Tuesday, March 24, 2015

The Inevitability of Peaceful Revolution


The Inevitability of Peaceful Revolution - Garden of Eden
14th March 2015
By Lance Schuttler
Guest Writer for Wake Up World
Though the mainstream media desperately tries to continue the facade that all is well among the status quo and banking elite, reality has cracked open the illusion and has spread everywhere it’s seeds of truth, freedom, equality and peace. What we are now living through and witnessing is the sprouting of a new society. Everywhere in  our world we are now seeing the awakening of humanity speed up. We are seeing massive rallies against corruption and rallies for peace spread. We are seeing tyranny, cover-ups and false flags exposed. And more importantly, we are seeing movements converging that offer solutions to these issues the world faces.
People are rethinking and questioning the way things are done. We are seeing many people’s hearts and minds shifting from programmed thinking and acting due to elitist propaganda into ways of self-direction, freedom and abundance. People’s inner worlds of heart and mind are breaking free and we are seeing this have direct and positive impacts in our outer world. This inner drive for every single one of us to feel and be free in every way is causing the conditioned past to be transcended and is creating a convergence of hearts, minds, projects, ideas and visions now manifesting for the highest good of all. Fortunately, we are not alone in this endeavor of creating inner and outer freedom.

Since the Occupy Wall Street protests in late 2011, the world has seen continued cries for justice, peace and equality. We have seen continued protests against Monsanto over the past several years as well as the hacker group Anonymous’ rallies for justice, transparency and peace. In 2012 it was synchronized anti-austerity protests throughout all of Europe. In 2013, it was in the form of millions taking to the streets in Brazil. Also in 2013, we saw over 8 million flood the streets of Cairo, Egypt as the military supported the people’s birthright to freedom by removing the corrupt regime. In 2014 in Catalonia, Spain we saw Europe’s largest peaceful rally as over 2 million Catalans took to the streets for independence from Spain. 2014 also saw the world’s largest march on climate change as well as Wal-Mart’s biggest strike in history on Black Friday. In early 2015 we then saw over 3 million unify for peace in Paris after an alleged terror attack.

Something Big and Positive is Happening

The Inevitability of Peaceful RevolutionOver the past 3 years we here on Earth have been experiencing increased solar activity with an increased number of coronal mass ejections (CMEs) being received by our Earth’s magnetic field. CMEs are explosions of electricity and energy in the form of electrons and protons, according to NASA. This ejected, self-organizing and coherent plasma usually takes between 3-4 days to reach our Earth’s magnetosphere which, if large enough, can create disturbances in radio signals and navigation systems. Interestingly, these CMEs also affect humans down to the level of our DNA.
In 1984-1985, Dr. Peter Gariaev and his team of Russian linguists were studying DNA and the ways light, sound and frequencies interact with DNA. Their research led to many groundbreaking and paradigm-shifting discoveries with one of them showing that DNA is able to absorb and emit light (photons), which spirals along the double helix in sacred geometrical form. They found that DNA has properties of a scalar/torsion field, which is “a self-sustaining vortex in the aether/time-space which is innately non-electromagnetic… By spinning, a vortex can excite photons or [pull] virtual photons out of the fabric of space/aether — and static torsion/scalar fields can harness and store light within them.”
Literally, DNA creates magnetized wormholes in the time-space fabric. DNA acts as “tunnel connections between entirely different areas in the universe through which inThe Inevitability of Peaceful Revolution - Double Helixformation can be transmitted outside of space and time. The DNA attracts these bits of information and passes them on to our consciousness.” They found that with the presence of  light (photons), DNA activation and and thus evolution can occur. New neuro-pathways can be created. Our thought patterns can be reshaped to ways that better serve us. We can change how we deal with a situation. We can change who we are. With the presence of photons always amidst us via our Sun, our DNA is constantly pulling in this light and continuing to change and evolve. We can think of a solar flare as a boost of light from our Sun. This extra light equates to a higher upgrade in the evolution of our DNA and thus, who we are.
In fact, pioneering physicist Nassim Haramein’s holofractographic universe theory says that the “fundamental structure and dynamics of space-time are those of the black hole.” In this view, any change to a part, in effect, changes the whole. This is true of any hologram. Every part contains the whole, and when something changes in a part of the object, the whole object then changes as well. So we see that every time someone in our world thinks, does or says something to improve themselves, a situation or another, the entirety of humanity benefits. We upgrade. We shift. We evolve. We also see that with the help from our Sun, our DNA and our consciousness is continuing to shift to higher octaves. And as our DNA continues to shift, the entire human race is impacted and benefited.  In other words, the deck is stacked in favor of humanity to continue growing and changing in ways that serve the whole. Peaceful revolution of the systems that suppress and no longer serve the humanity is inevitable.

