In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Bush,Government,Alphabet agencies
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Bush and "freedoms"
by Ed Lewis
"It is fitting that we remember those who sacrificed," he said, "because today we defend our freedoms. We defend our freedoms against people who can't stand freedom." ~ George W. Bush - May 27, 2002
Just what freedoms is this man talking about?
Is it the freedom to have to get State permission to get married?
Is it the freedom to pay out 50 percent of earnings to a foreign banking system known as the Federal Reserve Bank?
Is it the freedom to pay cities, counties, and States payments (a form of direct taxation) so you can keep your private real estate property, property no government has any proprietary interests in unless you purchased it through State or federal franchise resulting in it to being defined as "real property"?
Is it the freedom to use your talents to start a business with government permission only? Yes, that is what a "business license" is - government permission.
Is it to the freedom to arm yourself for protection against criminals, governments, and any others who would harm you and yours but only if granted by government?
Is it the freedom to see that your children are properly educated both generally and in the truth of how, why, and the Christian (not the pseudo Judeo-Christian) basis for the establishment of this union of states?
Is it the freedom to give a state an interest in your automobile so the state can issue you a commercial license plate on which it is stated clearly the automobile belongs to the State? And, for you to pay an annual fee to the state?
Is it the freedom to be forced by law enforcers and corrupted courts to get a sticker on your automobile that says you can use public streets within your town?
Is it the freedom to have to respond to Gestapo police tactics, such as checkpoints?
Is it the freedom to point out to law enforcers during "arrests" that you are the sovereign, that laws made to government artificial persons do not apply to natural persons, that "persons" in the statutes are defined as artificial entities and support this with multiple Supreme Court rulings?
Is it the freedom to then drive off in your automobile or truck after telling the law enforcer you are not a "driver" or "operator", that your conveyance is not a motor vehicle, and that you are not engaging in any franchised corporate commercial action?
Is it the freedom to have your property seized and stolen by government entities through extortion, theft, false and misleading documents, and racketeering practices by the dozens?
Is it the freedom of justice in which some black-robed corrupted judge makes law from his "bench", an artificial person who is essentially an officer of the State and ruling in a de facto law manner and not of the people?
Is it the freedom of justice that prevents you from being able to face your accused in accusations made that force you into government courts NOT made by the people in Article III of the Constitution, that government forces you into courts of equity based on de facto laws that are only for artificial persons and then prevents you from facing your accuser? And, no, the law enforcer is not your accuser - your accuser must be a fellow sovereign natural person, not the state as represented by the law enforcer (the principal is the agent and the agent is the principle).
Is it the freedom to walk out of the military court (indicated by the yellow-fringed flag of military origin and military tribunals) for it failing to produce a bona fide complaint by a fellow sovereign citizen?
Is it the freedom to ignore summons into courts of equity and then be arrested for failure to appear, even though such statutes apply only to artificial entities created by the government, not to men and women created naturally?
Is it the freedom of justice that allows courts to prohibit any defenses based on the Constitution and the laws of God?
Is it the freedom of justice that allows a court - meaning the judge - to throw out specific statutes of jurisdiction that free you from any violation based on man-made laws?
Is it the freedom to tell a judge he is an idiot ignorant of the Constitution and is conspiring with other traitors to violate your rights by ignoring his oath of office and demands made of judges by the Constitution, and then just walk out?
Is it the freedom to tell city officials (not even a bona fide government under the Constitution) to kiss off, that your property is your property not under their jurisdiction and then have the judge throw out supportive statutes?
Is it the freedom to defend yourself against any law enforcer who threatens you with force by either placing his hand on his weapon, having his weapon drawn as he approaches, or holding his baton in hand thumping it, and demanding you get out of your automobile so he can violate many other self-evident and enumerated rights?
Crap, this could go on for who knows how long but the point is that "freedom" is an unknown concept to the dull-witted Bush. What he calls "freedom" is the freedom for government to do as it wishes.
