This is an Awareness Blog to consider the future of your world. Actions are being done now to restore our freedom. County, State, and National Assemblies are forming across our world nullifying the corrupt corporations. Watch and become AWARE! Participate and be a part of making history!
62 MILLION VIEWS PER MONTH
Exclusive public outlet for documentation and notices from The Original Jurisdiction Republic 1861 circa 2010.
Hopefully, one of these days Senate Democrats will start reading the bills they are voting on. Sadly, that day hasn’t come yet.
Senate Democrats asked the Republican majority to bring an anti-human trafficking bill to the floor for a vote, and were likely pleased when Republicans agreed to do so.
The bill was 68-pages long and had 13 Democrat’s cosponsoring, and most Republicans offering their full support. It was expected that the bill would easily pass and the measure would become law… that is, until the Democrats finally read the bill.
Apparently, Senate Democrats had neglected to even read the bill that they were hoping to pass, because at some point on Tuesday they suddenly realized that the bill contained language that would prevent federal funding of abortion. (While abortion is a controversial subject that usually splits Democrats and Republicans, the language included in this bill is quite usual for such measures.)
Democrats are complaining that Republicans got the abortion language into the bill in an underhanded fashion, but Republican Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) says "It’s just not true!" (Since when are the demo-rats NOT COMPLAINING? Some one please supply them with their rubbers and Jack Daniels filled binkys.)
”This idea that there has been some sort of an ambush is just preposterous,” he said on the floor Tuesday. “It’s just not credible.” (Well - what about all the 'ambushes' the demo-rats have actually done through the years??? Pelosi should be hung for her illegal pushing and lies in regard to legislation.)
"Our Democratic friends have voted time, and time, and time, and time again for the exact same language they now say they’re going to filibuster on the Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act,” he said on the floor Wednesday. “Language they said they weren’t aware of when they voted for it.”
They didn’t read,” he continued. “Their staff didn’t tell them about it.”
Cornyn also said that the bill has been publicly available online for MONTHS!
Still, Democrats just can’t bring themselves to vote for an anti-human trafficking bill if it won’t let them murder babies.
At this point, it’s a bit gratuitous, no?
The Democrats desire to murder babies is so strong that they are willing to stand with people who are selling other people into slavery.
Do you still really think that the Democrat Party isn’t evil?
Incredible Minutes from a 1974 Henry Kissinger Staff Meeting on Gold.......
OH HOW GOOOOOD IT FEELZ TA SCREW DA WORLD.... TAKE THIS WORLD ..... THOSE ASLEEP IDIOTS WILL NEVER KNOW IT WAZ MY D_ _K THAT GOT YA...
The following excerpts are from a transcript of a 1974 meeting held by the then Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and his staff. This particular meeting was held on April 25, and focused on an European Commission Proposal to revalue their gold assets. What follows is an incredible insight into the minds of powerful American leaders scheming to maintain power and show other nations their place. What is most significant is how clearly they understood that demonetizing gold was a critical strategy to maintaining a dominant power position in the world.
So to those who continue to say that “gold doesn’t matter” because it hasn’t been used as an official asset in the monetary system for decades, I say give me a break. In fact, the reality of gold having been largely demonetized makes it an even greater threat going forward if the U.S. does not have all the gold it claims to, and other nations have more than they admit to. Thanks to In Gold We Trust for bringing this to my attention. Choice excerpts are provided below, and breaks in the conversation are denoted with an “…” Enjoy. Secondly, Mr. Secretary, it does present an opportunity though—and we should try to negotiate for this—to move towards a demonetization of gold, to begin to get gold moving out of the system. Secretary Kissinger: But how do you do that? Mr. Enders: Well, there are several ways. One way is we could say to them that they would accept this kind of arrangement, provided that the gold were channelled out through an international agency—either in the IMF or a special pool—and sold into the market, so there would be gradual increases. Secretary Kissinger: But the French would never go for this. Mr. Enders: We can have a counter-proposal. There’s a further proposal—and that is that the IMF begin selling its gold—which is now 7 billion—to the world market, and we should try to negotiate that. That would begin the demonetization of gold. Secretary Kissinger: Why are we so eager to get gold out of the system? Mr. Enders: We were eager to get it out of the system—get started—because it’s a typical balancing of either forward or back. If this proposal goes back, it will go back into the centerpiece system. Secretary Kissinger: But why is it against our interests? I understand the argument that it’s against our interest that the Europeans take a unilateral decision contrary to our policy. Why is it against our interest to have gold in the system? MORE @ http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2013/11/30/incredible-minutes-from-a-1974-henry-kissinger-staff-meeting-on-gold/
LICENSES ARE REQUIRED BY STATE AND 'FEDERAL' CORPORATION SLAVE MASTERS. OBTAINING LICENSES MAKES THE ROGUE CRIMINAL STATE AND/OR FEDERAL 'GOVERNMENT' A PARTNER IN YOUR MARRIAGE, BUSINESS, DRIVING, BIRTH, ETC. THEY MAKE THE 'RULES' YOU ARE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW AND OBEY - YOUR LOSS OF YOUR HUMAN RIGHTS. BREAK FREE!!!!