Reflection in Our Outer World

“Where are these things being reflected in our outer world,” some might ask. Are there those “in the know” talking of this revolution? The answer is an unshakable yes.
The Inevitability of Peaceful Revolution - Creating the World We WantThe growing BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) alliance, which has now reportedly swelled to over 190 countries with governmental, banking and military influence. On July 18, 2014, the same day the Contingent Reserve Arrangement and the BRICS Development Bank were announced and implemented, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the BRICS is an alliance that will “reform the international financial system.” Many economists believe this alliance, because of the amount of gold and silver several of these countries have been importing, are planning to reset the global financial system, which will be based on gold, silver and other metals and resources. (Something John F. Kennedy was reportedly very close to initiating with President Sukarno of Indonesia, via the Global Collateral Accounts.)
It is believed that in time, this reset will allow our world’s entire socioeconomic system to shift into a resource-based economy, a term coined by social engineer Jacque Fresco of The Venus Project. In this revolutionary, yet very practical system, technologies will be implemented that help improve the quality of life for every person on our planet by allowing food, shelter, clothing and social activities to be met necessities. This will also shift our world away from oil and other destructive energy practices and will help transform the health of our earth.

Creating The World We Want

The Inevitability of Peaceful Revolution - Love RevolutionAs famous author, speaker and physicist Gregg Braden has said, “Our beliefs have the power to change the flow of events in the universe – literally to interrupt and redirect time, matter, and space, and then events that occur within them.” We have the power to change our world and we are receiving help from many known and quiet sources. The change can begin with a thought. It can follow with an action. Inspire someone. Eat more organic foods. Soak up the sunlight as much as possible. Spark a movement. Transform negative thoughts into positive ones. Use words carefully and specifically. Plant a garden. Participate in synchronized global meditations for peace (every Saturday at 6 A.M. eastern time (New York City) or every Sunday at 11 A.M. eastern time.)
Above all, dream big and continue to be you. Continue visualizing and feeling the changes you want in your personal life as well as for our world. We each have a vital role to play in the creation of a better world. The only thing that is certain is change. With this world view and universal truth in mind, peaceful revolution is truly inevitable.
Also by Lance Schuttler:
About the author:
Lance Schuttler graduated from the University of Iowa with a degree in Health Science and is Director of Creative Health Non-Profits for Personable Media. He is passionate about holistic and naturopathic medicine as well as helping to bring awareness to an efficient, sustainable and health-promoting transition that our world’s current socio-economic model is rapidly undergoing.

U.S. Police Are Killing More Than All First World Police Forces Combined

U.S. Police Are Killing More Than All First World Police Forces Combined


 Who is causing or allowing the police to kill people most often for no reason...please readers let us know what you find out....

police car
By: L-Dixon | Never Get Busted -
Hide your kids.  Hide your wife.  The cops are killing everybody this year.
It would seem that the police in the U.S. are committed to breaking a murder record 2015, as the total body count at the hands of police is up to 138.  That’s 1 person every 8 hours!  Moreover, every police officer killed this year was murdered by other cops.  Continue reading below for the gripping article from TheFreeThoughtProject.com with statistics sure to shock and enrage you.
As of February 16, only a month and a half into 2015, there has been at least 138 individuals killed by police in the United States since the first of the year.
The frighteningly high number averages out to three killed per day, or someone killed every eight hours. While there is no government-run database, Killed By Police has taken it upon themselves to keep track, and are doing a fantastic job thus far.
Just to put things into perspective, let’s take a look at the rates at which police in other countries kill their citizens.
Let’s look at our immediate neighbors to the north, Canada. The total number of citizens killed by law enforcement officers in the year 2014, was 14; that is 78 times less people than the US.
If we look at the United Kingdom, 1 person was killed by police in 2014 and 0 in 2013. English police reportedly fired guns a total of three times in all of 2013, with zero reported fatalities.
From 2010 through 2014, there were four fatal police shootings in England, which has a population of about 52 million. By contrast, Albuquerque, N.M., with a population 1 percent the size of England’s, had 26 fatal police shootings in that same time period.
China, whose population is 4 and 1/2 times the size of the United States, recorded 12 killings by law enforcement officers in 2014.

Let that sink in. Law enforcement in the US killed 92 times more people than a country with nearly 1.4 billion people. 