It is he and the other traitors like him, including Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, the one must suspect fall guy for government's prior knowledge of WTC - Mueller of the FBI, the hundreds of CIA operatives killing leaders and notable others in other nations to overthrow governments, and the chickenshit groups of people known as the US Congress and the Supreme Court. These are the people who hate the freedoms the American people are supposed to have.
You can add to the list of freedom haters law enforcers, judges, prosecuting attorneys, Bar attorneys, the Federal Reserve owners, Zionist Jews controlling mainstream media, any anti-Christian propaganda by any group whatever, such as freemasons, those who label truth sayers as ''conspiracy theorists", militants, right-wing radicals, all State and political subdivisions of governments, and enforcers for the IRS, BATF, and DEA, just to name a few more.
These are those who have robbed us of our freedom and enforce their tyranny on us through armed force and other extortive means. These are those that are the enemy, not some people off in other lands far removed from us. The people in the far off lands, excepting for the governments, want no more than what we want - the freedom to live our lives as we want, not as some lame-duck person such as Bush dictates. Read about Muslims and other religions rather than taking the word of Jews who control the media and the fools in government misleading the American people.
Adding to the supposition above - that Bush's "freedom" is for the government to do as it wishes - Bush the Demented has decided he wants to return the power of the president as it used to be. This shows how incredibly stupid and ignorant the man truly is. What he actually wants to do is establish himself as a monarch, just as he stated as soon as the Supreme Court unlawfully placed him as president, and has no intentions of returning presidential powers to the very limited power the president used to have - and still does according to the Constitution.
So, to illuminate him in something besides the light of Satan he often salutes, below is the only authority of the President of the United States. It is the authority the chickenshits in Congress haven't the authority to change. It is the authority given by the people that chickenshit traitors in the Supreme Court haven't the authority to change by its interpreting the Constitution as they want in order to meet treasonous ends. The language is clear and easily understood.
Read it and - by all that is Holy - understand that the presidents of the United States have for generations been acting as monarchs. The many congresses, along with Supreme Court traitors, have been allowing it. Why?
Well, common sense dictates that either they were threatened if they didn't go along with treasonous actions or promised that if they did, they would become millionaires - or, at least increase their net worth tremendously. Then, of course, there is the increase in their own feelings of power over other people, that somehow they are above the people simply because they were elected or put in office by unknown controllers of the corrupted. How absurd.
Anyway, once more here is the authority given the United States President. Each is taken from Article II of the Constitution.
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the military of the United States but not of the militia unless called into actual service of the United States. Section 2, Clause 1. Note: Thus, the US Government fights against the militia of the people since it is not under its jurisdiction or the jurisdiction of any State. It is solely of the people.
He may grant Reprieves and Pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment. Section 2, Clause 1. Thus, he may NOT pardon for any crime not directly against the United States or for treason and dozens of other racketeering processes by government employees.
He will be the meter and greeter of Ambassadors and other public ministers. Section 2, Clause 2.
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate. Section 2, Clause 3.
And, most important of all is this quote:
". he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." Section 3
I know Bush lovers and others who believe the government works to preserve our freedoms are not going to believe this, that a President actually hasn't any authority to do much of anything. Remain fools if you wish but his primary duty is to preserve the law of the Constitution, not the laws made by Congress, or by any other agency/bureau head or whatever. And, he certainly does not have the authority to make laws applying to God's creation - We, the People - and to the many Republics known as States.
The only law-making authority is given to Congress but even it does not have power to make laws regarding our rights, whether enumerated or merely self-evident, nor does it have the authority to make laws concerning the many States. Its authority is to make laws governing the federal government and, in part, assuring it does not violate human rights.
People such as Bush who conceive of themselves as kings over men - possible through many years of excessive use of drugs or in drunken stupors - are nothing in reality other than other human beings with the same biological processes and psychological needs. They are not your "bosses" and haven't any authority to make any "law", nor to force those laws upon the people LAWFULLY. They may only do so at the point of a firearm or other weapon, including weapons such as creating terror in the people amongst other means of coercion.
Thus, the tool of the demented people we now have in government is terror and fear of retribution, either through alleged acts of terrorism by persons unknown to date in most cases, or acts done directly by law enforcers of not only the federal government, but also by State and political subdivisions, the latter of which hasn't any authority whatsoever over people.
And, now this stupid man ignorant of the principles of this nation and his job wants to create a monarchy/dictatorship for himself.
Good God, People, every action taken and every statement by this man since he was unlawfully put into the White House are acts of treason and his statements smack of treason when applied practically. He is not fighting for freedom of the people - he and his controllers are fighting for increased control of the people of this nation - the antithesis of "freedom".
Say what you will but the man (and his immediate collaborators in corruption - Cheney and that Fleischer guy who also pretend to understand liberty and our freedoms - along with every appointee by Reagan, Bush, Ford, Clinton, and Bush, along with the heads of every "agency" (most are bureaus lacking any jurisdiction over the people of the many States) of the US Government, and the members of Congress who respond to threats and other coercive pressures, or respond willingly with treasonous votes, should be tried for multiple war crimes, treason, racketeering, extortion, false documentation, SEC violations, and on and on.
Just as an added note - and once again - secrecy by government is forbidden. The people must be informed. See Title 5 and search this out for yourself. And, while you read through the many statutes, remember they apply only to the US Government and its jurisdiction, not to the people of the many States.
Lord, how I pray the American people wake up to the rotting process by the US Government of this once great country, particularly the unholy stench caused by the utter and complete corruption of the Bush Cartel, its lackeys, and those behind the scenes controllers, such as the Federal Reserve owners (look up the relationship between them and the freemasons and Zionism) and the unchristian and deadly group to the most of mankind - the Zionist Jews.
And, I pray it happens soon.
Ed Lewis is a veteran writer, having been published in many online journals and newspapers. Mr. Lewis, a Missourian dedicated to liberty and truth, may be reached for comment at elewis@mail.shighway.com
http://www.libertyforall.net/2002/archive/bush-and-freedom.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
by Ed Lewis
"It is fitting that we remember those who sacrificed," he said, "because today we defend our freedoms. We defend our freedoms against people who can't stand freedom." ~ George W. Bush - May 27, 2002
Just what freedoms is this man talking about?
Is it the freedom to have to get State permission to get married?
Is it the freedom to pay out 50 percent of earnings to a foreign banking system known as the Federal Reserve Bank?
Is it the freedom to pay cities, counties, and States payments (a form of direct taxation) so you can keep your private real estate property, property no government has any proprietary interests in unless you purchased it through State or federal franchise resulting in it to being defined as "real property"?
Is it the freedom to use your talents to start a business with government permission only? Yes, that is what a "business license" is - government permission.
Is it to the freedom to arm yourself for protection against criminals, governments, and any others who would harm you and yours but only if granted by government?
Is it the freedom to see that your children are properly educated both generally and in the truth of how, why, and the Christian (not the pseudo Judeo-Christian) basis for the establishment of this union of states?
Is it the freedom to give a state an interest in your automobile so the state can issue you a commercial license plate on which it is stated clearly the automobile belongs to the State? And, for you to pay an annual fee to the state?
Is it the freedom to be forced by law enforcers and corrupted courts to get a sticker on your automobile that says you can use public streets within your town?
Is it the freedom to have to respond to Gestapo police tactics, such as checkpoints?
Is it the freedom to point out to law enforcers during "arrests" that you are the sovereign, that laws made to government artificial persons do not apply to natural persons, that "persons" in the statutes are defined as artificial entities and support this with multiple Supreme Court rulings?
Is it the freedom to then drive off in your automobile or truck after telling the law enforcer you are not a "driver" or "operator", that your conveyance is not a motor vehicle, and that you are not engaging in any franchised corporate commercial action?
Is it the freedom to have your property seized and stolen by government entities through extortion, theft, false and misleading documents, and racketeering practices by the dozens?