By Randy Ellis
The Oklahoman
Posted
OKLAHOMA CITY — Sparked by controversy over same-sex marriages, the Oklahoma House of Representatives passed a bill Tuesday that would abolish government-issued Oklahoma marriage licenses..
“The point of my legislation is to take the state out of the process and leave marriage in the hands of the clergy,” said state Rep. Todd Russ, R-Cordell, the bill’s House author. “Marriage was historically a religious covenant first and a government-recognized contract second. Under my bill, the state is not allowing or disallowing same-sex marriage. It is simply leaving it up to the clergy.”
Under House Bill 1125, marriage licenses would be replaced by marriage certificates issued by clergy and others authorized to perform marriage ceremonies. The bill passed the House 67-24 and will now go to the Senate for consideration.
Russ’ bill sparked spirited discussion on the House floor, with some Democrat lawmakers arguing that the bill could have unintended consequences — like eliminating the state’s ability to stop bigamy or polygamy.
“As I read your bill, as long as the clergy has signed off on it, the state will have essentially signed off on it,” said House Minority Leader Scott Inman, D-Oklahoma City. “You are potentially opening up Pandora’s Box.”
Russ disputed that interpretation, saying other provisions in the law that make multiple marriages illegal would remain in place.
Russ said the bill is designed to protect employees of county court clerks’ offices who have been “caught in the middle of a fight between the federal and state government” over the legality of same-sex marriages.
Oklahoma law currently defines marriage as being “with a person of the opposite sex,” but federal circuit courts have ruled same-sex marriages are legal. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on the issue later this year. (What does the SUPREME JUDGE have to say about homo 'marriages.? Isn't that Who we need to be serving and pleasing?)
Russ said he decided to author the bill because some court clerks have told him they feel uncomfortable about being placed in the middle of the dispute.
His bill would leave it up to clergy and other individuals who are authorized to perform marriages to determine whether legal requirements have been met to issue marriage certificates. The role of court clerks would be reduced to filing the marriage certificates or affidavits of common law marriage.
The bill, as drafted, also would eliminate from Oklahoma law the words that define marriage as being “with a person of the opposite sex.”
State Rep. Emily Virgin, D-Norman, argued that if the U.S. Supreme Court should unexpectedly uphold state laws that define marriage as being between a man and a woman, Russ’ bill would end up making same-sex marriages legal in Oklahoma.
Russ accused some lawmakers of trying to create confusion. “I was proud to receive the support of a majority of my colleagues,” Russ said. “I was disappointed in a few opponents trying to mischaracterize the bill, but for the most part, Oklahomans see this as a positive step around the federal government’s disregard for our 10th Amendment and individual states’ liberties.”
The executive director of Freedom Oklahoma, which advocates in behalf of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals, criticized House passage of the measure. “This legislation puts all couples who plan to marry in Oklahoma at risk of being denied hundreds of federal legal rights and protections, if it were to become law,” said Troy Stevenson, executive director of Freedom Oklahoma. “The federal government and other states will not be required to acknowledge these proposed ‘marriage certificates.’ This legislation will only result in mass confusion from clerks’ offices to courtrooms around the nation — while putting Oklahoma families at risk.”
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency LLC.
CERTIFICATES OF MARRIAGE (AND BIRTH CERTIFICATES) WITNESSED BY FAMILY, FRIENDS AND/OR CLERGY WERE THE OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS - AND NOT 'LICENSES' - UNTIL THE CRIMINALS IN WASHINGTON DC FOUND A WAY TO INTERFERE IN YOUR PERSONAL RIGHTS. TAKE YOUR RIGHTS BACK.
The perspective taken by Jason Vuic in his book about the Yugo is apparent from its subtitle: ‘The Rise and Fall of the Worst Car in History’. Clearly this is not going to be an attempt to make a defence for the Yugo’s shortcomings, or to claim that it was unfairly maligned. No, the objective here is to determine why the little Yugoslavian car was so bad, and to analyse why it could never succeed in ‘80s America.
So of course, there are plentiful anecdotes about Yugos being poorly assembled in a Serbian factory, breaking down on road tests and gradually acquiring the reputation of being barely preferable to walking.Yet there is also a considered investigation into the context of the Yugo’s appearance in the USA.
The central character is an entrepreneur called Malcolm Bricklin, who has made his living importing cars. However, his track record in this business is erratic at best. Bricklin was the first person to sell Subarus in the USA: this venture ended badly, with the vehicles being declared unsafe and unroadworthy, but the more recent successes of the Subaru brand suggest that he may in fact have been onto something. His next project was importing small Italian sports cars; this was also a failure. Undeterred, Bricklin began the search for a more viable import, and found the Yugo.
Of course, there is comedy in this story. In the early ‘80s, the Yugo appeared to Bricklin to be a great business prospect; looking back, we laugh, knowing how fraught with problems the Yugo was. What is generally overlooked is the fact that, for a short time, the Yugo was a successful car. Its big selling point was its price: at its launch it cost just $3,990. This convinced thousands to sign up for the car, and for a while demand outstripped supply, with some customers waiting several months to take delivery of their Yugos.
Even after motoring journalists had panned it and comedians had incorporated it into the routine, many owners remained happy with their cars. While the Yugo appealed only to a certain demographic – those who wanted a brand new car for very little money – it filled a niche in the market that few realised existed.
So where did it all go wrong? Several factors and a combination of misjudgement and misfortune brought about the Yugo’s demise. In order to boost slightly flagging sales, Bricklin negotiated a deal with the Malaysian manufacturer Proton to add their cars to his portfolio of imports. This required backing from Mitsubishi, which provided most of Proton’s components, and at the time that Bricklin invested this remained unsecured. Then there was the unstable political climate of Serbia, which was now suffering at the hands of Slobadan Milošević.
An even more immediate problem was the short lifespan of the American market for tiny cars like the Yugo. Once the oil crisis of the ‘70s was forgotten, few car buyers cared much about gas mileage. To have a larger car was to feel safer on America’s aggressive roads – if a Yugo collided with an SUV then the Yugo driver came off worse, so it was considered preferable to have a large, sturdy car. Then there was the status that a big, prestigious car afforded its driver, and in the rabidly consumerist environment of the ‘80s, this was perhaps the most important factor in the Yugo’s demise.
While not everyone could afford a Mercedes or a Cadillac, there was also an influx of smaller, cheaper cars that were pitched against the Yugo. None of them were quite as reasonably priced but, in a way, this worked in their favour. They were affordable, but they were a step up from the absolute bottom of the heap. In an era obsessed with status and money, to be the cheapest car on the market may have been detrimental to the Yugo.
From my perspective as a European, one of the major things that this book confirms is America’s lacks of enthusiasm for small cars In Britain in the ‘80s and ‘90s we had the opportunity to buy not only Yugos but also cars from other east European makes that never made it to the USA, such as Lada, FSO and Skoda. While Skoda has now established itself as a manufacturer of quality cars that equal anything sold by Ford or Toyota, the others have admittedly been pushed out of the market. Yet their demure size was never an issue here – it was their inadequate emissions standards and their poor quality compared to more modern Asian rivals that bothered us Europeans.
The state of the car industry in the developing world is an increasingly important contemporary concern, and therefore Vuic’s book is timely, even though it deals with recent history. The economy of South Korea has progressed rapidly, and its car industry has made significant advances; the market share of brands like Hyundai and Kia is testament to this. We can expect this to be followed by the arrival of new and unfamiliar names from India and China, such as Tata and Geely. If these cars are picked up by the American market, then we can only hope they have more enduring success amongst America’s fickle car consumers than the well-intended but ill-fated Yugo.
SENT FOR POSTING BY A VERY ASTUTE AND CONCERNED AMERICAN:
IT'S NOT JUST THE 'BLACKS' THAT ARE BEING SHOT AND BRUTALIZED IN AMERICA
IT IS ALSO THE 'HISPANICS' AND THE 'WHITES'
ONE OF MANY DOCUMENTARIES THAT PROVE THAT AMERICA AND ITS POLICE ARE NOW OPERATING IN FULL FORCE NAZISM
WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THESE ASSHOLES IN BLUE / BLACK / KHAKI UNIFORMS WITH
STARS ON THEIR CHESTS?
AMERICA: WHEN THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN ENTRUSTED TO PROTECT AND DEFEND THE PERSONS AND SAFETY OF AMERICA'S CITIZENS BECOME THE BRUTAL ABUSERS, THEN
WE HAVE THE RIGHT AS AMERICANS AND AS HUMAN BEINGS TO DEFEND AND PROTECT OURSELVES AND OUR POSTERITY
SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE ABOUT THIS ABUSE OF POWER
NOT ALL 'COPS' ARE 'BAD'
BUT PERHAPS THOSE THAT ARE 'BAD' NEED TO LEARN SOME DIFFICULT LESSONS?
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) was a prominent Protestant pastor who emerged as an outspoken public foe of Adolf Hitler (this criminal regime lives on in America today) and spent the last seven years of Nazi rule in concentration camps.
and MORE - MUCH MORE - DO YOUR OWN YOUTUBE SEARCH!
BE AWARE - THE COMMUNISTS ARE DOING ALL THEY CAN TO BEGIN A FULL
BLOWN RACE WAR IN AMERICA - ONE OF THEIR TACTICS IS TO PIT BLACKS AGAINST WHITES USING TRUMPED UP HOLLYWOOD TACTICS ALONG WITH ALL THE PAID LIARS AND MEDIA
WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER
THIS IS NOT ABOUT RACE
THIS IS ABOUT TYRANNY FROM TRAITORS WITHIN THIS NATION AND ITS ROGUE 'GOVERNMENT'
Iran Letter: 165,000+ Sign Petition to Prosecute GOP Senators for Treason
By KATELYN MARMON 16 hours ago
Iran Letter: 165,000+ Sign Petition to Prosecute GOP Senators for Treason (ABC News)
A petition on the white (whore) house website calling for charges to be filed against the 47 senators who sent an open letter to the leaders of Iran, possibly in violation of the Logan Act, has collected more than 165,000 signatures in less than two days. (goes to prove how double minded and totally ignorant of this administration's 'history' the signers are)
Because the petition exceeded 100,000 signatures within 30 days, the White House is required to respond. (how many phony signatures are on it - just like with the Democrat phony 'voters' during 'elections' - 'voting' using names dug up from graves?)
The creator of this petition, known only by the initials C.H., alleges that the 47 senators “committed a treasonous offense when they decided to violate the Logan Act, a 1799 law which forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments." (Interesting the referral back to 1799 - SINCE WHEN HAS THE 'GOVERNMET' REFERRED TO ANY THING IN LAW THAT BENEFITS THIS NATION - I.E., THE MISSING 13TH AMENDMENT WHICH DISALLOWS ATTORNEYS/LAWYERS FROM PARTICIPATING IN THIS NATION'S GOVERNMENT? THEY SWEAR THEIR ALLEGIANCE TO THE CRIMINAL 'QUEEN' IN B RITAIN - THE CITY OF LONDON - AND THUS COMMIT TREASON AGAINST THIS NATION. WHY AREN'T THEY BEING ARRESTED AND HUNG AS THE TRAITORS THAT THEYA RE? SO WHY THE REFERRAL NOW AFTER 200+ YEARS TO 'THE LOGAN ACT?" HOW ABOUT THE TREASON COMMITTED BY THIS ROGUE 'GOVERNMENT' AS A MATTER OF DAILY ROUTINE? WHAT ABOUT THAT? WHY IS THAT NOT INVESTIGATED AND THE PARTICIPANTS HUNG FOR TREASON???)
The letter, which was published on Monday, warned Iranian leaders that any nuclear deal they sign with 'President' Obama won’t last past his second term. (CORRECT! THEY ARE WARNING ONE OF THE WORLD'S LEADING TERRORIST NATIONS THAT THE TREATY BETWEEN THE OBANA ADMIN AND IRAN IS TREASON AND WILL BE NULLIFIED. HOW MUCH MORE HONEST CAN THEY GET? WHY IS THIS ADMINISTRATION STILL RULING OUT OF WASH DC AND NOT ARRESTED AND HUNG FOR TREASON?)
Jerome Barron, a professor of Constitutional Law at George Washington University, told ABC News in an interview that he finds the senators’ letter “disrespectful,” but he does not believe the senators have committed treason.
They would make the argument the Logan Act doesn’t apply because they are one of the three branches of government and although the they don’t have the major role of foreign relations, they do, after all, as the senate, confirm treaties,” Barron said. “It’s true this is an executive agreement (ONCE AGAIN THIS 'ADMIN' RULES BY DICTATORSHIP AND NOT BY 'LAW' UNLESS 'LAW' BENEFITS THEIR TRAITOROUS ACTIVITIES!), but they [the Senate] have some role I suppose. I don’t think they’re in violation of the Logan Act.”
When asked about the potential violation of the Logan Act, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest highlighted the authority of the Department of Justice.
“For a determination like that, I'd refer you to the Department of Justice. It ultimately would be their responsibility to make that kind of determination,” Earnest said today in the White House briefing room. “I know that there's been a lot of speculation about this, but I'm not aware of any conversations about the Logan Act in its relation to this specific matter that have taken place here at the White House."
And while Earnest redirected the inquiry about the potential Logan Act violation for now, the White House will have to make an official response to the petition.
Other petitions that have met the White House’s response threshold include legalizing marijuana, publishing the White House beer recipe and even deporting Justin Bieber back to Canada!!!!!!!!! (So JUST HOW IMPORTANT is this 'petition' and the controversy about the Logan Act??!!)
ABC News' Justin Fishel contributed to this report
After leading the charge on an open letter to the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran about the ongoing nuclear negotiations, Sen. Tom Cotton rebutted criticism from the White House and Democrats that the message undermines U.S. negotiators working toward a deal.
"It's the job of the president to negotiate but it's the job of Congress to approve," Cotton, R-Arkansas, said in an interview with ABC News in his office this afternoon. "We're simply trying to say that Congress has a constitutional role to approve any deal, to make sure that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon. Not today, not tomorrow, not ten years from now."
President Obama said it is "somewhat ironic" to see some congressional Republicans "wanting to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran."
"It's an unusual coalition," Obama observed.
Cotton said "there are nothing but hardliners in Iran" and explained that Republicans wrote the letter "to make sure" Iran understands that Congress has a constitutional role to approve any potential agreement.
"We're on the verge of a deal that could allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon in as little as ten years, so it's important that Iran realize that Congress will not allow that outcome to happen," he said.
Vice President Joe Biden said in a statement this evening that the letter was designed to undercut a sitting president in the wake of sensitive international negotiations.
"In thirty-six years in the United States Senate, I cannot recall another instance in which Senators wrote directly to advise another country -- much less a longtime foreign adversary -- that the President does not have the constitutional authority to reach a meaningful understanding with them," Biden said in the statement. (This is the WORST whore house this nation has EVER suffered - GOOD FOR THE SENATORS THAT STOOD UP FOR HONESTY AND TRUTH!)
"The decision to undercut our President and circumvent our constitutional system offends me as a matter of principle," he said. "As a matter of policy, the letter and its authors have also offered no viable alternative to the diplomatic resolution with Iran that their letter seeks to undermine."
AND THEN THIS FROM ONE OF THE MOST TRAITOROUS EVIL LAW BREAKING CHEATING 'SENATORS' EVER TO OCCUPY A SEAT IN THE SENATE.......................
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid went after Republicans, speaking from the Senate floor as Cotton presided over the chamber.
"Let's be very clear: Republicans are undermining our commander in chief while empowering the ayatollahs," Reid, D-Nev., said. "This letter is a hard slap in the face of not only the United States, but our allies. This is not a time to undermine our commander in chief purely out of spite."
Reid then went after Cotton, a freshman senator, who watched silently.
"Today's unprecedented letter originated by a United States senator who took his oath of office 62 days ago," Reid said. "As a kind of pettiness that diminishes us as a country in the eyes of the world. Republicans need to find a way to get over their animosity of President Obama. I can only hope that they do it sooner, rather than leader."
In his interview with ABC, Cotton dismissed Reid's assertion that the letter harms U.S. relations with several key allies.
"You have many other allies like Israel, or Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, who are deeply troubled by the deal that the president and his team have given the outlines of," Cotton said. "They all agree with the 47 senators who have signed this letter, which is that Iran cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons capability."
YOU GO COTTON! WERE THAT THE REST OF THAT UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY WERE MORE LIKE YOU!!!
A majority in both the Senate and House — 52 senators, 238 House members — have joined to oppose the Obama administration's move to ban a popular type of ammo used in the top-selling AR-15 rifle and pistol because it pierces police body armor.
A week after the House members, led by Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte, sent a letter of opposition to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley echoed that in his own letter signed by 51 others.
In their letter, the senators said that the 5.56 M855 "green tip" cartridge was exempted in a 1986 law, along with other rifle ammo from bans on armor-piercing rounds. The reason: popular rifle ammo is not used in shootouts with police.
They also raised new concerns that the 'administration' appears poised for a much wider ammo ban. "Second Amendment rights require not only access to firearms but to bullets. If law-abiding gun owners cannot obtain rifle ammunition, or face substantial difficulty in finding ammunition available and at reasonable prices because government entities are banning such ammunition, then the Second Amendment is at risk," said Grassley's letter.
The ATF has proposed banning the ammo because it has concerns that the popularity of AR-15 pistols might mean a greater threat to police. Foes of the move, including a top police group, however, say there is no evidence the $1,000 pistols have been used against police.
Others note that the metals used in the ammo are not included in the old law's description of armor-piercing bullets. "These cartridges are prevalent for one of the most commonly possessed rifles, the AR-15. Congress did not, and did not intend to, ban this form of ammunition," wrote Grassley of the1986 Law Enforcement Officer Protection Act.
He also raised concerns that the administration is targeting other ammo, a charge made by the National Rifle Association last week. "ATF's proposed restriction of the M855 cartridge is particularly serious in light of efforts to ban other forms of ammunition. The standards in the 'Framework' would make use of ammunition containing materials other than lead more difficult. At the same time, various efforts to ban lead ammunition are proceeding apace. Second Amendment rights require not only access to firearms but to bullets. If law-abiding gun owners cannot obtain rifle ammunition, or face substantial difficulty in finding ammunition available and at reasonable prices because government entities are banning such ammunition, then the Second Amendment is at risk. An outright ban is an even more serious threat to the Second Amendment than the threat to the First Amendment's protection of free press created by a TAX imposed only on voluminous purchases of paper and ink," they said.
The House opposition is also largely Republican and the issue has even become a 2016 presidential topic.
Democrats, meanwhile, are circulating a letter in support of the ban what they call "cop killer" ammo. The White House also backs the ATF proposal.
The full Grassley letter is below:
March 9, 2015
The Honorable B. Todd Jones
Director
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
99 New York Avenue, N.E.
Washington, DC 20226
Dear Director Jones:
We take issue with the "ATF Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are 'Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes' Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(C)," to which ATF sought comment on February 13, 2015.
Congress in 1986 passed the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (LEOPA). It did so to protect law enforcement officers from a particular category of bullets – those that could be fired from handguns and pierce police officers' body armor. Because rifle ammunition could also pass through police body armor, and some rifle ammunition could be fired from handguns, LEOPA protected common rifle ammunition by exempting from its scope projectiles "which the Attorney General finds [are] primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes."
The "Framework" does not follow LEOPA. Without any support, it purports to create an "objective" test never before applied for delineating which projectiles are "primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes." ATF will exempt a ".22 caliber projectile … if the projectile weighs 40 grains or less AND is loaded into a rimfire cartridge," and will exempt other forms of ammunition if they are "loaded into a cartridge for which the only handgun that is readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade is a single shot handgun." But even if a particular projectile satisfies these novel tests, ATF proposes to "retain[] the discretion to deny any application for a 'sporting purposes' exemption if substantial evidence exists that the ammunition is not primarily intended for such purposes."
ATF would determine what amounts to "substantial evidence" and whether the "ammunition is not primarily intended for [sporting] purposes." The statute was not enacted to give authority to ATF to do either. In 1986, the sponsors of the legislation were emphatic in stating that ammunition commonly used in rifles for TARGET practice or hunting was not of the type of ammunition that the bill would ban. ATF seems to have decided to ban ammunition types that the law did not ban, then developed from whole cloth an "objective" test to supposedly provide it with the ability to ban the ammunition types it already had selected for prohibition.
Earlier, ATF recognized the proper scope of LEOPA. ATF has always granted an exemption to the M855 5.56 x 45mm cartridge from the LEOPA ban because it recognized that this ammunition fell squarely within the "sporting purposes" test. It did so because factually, as well as legally under the legislative language, such cartridges were and are widely used by millions of law-abiding gun owners for "sporting purposes." These cartridges are prevalent for one of the most commonly possessed rifles, the AR-15. Congress did not, and did not intend to, ban this form of ammunition.
ATF's proposed restriction of the M855 cartridge is particularly serious in light of efforts to ban other forms of ammunition. The standards in the "Framework" would make use of ammunition containing materials other than lead more difficult. At the same time, various efforts to ban lead ammunition are proceeding apace. Second Amendment rights require not only access to firearms but to bullets. If law-abiding gun owners cannot obtain rifle ammunition, or face substantial difficulty in finding ammunition available and at reasonable prices because government entities are banning such ammunition, then the Second Amendment is at risk. An outright ban is an even more serious threat to the Second Amendment than the threat to the First Amendment's protection of free press created by a TAX imposed only on voluminous purchases of paper and ink. See Minneapolis Star Tribune Co. v. Commissioner, 460 U.S. 575 (1983).
It is not clear where ATF believes it has obtained the authority to issue general standards interpreting the meaning of "sporting purposes" under LEOPA as opposed to exempting or not exempting particular cartridges. Nevertheless, no federal statute, including LEOPA, interferes with the ability of law-abiding citizens to obtain ammunition commonly used for such legitimate purposes as TARGET shooting, hunting, and shooting competitions. Nor could any such statute do so consistent with the Second Amendment. The "Framework" should not be adopted, and ATF should not propose in the future to ban any widely used form of ammunition used by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.
Sincerely,
Senators joining Grassley on the letter include Mike Rounds (R-S.D.); John Thune (R-S.D.); Cory Gardner (R-Colo.); Tom Cotton (R-Ark.); John Hoeven (R-N.D.); Joni Ernst (R-Iowa); David Vitter (R-La); Michael Crapo (R-Idaho); Jerry Moran (R-Kan.); David Perdue (R-Ga.); James Risch (R-Idaho); John Isakson (R-Ga.); Steve Daines (R-Mont.); Dean Heller (R-Nev.); Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.); Richard Burr (R-N.C.); Roy Blunt (R-Mo.); Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.); Bill Cassidy (R-La.); John Boozman (R-Ark.); Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.); Ted Cruz (R-Texas); Thom Tillis (R-N.C.); Orrin Hatch (R-Utah); Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.); James Lankford (R-Okla.); Richard Shelby (R-Ala.); Deb Fischer (R-Neb.); Thad Cochran (R-Miss.); Shelley Capito (R-W. Va.); Pat Roberts (R-Kan.); Pat Toomey (R-Pa.); Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska); John Cornyn (R-Texas); Ron Johnson (R-Wis.); Michael Lee (R-Utah); John Barrasso (R-Wyo.); Marco Rubio (R- Fla.); Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.); Dan Coats (R-Ind.); Bob Corker (R-Tenn.); Tim Scott (R-S.C.); Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.); Ben Sasse (R-Neb.); Roger Wicker (R-Miss.); Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.); Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.); Rand Paul (R-Ky.); John McCain (R-Ariz.); Rob Portman (R-Ohio); Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska); and Susan Collins (R-Maine).
Paul Bedard, the Washington Examiner's "Washington Secrets" columnist, can be contacted at pbedard@washingtonexaminer.com.
Transhumanists believe that the time has come
for humans to take control of their own evolution. Many of them are
fully convinced that we can use emerging technologies to “fix” the flaws
in the human race and ultimately eradicate sickness, disease, poverty
and war.
So would you like to have the eyesight of an eagle? Would you like to download
an entire library of information directly into your brain in just
minutes? Would you like to rid your family line of all genetic diseases?
Would you like to extend your lifespan to 500 years or even longer?
Transhumanists promise that all of these things
will soon be possible, if we are willing to embrace a new way of doing
things. They foresee a future in which we will all have lots of little
nanobots running around inside of us, in which we are all connected
directly to the Internet, and in which we have all been genetically
modified to at least some degree. In fact, one prominent transhumanist
recently stated that he believes that "eventually every human will be
designed on a computer." In the end, the goal is to produce a vastly
improved version of the human race which will usher in a golden new age
for the planet. But as we merge ourselves with animals, machines and
weird new technologies that scientists cook up, at what point do we
cease to be human?
And when I say “weird new technologies”, I am
not overstating things in the least. Just consider what one
transhumanist says that they have planned for us…
As with all radical social movements, there is
bound to be resistance. After all, transhumanists are interested in some
pretty bizarre things: mind uploading, living indefinitely through life
extension science, biohacking themselves to install
cyborg body parts, and creating artificial general intelligence. Each
of these areas of research will radically change the lives of people—and
some, such as cyborg body parts, are already doing so.
Once upon a time, the only people that talked about “cyborgs” were science fiction geeks.
But today, many transhumanists speak of us
becoming “cyborgs” as if it was some sort of foregone conclusion. It is
almost as if they are the Borg, and they are telling us that there is no
choice but to assimilate.
And this assimilation is already happening to a
certain degree. If the idea of humanity “merging with machines” sounds
bizarre to you, just check out the following excerpt from a recent Vice
article…
Next up are brain implants, tiny computer chips
inserted surgically directly into the brain itself. So far, they’ve been
used mainly to help treat patients suffering from Parkinson’s disease
and other neurological conditions such as Alzheimer’s and epilepsy.
But some scientists are now tinkering with
brain implants that enable more physical pursuits, from controlling
people’s prosthetic limbs to restoring movement in paralyzed rats.
Scientists say that the capabilities of brain implants are only in their
infancy, and some of them envision a near-future where brain implants
can even be installed in healthy people to connect them directly to the
internet and improve memory] a la Black Mirror. The US military agency
DARPA is already building such memory chips, and wants to develop
implants that could be installed throughout a soldier’s nervous system
to provide advanced, on-the-spot healing of conditions from mental
illness to arthritis.
Of course most of those developing these new technologies believe that they are doing something wonderful for humanity.
Congress has really outdone itself this time. On
Monday, neoconservative Republicans in the Senate were apparently so
eager to go to war with Iran that they broke a federal law known as the
Logan Act in the process. The Logan Act has been around since 1799 and
has remained mostly unchanged, created to keep rogue members of Congress
from undermining foreign relations.
How did Senate Republicans violate the Logan
Act? Well they did that by being war mongers. But more specifically,
when 47 members of Congress signed onto a letter
that was sent to Iranian officials in an attempt to undermine the peace
deal with Iran, they clearly violated the act — and also all committed
felonies. According to Cornell University, the act reads:
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he
may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or
indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse
with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent
to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of
any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or
controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the
United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more
than three years, or both.
And the precedent has already been clearly set.
In the case United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. (1936), Justice
Sutherland wrote in the majority opinion:
The President alone has the power to speak or
listen as a representative of the nation. He makes treaties with the
advice and consent of the Senate; but he alone negotiates. Into the
field of negotiation the Senate cannot intrude, and Congress itself is
powerless to invade it.
The Republicans, who so often talk of the
Constitution almost as highly as they talk of their support for Israel,
seem to have trampled over the document
multiple times in as many weeks. You see, when they invited Israeli
Prime Minister Netanyahu to speak to Congress, they were also in
violation of the Logan Act then too. John Boehner is mostly at fault for
the Netanyahu fiasco, though, so he’s the only member of the House that
should prosecuted for that.
However, 47 members of the US Senate — all
Republicans — have clearly violated the Logan Act, and should be
punished to the fullest extent of the law. Three years in prison for 47
members of our war mongering Congress? I would support that. The real
question is: will enough Americans stand up and carry out the laws that
are written plain as day in the Constitution, or will we simply sit back
and expect the government to punish itself?
President Obama, who himself has shown little to
no respect for the Constitution, seems to have no interest in
prosecuting the war mongering 47, so that’s up to us to carry out. A
petition to charge the Senators
has already racked up over 40,000 signatures overnight (UPDATE: the
petition has now surpassed 100,000 signatures, which means the White
House will have to respond to it).
However, Citizen’s arrest seems to be a more
effective plan of action than petitioning. These 47 men committed
felonies and should be charged just as any one of us regular folks would
be when we commit a crime. Who should we arrest first? John McCain or Lindsey Graham?
Nick Bernabe writes for TheAntiMedia.org, where
this first appeared. Tune-in to The Anti-Media radio show Monday-Friday @
11pm EST, 8pm PST. Help us fix our typos: editor@theantimedia.org
Are you in doubt that the real original jurisdiction De Jure Republic is being restored? Do you have Questions that you want answered? Do you want to get involved? Visit https://national-assembly.net/ for more information and to participate. Check out the forums as the national assembly is 100% transparent to the public and welcomes public participation. This is the real deal folks. This is our last chance to do it right and nullify the 1871 contract that employed the U.S. Corporation to provide 19 governmental services to the people. This is our right under Article 1 of the Bill of rights. This also nullifies General Order 100 of 1863.
Search This Blog "if this search box is working"
Donation to assist in efforts to restore our republic
The DUKE - Patriot!
Born in 1948 Died in 2015
National Assembly of the people returning to self governance
Join the forums and introduce yourself so your state coordinator can connect with you.
Question -- What is the goal of this website? Why do we share different sources of information that sometimes conflicts or might even be considered disinformation?
Answer -- The primary goal of Nesaranews is to help all people become better truth-seekers in a real-time boots-on-the-ground fashion. This is for the purpose of learning to think critically, discovering the truth from within—not just believing things blindly because it came from an "authority" or credible source. Instead of telling you what the truth is, we share information from many sources so that you can discern it for yourself. We focus on teaching you the tools to become your own authority on the truth, gaining self-mastery, sovereignty, and freedom in the process. We want each of you to become your own leaders and masters of personal discernment, and as such, all information should be vetted, analyzed and discerned at a personal level. We also encourage you to discuss your thoughts in the comments section of this site to engage in a group discernment process.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." – Aristotle
11
Followers
The articles on this blog are reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
US Supreme Court, in 1985, “Dowling v. United States”, unequivocally held that allegations of copyright infringement can be prosecuted only under copyright-specific legislation, not criminal law.
”This idea that there has been some sort of an ambush is just preposterous,” he said on the floor Tuesday. “It’s just not credible.” (Well - what about all the 'ambushes' the demo-rats have actually done through the years??? Pelosi should be hung for her illegal pushing and lies in regard to legislation.) 