It doesn’t stop there.
From 2013-2014, German police killed absolutely no one. 
In the entire history of Iceland police, they have only killed 1 person ever. After exhausting all non-lethal methods to detain an armed man barricaded in his house who actually shot 2 police officers, police were forced to take the 59-year-old man’s life. The country of Iceland grieved for weeks after having to resort to violence.
Unofficially, it seems that American police kill more than all of the first world nations police departments combined!
That’s not the only mind-blowing perspective either.
So far this year all cop killers have been other cops.  This year the police seem to be far more likely to die as a result of police brutality than at the hand of a violent suspect.
Just last week an officer responding to a domestic disturbance at a North Texas residence, shot and killed off-duty sheriff’s deputy Larry Hostetter, 41, shortly after midnight.At the end of January, we also reported on a Yonkers police officer who shot a suicidal officer from another precinct, claiming he feared for his safety.  We also reported on an undercover Albuquerque police officer who was shot by another officer during a drug bust over $60 worth of meth.  The media called it a “tragic accident” while, in reality, it was another example of police shooting someone who poses no threat to them.
There was also John Ballard Gorman was shot and killed by a fellow officer during a training exercise in Tunica, MS last month. The officer who shot Gorman failed to switch out his weapon for a training weapon and fired a real round into his fellow officer, killing him.
According to the Officer Down Memorial Page, the pro-police site that tracks every officer death, not a single police officer has been killed by a suspect so far this year.
Line of Duty Deaths: 14
Automobile accident: 5
Heart attack: 4
Struck by vehicle: 2
Vehicle pursuit: 1
9/11 related illness: 1
Gunfire (Accidental): 1
In fact, being a police officer isn’t even close to being in the top 10 most dangerous jobs in this country.  According to the 2013 report by the Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics on work-related fatal injuries, “Police and sheriff’s patrol deputies” ranked as the 41st most dangerous occupation.
Also, according to an FBI report, Americans are less violent than ever; its the police who have been increasingly violent.
With job related danger so low, there is no excuse for the police to be so trigger happy, acting like they are Batman and every citizen is a violent villain hell bent on their death.
As Liberation News pointed out, a vast majority of those killed by the police in 2015 have again been young African Americans and Latinos. The two youngest were both 17-years-old, Kristiana Coignard of Texas and Jessica Hernandez of Colorado. The oldest was 87-year-old Lewis Becker from rural upstate New York.
Officers who cannot bring 17-year-old girls or 87-year-old men into custody safely have absolutely no business “protecting and serving” anyone.  A person who cannot control a situation with a 90 pound high school girl or an elderly gentleman, and “fear for their life” so severely that they need to pull a trigger, is not a hero, they’re a coward.
It is time for the United States to get over its love affair with idolizing the badge.

L-Dixon is a multi-passionate creative focused on catalyzing positive change in the world through his many creative outlets. Whether it be through music, entrepreneurship, web development or film, L-Dixon aims to create and share a vision of a freer, more just and more sustainable world. He is the founder of The Autonomite Network, a crowdsourced media and publishing network where brands can buy inspired and relevant content from passionate creatives.

“Media Blackout On Smart Meter Dangers” Wins Project Censored Award......

“Media Blackout On Smart Meter Dangers” Wins Project Censored Award......

smart meter
James Tracy’s story, “Health Impact of RF Radiation: Media Blackout on Smart Meter Dangers,” published at Memory Hole Blog and by Professor Michel Chossudovsky, editor of Global Research, in January 2014, was nominated by student researchers and faculty evaluators working with Project Censored at San Francisco State University and Sonoma State University in spring 2014.
The story was voted into Censored’s Top 25 at Number 14 out of a field of over 230 nominations, alongside a related article, “Two Important New Papers Show Mobile Phone Use Does Cause an Increase in Brain Tumours,” first appearing at power watch.uk.org. Both stories were featured in Project Censored’s 2015 yearbook, Censored 2015: The Top Censored Stories and Media Analysis of 2013-2014, published in October 2014.
Story nominations by Tracy’s undergrad students at [censored] University for 2014 also received recognition from Project Censored judges (here, here, here, and here).
Tracy won a Project Censored award in 2013 for the story, “Wireless Technology: A Looming Health Crisis,” published at Memory Hole and Global Research, also voted Number 14, and featured in Censored 2014: Fearless Speech in Fateful Times.
Tracy’s original January 21, 2014 article is reposted below.