Is it the freedom of justice in which some black-robed corrupted judge makes law from his "bench", an artificial person who is essentially an officer of the State and ruling in a de facto law manner and not of the people?
Is it the freedom of justice that prevents you from being able to face your accused in accusations made that force you into government courts NOT made by the people in Article III of the Constitution, that government forces you into courts of equity based on de facto laws that are only for artificial persons and then prevents you from facing your accuser? And, no, the law enforcer is not your accuser - your accuser must be a fellow sovereign natural person, not the state as represented by the law enforcer (the principal is the agent and the agent is the principle).
Is it the freedom to walk out of the military court (indicated by the yellow-fringed flag of military origin and military tribunals) for it failing to produce a bona fide complaint by a fellow sovereign citizen?
Is it the freedom to ignore summons into courts of equity and then be arrested for failure to appear, even though such statutes apply only to artificial entities created by the government, not to men and women created naturally?
Is it the freedom of justice that allows courts to prohibit any defenses based on the Constitution and the laws of God?
Is it the freedom of justice that allows a court - meaning the judge - to throw out specific statutes of jurisdiction that free you from any violation based on man-made laws?
Is it the freedom to tell a judge he is an idiot ignorant of the Constitution and is conspiring with other traitors to violate your rights by ignoring his oath of office and demands made of judges by the Constitution, and then just walk out?
Is it the freedom to tell city officials (not even a bona fide government under the Constitution) to kiss off, that your property is your property not under their jurisdiction and then have the judge throw out supportive statutes?
Is it the freedom to defend yourself against any law enforcer who threatens you with force by either placing his hand on his weapon, having his weapon drawn as he approaches, or holding his baton in hand thumping it, and demanding you get out of your automobile so he can violate many other self-evident and enumerated rights?
Crap, this could go on for who knows how long but the point is that "freedom" is an unknown concept to the dull-witted Bush. What he calls "freedom" is the freedom for government to do as it wishes.
It is he and the other traitors like him, including Cheney, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, the one must suspect fall guy for government's prior knowledge of WTC - Mueller of the FBI, the hundreds of CIA operatives killing leaders and notable others in other nations to overthrow governments, and the chickenshit groups of people known as the US Congress and the Supreme Court. These are the people who hate the freedoms the American people are supposed to have.
You can add to the list of freedom haters law enforcers, judges, prosecuting attorneys, Bar attorneys, the Federal Reserve owners, Zionist Jews controlling mainstream media, any anti-Christian propaganda by any group whatever, such as freemasons, those who label truth sayers as ''conspiracy theorists", militants, right-wing radicals, all State and political subdivisions of governments, and enforcers for the IRS, BATF, and DEA, just to name a few more.
These are those who have robbed us of our freedom and enforce their tyranny on us through armed force and other extortive means. These are those that are the enemy, not some people off in other lands far removed from us. The people in the far off lands, excepting for the governments, want no more than what we want - the freedom to live our lives as we want, not as some lame-duck person such as Bush dictates. Read about Muslims and other religions rather than taking the word of Jews who control the media and the fools in government misleading the American people.
Adding to the supposition above - that Bush's "freedom" is for the government to do as it wishes - Bush the Demented has decided he wants to return the power of the president as it used to be. This shows how incredibly stupid and ignorant the man truly is. What he actually wants to do is establish himself as a monarch, just as he stated as soon as the Supreme Court unlawfully placed him as president, and has no intentions of returning presidential powers to the very limited power the president used to have - and still does according to the Constitution.
So, to illuminate him in something besides the light of Satan he often salutes, below is the only authority of the President of the United States. It is the authority the chickenshits in Congress haven't the authority to change. It is the authority given by the people that chickenshit traitors in the Supreme Court haven't the authority to change by its interpreting the Constitution as they want in order to meet treasonous ends. The language is clear and easily understood.
Read it and - by all that is Holy - understand that the presidents of the United States have for generations been acting as monarchs. The many congresses, along with Supreme Court traitors, have been allowing it. