catalyzer” and is a device in which hydrogen gas, powdered nickel metal, and undisclosed proprietary catalysts are combined to produce a large amount of heat through a little understood low energy nuclear reaction (LENR) process inside a specially designed chamber. The inner workings of the reactor are covered by a trade secret which Rossi consistently refuses to discuss. In this process, when an external heat source is applied (Electric or fossil) to the reaction chamber, large amounts of thermal energy (heat) are produced, much more than could be accounted for from chemical reactions. From reports of tests, it appears that the reaction begins when the reactor is heated to around 60 degrees Celsius, and once the reaction is stable, the external heat can be turned off and the reaction can continue for a considerable length of time. In an October 6th test in Bologna, Italy, the E-Cat ran without external heat (referred to as ‘self-sustain mode) for almost four hours, maintaining a constant temperature and boiling water continuously. Initially, Rossi and Focardi believed, and stated that the heat was generated because the nucleus of a hydrogen atom, a proton, penetrated a nickel nucleus and in doing so a nickel atom became a copper atom. Now Rossi states that while transmutation does take place, it is more of a side effect, and the core effect is caused by some undisclosed mechanism. Rossi says he has a firm understanding of what is taking place, but will not disclose his theory until he has patent protection. How long the E-Cat can run in self sustain mode without external heat being applied is unknown, but Andrea Rossi has said that for safe and stable operations it is necessary that the external heat source be cycled on and off. The energy produced by the nuclear reactions is used to heat water, and the output of the E-Cat is hot water or steam. Lead and Boron are used as a shield to prevent the release of gamma rays during the reactions, and when the reactions are complete (The hydrogen input is turned off) there is no radioactive waste. The significance of the E-Cat as an energy source is that it can produce energy at a much cheaper rate and much more cleanly than other sources on the market. The major ingredients, nickel and hydrogen are common elements and readily available at low cost and are consumed in very small quantities. There is no release of CO2 or other greenhouse gases from the E-Cat. Unlike traditional nuclear fission power, no radioactive materials are involved, and no radioactive waste is produced. Rossi has been awarded a patent for the E-Cat by the Italian Patent Office and is seeking further patent protection. Andrea Rossi launched the first commercial E-Cat plant, a 1 MW thermal power plant in Bologna, Italy on October 28th, 2011 which was tested and certified as being acceptable by an agent for an unknown customer. Rossi has stated that the customer is a military entity that does not want to be identified. Rossi’s Leonardo Corporation is planning to move into the domestic market within between a year and eighteen months, and has already started production of parts for one million small 10-20 kW E-Cat units that can provide heat and air conditioning to homes. Rossi has said that his target price for these first units is going to be around $1000 each.

The devil you don't know

Subject: The devil you don't know

Ronald

PR spooks can turn a war
criminal (John Negoponte)
into a statesman...

A Pentagon/oil industry
operative (Stewart Brand)
into a counter culture
leader...

And a literal war monger
(John Rendon) into a
'great thinker.'

They're also good at killing
people in broad daylight and
getting away with it.

Video:

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/20655.html

- Brasscheck

P.S. Please share Brasscheck TV e-mails and
videos with friends and colleagues.

That's how we grow. Thanks.

================================

Visit out partner sites:

Real Econ TV: http://RealEconTV.com
Financial news without the big bank baloney

The Real Food Channel: http://RealFoodChannel.com
The truth about the food you eat

================================
Brasscheck TV
2380 California St.
San Francisco, CA 94115

To unsubscribe or change subscriber options visit:
http://www.aweber.com/z/r/?zAxs7OwctKxMHAzsTMwctEa0jGwMrKxsnBw=

Jury Nullification Continues to Gain Traction Across the United States

Leave a Comment

Read the Daily Intel Hub News Brief:  

By Brent Daggett
theintelhub.com
October 13, 2012

In 1782, Thomas Jefferson wrote in his tome, Notes on the State of Virginia, “it is usual for the jurors to decide the fact, and to refer the law arising on it to the decision of the judges.

But this division of the subject lies with their discretion only.  And if the question relate to any point of public liberty, or if it be one of those in which the judges may be suspected of bias, the jury undertake to decide both law and fact.”

This may seem like an antiquated statement, especially given our current state of affairs regarding unconstitutional laws, however the application of jury nullification is making its way back to the forefront.

Be sure to read Brent’s other recent articles on ballot access for third parties, free speech in schools and local currencies.

On June 18, 2012 Governor John Lynch of New Hampshire signed HB 146, which reads:

“In all criminal proceedings the court shall permit the defense to inform the jury of its right to judge the facts and the application of the law in relation to the facts in controversy.”

In other words, jurors have the right not only to be informed of jury nullification, but have the right to nullify a law if they have reason to believe the law itself is corrupt.

Even though the law does not go into effect until next January, jury nullification in New Hampshire has already occurred.

In 2009, Rastafarian Doug Darrell, of New Hampshire, was arrested after members of a marijuana eradication task force spotted plants from a National Guard helicopter flying over Darrell’s home in Barnstead.

Darrell’s lawyer, Mark Sisti, attempted to get the evidence suppressed, but to no avail, arguing the aerial surveillance was illegal, since the helicopter was below the Federal Aviation Administration of safe altitude, thus violating Darrell’s privacy.

Long story short, Darrell turned down all plea deals (he had 15 plants and did not even distribute), due to the fact he believed he did nothing wrong since marijuana is a sacrament in his religion and was cultivating it for medicinal use.

In Darrell’s second trial, which took place last month, he was acquitted and if he was convicted, Darrell could have received three and a half to seven years in prison for a Class B felony.

NH is not the only state practicing jury nullification.

In September, organic egg producer Alvin Schlangen of central Minnesota faced threemisdemeanors of distributing unpasteurized milk, operating without a food handlers license and handling adulterated food.

Minnesota law prohibits the sale of raw milk “except directly to consumers on the farm when it’s produced.”

After a deliberation of 4 and a half hours, the six panel jury ruled not guilty on all three counts in Hennepin County District Court.

However, Schlangen is not completely out of the woods, as he is facing the same charges in Stearns County on November 2.

With these most recent cases, jury nullification is not some new revelation.

The first case of jury nullification can be traced back to 1670 in England when jurors refused to convict Quaker activists William Penn and William Mead on charges of unlawful assembly.

In 1735, jury nullification was introduced in America, in the trial of John Peter Zenger, who was the Printer of The New York Weekly Journal.

Zenger’s offense was constantly attacking Governor William Cosby, which violated the seditious libel law, prohibiting any criticism of the King or his appointed officers.

Andrew Hamilton, Zenger’s lawyer, argued the court’s law was outmoded and challenged that falsehood was the key component that makes a libel.

The jury only took a few minutes to deliberate before declaring Zenger not guilty. Since then, the truth continues to be a defense in libel cases.

Besides those cases, jurors at times refused to convict perpetrators of the Alien and Sedition Act, the Fugitive Slave Act and alcohol prohibition laws.

Opponents of jury nullification fear this precedent will lead to anarchy.

As to be expected, I disagree with that since I believe it is a fallacious argument.

If We the People have a Constitution, then our rights should continue to foster the cause of liberty and strike down laws which violate that foundation, otherwise we will inadvertently give power to the tyranny of the majority.

The Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA), who would probably agree with the aforementioned critique, is a group dedicating themselves to educate the American populace on the full powers of jurors, which includes the right to judge the merits of the law as well as the applications.

FIJA goes into further detail on how to protect citizens from abuses of power.

“The primary function of the Independent juror is not, as many think, to dispense punishment to fellow citizens accused of breaking various laws, but rather to protect fellow citizens from tyrannical abuses of power by government.

The Constitution guarantees you the right to trial by jury.

This means that government must bring its case before a jury of The People if government wants to deprive any person of life, liberty, or property.  Jurors can say no to government tyranny by refusing to convict.”

Currently FIJA bills have been introduced in Arizona, Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and South Dakota.

With the decisions that have been rendered in New Hampshire and Minnesota, maybe it will unleash a trend in other states.

When the idea of jury nullification eventually becomes the norm (which may be wishful thinking) let’s hope caution is used by potential juries in order to prove the critics wrong.

For if discretion by jurors is not taken into consideration, then we could be on a slippery slope to this scenario:  ”Where morality is present, laws are unnecessary.

Without morality, laws are unenforceable,” Anonymous (does not refer to the group, but is from an unknown source).

Edited by Madison Ruppert

http://theintelhub.com/2012/10/13/jury-nullification-continues-to-gain-traction-across-the-united-states/

Orange Co. Fl. - St John's Water Mangement - Yeah- The guys that pump gray water in the aquafers

WND EXCLUSIVE
Landowner stands ground against government ’shake-down’
Supremes agree to decide how much regulators can require
Then regulators tell you they also are going to require that you – at an expense estimated up to $150,000 – fix up and clean up a piece of unrelated government property miles away from your project.

Or else.

What do you do?

That’s the question that will be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court in a dispute out of Florida that is being handled by the Pacific Legal Foundation.

In the case, the owner of a piece of commercial property in Orange County, Fla., the Koontz family, was told that to get the permits necessary to use their land, they would have to spend thousands of his dollars making improvements to government-owned land miles away – just because that’s what officials decided they wanted.

“Property owners large and small, from coast to coast, should be thankful that the U.S. Supreme Court has accepted this important property rights case,” said Paul Beard, principal attorney for the foundation.

“If the Koontz family can be hit with the government rip-off that happened in this case, then everybody’s property rights are put at risk. The Koontz family merely wanted to exercise their rights as property owners, to develop the family’s land in legal and responsible ways.

“But regulators saw a chance to pounce and make all kinds of costly, unrelated, outrageous demands,” he said. “Without any justification, the government demanded money, labor and resources as the price for allowing the Koontzes to use their own land.

“This was a flat-out shakedown, a form of extortion,” he said.

Family members had tried for years to develop the land, but the local St. Johns River Water Management District would not issue the necessary permits, “because Koontz would not agree to costly and unjustified conditions that the district imposed.”

“Specifically, the district demanded that Koontz dedicate his money and labor to make improvements to 50 acres of district-owned property located miles away from the proposed project,” the legal team explained.

“In other words, what we have here is a classic case of an unconstitutional shakedown. The U.S. Supreme Supreme Court has ruled that the government violates property rights – it commits a ‘taking ‘ in violation of the Fifth Amendment – if it tries to use the permitting process to extract conditions that aren’t related to the impact of the proposed development.”

“Constitutional Chaos: What Happens When the Government Breaks Its Own Laws”

Some details had been worked out. The Koontzes wanted to develop 3.7 acres of their land, which was in a habitat-protection zone. They agreed to dedicate another 11 acres of their land for conservation.

But the district also demanded the family replace culverts and plug ditches on district land seven miles away, at costs estimated to run as high as $150,000, the legal team said.

The family won the argument at the trial and appellate courts, but the Florida Supreme Court refused “to recognize that the district had imposed an unconstitutional take.”

The Pacific Legal Foundation noted that it won a case in 1987 in the Supreme Court that said governments can’t impose unrelated demands as the price of permits or other regulatory permissions.

See an explanation of the arguments:

The foundation also won a property-rights battle earlier this year over the government’s arbitrary imposition of requirements on a landowner.

In that case, Mike and Chantell Sackett of Priest Lake, Idaho, bought a piece of land in a residential subdivision that was about two-thirds of an acre, purchased the appropriate building permits and started work on their dream home.

Then the federal Environmental Protection Agency arrived, ordered them to restore the land to its pristine condition, protect it for years and then go through a ruinously expensive application process to request permission to use their own land. Further, the EPA, in collusion with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, told the couple they could not even challenge the decision unless they went through the expensive process.

The Supreme Court overturned the appeals court, saying the EPA must provide a process through which a challenge to its decision can be addressed in a meaningful way.

Pacific Legal called the decision a “precedent-setting victory for the rights of all property owners.”

The EPA previously had threatened the couple with fines of up to $75,000 per day for failing to follow the agency’s intrusive “compliance” plan through which federal officials not only effectively seized control of the land but also the couple by demanding their paperwork and other detailed information
video – http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=I51s5082Wts

Cool video of the Hutchison frequencies

Yes, you CAN see them...the frequencies John Hutchison uses to eliminate radioactive contamination
and what's THAT..inside the destroyed Japan nuclear reactor #1????

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gxLeAYWoXc&feature=youtu.be