Health Impact of RF Radiation: Media Blackout on Smart Meter Dangers

By James F. Tracy
Major power utilities continue to deploy “smart” electrical meters on businesses and private residences throughout the United States and Canada. Yet those in North America and elsewhere remain in the dark on the negative health effects of such devices that systematically blast their homes with radio-frequency (RF) radiation on a minute-by-minute, round-the-clock basis.
In 2009 the Obama administration partnered with utilities by allocating $3.4 billion in federal stimulus funds toward building a nationwide “smart grid,” where smart meters figure centrally.[1] The project is part of President Obama’s “Climate Action Plan” that under United Nations auspices seeks to reduce US carbon emissions 20% by the year 2020.[2]
There is more than ample research available that has associated negative health effects of RF radiation emitted by smart meters [3] for regulatory authorities to place restrictions on power utilities and compel them to abide by the precautionary principle. Such restrictions would require power providers to refrain from wide scale installation of smart meters until a sufficient body of scientific research demonstrating the safety of such devices has been produced and rigorously evaluated.
Yet in the US and elsewhere the imperative of having a “smart grid,” the prospect of a carbon trading scheme, lax (and in at least some cases corrupt) state and federal regulatory bodies, and the sheer power of the utilities combine to jeopardize the long term health of the entire population.
In a purportedly democratic society news outlets play a decisive role in such an impending health crisis. By failing to report on the dubious health research of smart meters and the fact that the public is being involuntarily subjected to such technology, news media are a key factor in the citizenry’s continued ignorance and inaction.
In May 2011 the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer categorized “radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, associated with wireless cellphone use.”[4] Despite this warning from a well-recognized source, the utilities stubbornly insist that all residences must be equipped with a smart meter issuing dangerous electropollution.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ceased studying the health effects of radiofrequency radiation when the Senate Appropriations Committee cut the department’s funding and forbade it from further research into the area.[5] Thereafter RF limits were codified as mere “guidelines” based on the EPA’s tentative findings and are presently overseen by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
These weakly enforced standards are predicated on the alleged “thermal effect” of RF to which the FCC subscribes. In other words, if the energy emitted from a wireless antenna or device is not powerful enough to heat the skin or flesh then no danger is posed to human health.[6]
smart_meterTo this day power utilities cling to this severely outmoded and unscientific standard when confronted with the formidable body of research linking RF to cancer, destruction of DNA, and other negative health effects. News media seldom question the FCC policy when it is cited by utilities and regulators alike to underline the supposed overall safety of smart meters.[7]
An electronic LexisNexis search of newspaper articles referencing “smart meters” appearing between May 31, 2011, the date WHO classified RF a Class 2B carcinogen, and June 19, 2014, yields close to 839 pieces published in English language papers. Yet for the same time span only one tenth of the sample (82 articles) mentions “smart meters” and “carcinogen” or “carcinogenic” in the same report. Of these, 65 of the articles appeared in Canadian, and to a much lesser degree Australian or UK papers. Note that each sample includes guest editorials and letters to the editor penned by concerned citizens.
Using parameters from the date May 31, 2011, the date WHO declared RF a Class 2B carcinogen, to January 19, 2014, of 93 newspaper articles referencing “smart meter” and “World Health Organization,” 76 were published in Canadian, and to a much lesser degree UK, Australian, Malaysian or New Zealand outlets.
As the above suggests, the extremely limited awareness especially in the US of the potential health consequences of exposure to the continual RF emitted by smart meters is primarily because the issue is being blacked out in the press. When such dangers are reported, they are tempered by the refrain of the FCC’s “thermal effect” policy, which in light of the abundant countervailing research amounts to disinformation.
In December 2013 I contacted the reporter at the local metro-daily Palm Beach Post covering the state power utility, Florida Power and Light, and its smart meter policy to remind her of the bevy of public health and medical research documenting the likely consequences of sustained RF exposure. I also directed her to the WHO statement classifying RF as potentially carcinogenic.
To the Post’s credit a subsequent story highlighting Florida Power and Light’s “opt out” policy referenced the WHO statement. Yet the piece appeared deep in the business section of the paper, and the WHO warning was accompanied by the Florida Public Service Commission’s familiar rejoinder.
In 2011 the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified radio frequency electromagnetic fields such as those emitted by cellular phones, microwaves and smart meters as possibly carcinogenic to humans.
The PSC has said its authority does not extend to health issues related to meters. Smart meters are certified for compliance with radio frequency emission standards by the Federal Communications Commission, and the FCC has deemed that meters in compliance with the standards do not have adverse health impacts.[8]
While one or more hidden agendas likely exist to keep the public unaware of the health dangers associated with RF and smart meters (again, think carbon trading, in addition to the social control possibilities via energy rationing and surveillance soon to be realized through the “smart grid,”) a more immediate cause for such censorship is simply profit and continued media monopoly control of public opinion and discourse.
The telecommunications industry whose services are largely predicated on RF has recently exhibited the largest growth in advertising outlays, which are surely recognized in bottom line terms by the news and media industries.[9] With potential continued revenue growth on this scale, raising questions and relaying information that can safeguard public health and allow citizens to ask intelligent questions concerning the health of themselves and their loved ones simply constitutes poor business practice.
Notes
[2] Ed King, “Obama Promises to Cut Carbon Pollution in Climate Action Plan,” Responding to Climate Change, June 26, 2013.
[3] See, for example, the American Association of Environmental Medicine EMF-RF Reference List (PDF) and AAEM’s April 12, 2012 Press Advisory (PDF).
[4] World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer, “IARC Classifies Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields as Possibly Carcinogenic,” May 31, 2011.
[5] Susan Luzzaro, “Field of Cell Phone Tower Beams,” San Diego Reader, May 18, 2011,
[6] FCC Office of Engineering and Technology, http://www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety. See also James F. Tracy “Wireless Technology and the Accelerated Toxification of America,” memoryholeblog.com, July 7, 2012.
[7] When this author obtained documents through a public records request from the Florida Public Service Commission on Florida Power and Light’s smart meter campaign–a very simple and routine endeavor for any journalist–it was evident that no human health impact studies on statewide smart meter deployment were ever considered. The PSC merely accepted FPL’s rationale and related public relations literature.

Professor James F. Tracy is an Associate Professor of Media Studies at Florida Atlantic University. James Tracy’s work on media history, politics and culture has appeared in a wide variety of academic journals, edited volumes, and alternative news and opinion outlets. James is editor of Union for Democratic Communication’s Journal Democratic Communiqué and a contributor to Project Censored’s forthcoming publication Censored 2013: The Top Censored Stories and Media Analysis of 2011-2012. Additional writings and information are accessible at memoryholeblog.com.

John Kerry Loses It Over GOP Senators’ Letter to Iran… But Look What He Did During the Vietnam War

John Kerry Loses It Over GOP Senators’ Letter to Iran… But Look What He Did During the Vietnam War



When news of the letter that Sen. Tom Cotton and 46 other Republicans sent to Iran hit the press, Secretary of State John Kerry lost his very tenuous uplink to reality and began spouting venom at the opposing party.
“This letter ignores more than two centuries of precedent in the conduct of U.S. foreign policy,” Secretary of State Kerry said, conveniently ignoring the two centuries of constitutional precedent on treaties that the president was ignoring.
According to Politico, Secretary of State Kerry said that during 29 years in the Senate, he had “never heard of or even heard of being proposed anything comparable to this.”
Perhaps while he was in the Senate, no. However, as a young man who was the president of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, Kerry had done almost the exact same thing.
Let’s flash back to 1971, when Kerry was at the helm of the influential anti-war group. President Nixon and Secretary of State Kissinger were trying to negotiate an end to the Vietnam War in France, talks which would eventually produce the 1973 Paris Peace Accords.
During that time, Kerry travelled to Paris to meet with the North Vietnamese delegation, at that time an enemy combatant nation. He met with Madame Nguyen Thi Binh, one of Ho Chi Minh’s top negotiators, in sessions that were possibly illegal and not fully disclosed until Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign.
According to WND, Binh had worked out a scheme where she would undermine the negotiations by painting the United States as being unreasonable. Kerry was deemed the appropriate vessel to carry this message back to the United States, and after their talks in Paris, he did just that.
Kerry threw the weight of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War behind trying to convince America that President Nixon should accept all of North Vietnam’s demands. Keep in mind that the North Vietnamese plan ordered America to withdraw and to pay the North Vietnamese government reparations.
This was all merely so that North Vietnam would, at some point in the future, maybe release our prisoners of war, or at least set a date in which they said they would do so.
Now, it’s possible in hindsight to have differing opinions about the rectitude and wisdom of the Vietnam War.
It isn’t possible, however, to have differing opinions about what John Kerry did. He undermined the position of the American government at the behest of one of its enemies.
And even if the wisdom of the war can be questioned, nobody could claim that the brutal communist regime of North Vietnam had any moral claim great enough for John Kerry to intervene on their behalf.
For John Kerry to whine about the intervention of 47 senators in his questionable negotiations with a pariah state that wants a nuclear weapon is the ultimate hypocrisy, especially when this is a man who spent years undermining the American government during wartime.
It’s that kind of hypocrisy that makes John Kerry the perfect Obama administration official. It’s also the kind of hypocrisy that makes America glad they didn’t vote for this man in 2004.

Chief Justice John Roberts has Signed Off To Have Obama Removed from office for These 25 Charges of Treason.

Chief Justice John Roberts has Signed Off To Have Obama Removed from office for These 25 Charges of Treason.


There’s a bombshell of a rumor going around right now that Chief Justice John Roberts has signed off on Interpol to have Obama removed from office for multiple counts of treason.
The charges are to include declaring war without consent of Congress, Second Amendment infringements, and abuse of the Posse Comitatus Act during the Bundy land dispute.
When Obama was sworn into office he took an oath to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States of America,” however according to the leaked document he’s guilty of the following crimes;
Article 1, Sect. 1
1. Used Executive Privilege in regards to Fast & Furious gun running scandal. When Government misconduct is the concern Executive privilege is negated.
2. Issued 23 Executive Orders on gun control – infringement of the 2nd Amendment.
3. Executive Order bypassing Congress on immigration – Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress.
4. NDAA – Section 1021. Due process Rights negated. Violation of 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th Amendments. White House: ‘War on terrorism’ is over Thursday, August 6, 2009
5. Executive Order 13603 NDRP – Government can seize anything.
6. Executive Order 13524 – Gives INTERPOL jurisdiction on American soil beyond law enforcement agencies, including the FBI.
7. Executive Order 13636 Infrastructure Cyber security – Bypassing Congress
Violations: Article 1 Section 1, Art. 4 sect. 4,
8. Signed into law the establishment of “NO Free Speech Zones” – noncompliance is a felony.
9. Attempt to tax political contributions –
1st. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Article I Section 7. All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.
Violations: 1st Amendment, Art.1 sect. 7
10. Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) Law – Obama directed DOJ ( Dept. of Justice ) to ignore the Constitution and separation of powers and not enforce the law.
Violations:
Article III, Section 3 – Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attained. White House: ‘War on terrorism’ is over Thursday, August 6, 2009
11. Drone strikes on American Citizens – 5th Amendment Due process Rights negated.
Article II Section 2. The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
[The Trading with the Enemy Act (Public Law 65-91, 65th Congress, Session I, Chapters 105, 106, October 6, 1917) ] 18 USC 241 – Sec. 241
Violations : Art. 2 sect.2 , 5th amendment, 18 USC 241 – Sec. 241
12. Bypassed Congress and gave EPA power to advance Cap-n-Trade
Article I Section 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
Violations: Art. 1 Sect. 1
13. Attempt for Graphic tobacco warnings (under appeal) –
Art. 1 sect. 8 Section 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; (see list)
1st Amendment. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Violations: 1st Amendment. Art. 1 sect. 8
14. Four Executive appointments – Senate was NOT in recess (Court has ruled unconstitutional yet the appointees still remain)
Art. 1 sect 2 Section 2. The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.
Art. 1 sect . 5 Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.
Violations: Art. 1 sect 2 & 5 ,
15. Obama took Chairmanship of UN Security Council –
Art 1 Sect. 9. Section 9. The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.
Violation : Art 1 Sect. 9.
16. Obamacare ( A.C.A. ) mandate – SCOTUS (U.S. SupremeCourt ) had to make it a tax because there is no Constitutional authority.
Art. 2 sect. 1 Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:–”I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Violations : Art. 2 sect. 1 , Amendments 1, 2, 9, 10, & 14, Art. 1 sect. 7
18. Healthcare waivers – No president has dispensing powers
1st. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
2nd. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
9th. The enumeration in the Constitution (narrative), of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
10th. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
14th. The Fourteenth Amendment, guaranteeing equal protection for all citizens, was necessary to secure for freed slaves the same rights as whites. Simply ending slavery was not enough. Prior to the Civil War, it was automatic in many states to treat blacks, whatever their status, as second-class citizens. A ruling by a court in Virginia in 1824 stated, without any effort at dissimulation, that, “And, yet, nobody has ever questioned the power of the legislature to deny to free blacks and mulattoes one of the fist privileges of a citizen — that of voting at election.”
Art 1: Sect. 7 All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.
Violations: 1st, 2, 9,10, & 14th Amendment, Art 1: Sect. 7
19. Refuses to acknowledge state’s 10th Amendment rights to nullify Obamacare ( Affordable Care Act ) .
Article I Section 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
Violation: Art. 1 sect. 1 , Art. 2. sect. 1 , 10th Amendment
20. Congress did not approve Obama’s war in Libya. Article I, Section 8, First illegal war U.S. has engaged in. Impeachable under Article II, Section 4. Obama falsely claims UN can usurp Congressional war powers.
Violations: Article I, Section 8, Art.2 sect. 1
21. Obama has acted outside the constitutional power given him – this in itself is unconstitutional.
Violations: Art. 2 sect 1
22. With the approval of Obama, the NSA and the FBI are tapping directly into the servers of 9 internet companies to gain access to emails, video/audio, photos, documents, etc. This program is code named PRISM. NSA also collecting data on all phone calls in U.S. Violation of 4th Amendment.
Violations: 4th Amendment.
23. Plans to sign U.N. Firearms treaty – 2nd Amendment.
Violation: 2nd ,4th, 9th, 10th , & 14TH Amendment, Art.1 Sect. 4 , Art. 2 sect. 1
24. The Senate/Obama immigration bill (approved by both) raises revenue – Section 7. All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives;
Violations: Art. 1 sect 4th, 7 , & 8th, Art. 2 sect. 1, Art. 4 sect. 4,
25. Obama refuses to uphold the Business Mandate Law (ACA) for a year. President does not have that authority – Article. I. Section. 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States. The president ”shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed” Article II, Section 3.

High Court To Decide If Texas Violated Freedom Of Speech Over Confederate Flag License Plate


High Court To Decide If Texas Violated Freedom Of Speech Over Confederate Flag License Plate



High Court Will Decide If License Plates Are Freedom Of Speech
On Monday, the Supreme Court will hear a case that may decide if a Confederate license plate may be denied. The case, which is viewed as a First Amendment issue, is one of many high profile cases the high court has on its docket this year. In addition to the freedom of speech case, the court also has an important marriage equality case to decide.


_____________________________________________________________
The First Amendment case, which originated back in 2009, was considered important enough to be heard by the high court. The question that the Supreme Court must decide is, does the license plate speak for the government or the individual? This has been a question for years concerning many First Amendment issues.
In 2009, the Texas branch of the Sons of Confederate Veterans submitted a design for a specialty license plate. The design included the Confederate flag, and the intention was to honor to the men who fought for the Confederacy in the Civil War. At that point, the Department of Motor Vehicles board voted on the proposal after receiving many opinions against the plate. The license plate was denied twice, and the reason was the DMV board felt the design was an offensive celebration of slavery.
The SCV then sued the DMV, stating the denial of the specialty license plate was a clear violation of free speech. Texas responded by saying that since license plates were government property, they could decide what went on them.
A federal court then ruled in favor of the state and dismissed the lawsuit. The case was revived when the Fifth US Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the ruling. The court concluded that the DMV board engaged in censorship of free speech based on the viewpoint it conveyed.
The irony is that Texas does celebrate an annual Confederate Heroes Day, but the state asserted in their brief that it “is fully within its rights to exclude swastikas, sacrilege, and overt racism from state-issued license plates that bear the State’s name and imprimatur.”
The SCV shot back that since the state of Texas already does acknowledge a Confederate holiday, how do they find this license plate offensive? The state not only celebrates this particular holiday, but they also fly the Confederate flag on the grounds of the Texas capitol. R. James George, a lawyer representing the SCV, asserts that the state of Texas is being hypocritical.
“The State apparently does not believe that the ‘message’ of the Confederate flag is offensive to the public, or, if it is offensive, the State certainly does not shy away from its expression because of such offense.”
Of course, Texas came back with their own response to the U.S. Supreme Court, saying they have done nothing to censor freedom of speech.
“The respondents have every right to decorate their cars with bumper stickers or placards that display the Confederate battle flag. But they cannot commandeer the state into promoting the Confederate battle flag on a state-issued license plate.”
The state’s brief to the high court also asserts the SCV is attempting to make Texas promote an image they do not wish to be associated with.
“The [Sons of Confederate Veterans] are not seeking to vindicate their freedom of speech; they are trying to coerce the State of Texas into propagating a message and image that it does not wish to convey,”
Texas Solicitor General Scott Keller is arguing to the high court that if they allow this particular plate to be released to the public, what other plates will be allowed? At the present time, other states have issued license plates that express a pro-life stance. Does that then mean that there should be a Respect Choice plate?
Solicitor General Keller argues in his brief to the court, “States that issue Fight Terrorism or World War II Veteran plates should not be compelled to print license plates approving of Al Qaeda or the Nazi party,”
SCV Attorney George contends that the question of whether this is individual speech or if the government is promoting a viewpoint has never truly been addressed.
“The specialty plates at issue here are either private speech or government speech, if they are private speech, the [Texas board] cannot discriminate based on viewpoint, and offensiveness is an impermissible standard. If they are government speech, the government is free to say whatever it wants.”
A decision from the high court is expected late in June, 2015.
[Image Credit Texas Department of Motor Vehicles/Handout

How Ted Cruz Plans to Win the Presidency in 2016



How Ted Cruz Plans to Win the Presidency in 2016......






Teddy boy is an attorney, one of the corporate Con-gress, his wife
is the VP of Goldman Sachs one of the CABAL banks.....He is no one I want to see running our country. He says he wants Christian votes.... he needs to start behaving like a Christian..... I double dog dare you to check out his voting record....
Definition of a Christian attorney??.....................Oxymoron....


During an interview last month at CPAC, Sen. Ted Cruz holds nothing back when explaining what it will take to win the presidency in 2016. With his decision Monday to officially run for the White House, The Daily Signal brings you this never-before-seen clip.
Put simply, Cruz says a moderately conservative establishment candidate like Bob Dole, John McCain or Mitt Romney won’t work this time around. Cruz says he’s going after a bigger turnout of the evangelical vote and those former “Reagan Democrats” who he believes are a crucial constituency that’s turned away from the GOP for a long time.
>>> Ted Cruz Appeals to Liberty at Start of 2016 Race for President
Video courtesy of CBN News.

What We Can Learn From Patrick Henry’s ‘Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death’ Speech.....

What We Can Learn From Patrick Henry’s ‘Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death’ Speech.....


Patrick Henry delivering his "give me liberty or give me death" speech. (Photo: World History Archive/Newscom)
Two hundred forty years ago today, Patrick Henry made his immortal cry, “Give me liberty or give me death!”
The statement came at the end of a speech Henry made to the Virginia House of Burgesses. As Henry spoke, Great Britain was preparing to use force to reduce the American colonies to a state of obedience. His words spurred the movement of resistance that, in the end, succeeded in establishing a new, independent republic in America.
Henry’s speech stands out in the annals of American rhetoric not only because of its memorable conclusion, but also because of its lack of documentation. It may be the most important American political speech of which we have no contemporary written record. Henry evidently spoke from no prepared text, or if he did have such a text, he preserved no copy of it.
No written record was made of the speech at the time it was made, and it fell to Henry’s biographer, William Wirt, to try to reconstruct it many years later from the reminiscences of men who were present when it was delivered, especially St. George Tucker.

It might seem imprudent for Wirt to have produced such a reconstruction, since—relying on the memories of others, after a lapse of so many years—he could have had no clear idea of the exact phrases that Henry had used, except perhaps in the case of especially striking ones like the famous concluding sentence.
Nevertheless, we should be grateful that he did it. Wirt’s version eventually became as important to Americans generally as Henry’s original speech was to the Virginians of 1775. Wirt’s reconstruction has appeared in collections of American literature and has been read by countless American students over the years (and probably memorized by more than a few). Wirt’s version of the speech therefore helped to secure Henry’s honored place in American memory, and at the same time placed on the record an expression—“give me liberty or give me death”—that captures part of the spirit of the revolutionary generation.
Moreover, we can learn things of lasting value from Wirt’s reconstruction of Henry’s famous speech. We cannot be sure how precisely Wirt captured Henry’s words or the exact contours of his argument. Nevertheless, it is safe to take the reconstruction as an expression of the mind of the founders. That is, we can surely say that it is the kind of speech that would have been given by an American of the revolutionary generation, that it appealed to the ideas to which those Americans were committed and by which they guided their steps.
Specifically, the speech can remind today’s Americans of three important political virtues, virtues as relevant to Patrick Henry’s time as to ours.
First, the speech reminds us of the importance of both civility and candor to a healthy politics. Perhaps surprisingly in view of its impassioned ending, the speech begins by noting the importance of civility. Henry opens his remarks by acknowledging the “patriotism, as well as the abilities” of those who spoke on the other side of the issue. He disclaims any intention to be “disrespectful” to them.
Nevertheless, the speech also points to the need for a candid civility. The stakes in play—freedom or slavery—require each citizen to speak his mind forthrightly. Only on the basis of such open debate, after all, can we “hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility we hold to God and our country.” Civility means not seeking to give offense. It does not mean avoiding hard truths because they may offend others.
Second, the speech is an exercise in prudence, and it therefore teaches us something about prudence. According to Aristotle, prudence is the virtue by which we know how to act for the best in the circumstances we face. Thus understood, prudence involves complex political judgments, and it cannot be reduced to a simple formula. We often try to do this, however, and especially to reduce prudence to caution.
Henry, however, suggested that a prudent regard for “experience” taught in this case the need for bold, immediate action. All of the colonists’ experience, he argued, showed that further argument with the British would be fruitless. The government of Great Britain was preparing to use force to bring the colonies to heel, and so prudence rejected further delays and called instead for immediate resistance—before the British force in America grew so strong that such resistance would become impossible.
Finally and most obviously, the speech shows forth a spirit of courage. According to Aristotle, courage is the virtue that faces death for a good cause. The speech is a call to arms—not figuratively as the expression “call to arms” is often used, but literally a call to armed resistance against the British. Henry’s electrifying final words—“give me liberty or give me death”—remind us that finally a just freedom can be held securely only by those who are willing to risk everything to preserve it.
The American founders were both moral and political realists. As moral realists, they believed that there is a real moral order to nature, and that this moral order includes certain rights that belong to human beings by virtue of their humanity. As political realists, however, they also realized that human beings tend to be selfish and weak, and that they therefore are often prone to violate the rights of others. In sum, humans want to be free themselves but are also tempted to oppress others.
On this ground, the founders understood that freedom and rights can only be enjoyed reliably by a people willing to exert themselves to win and hold them. Henry’s words remind us that in the extreme case—a case that does not arise every day, but will arise more often than we would like—we have to be willing to fight and risk death if we wish to remain free.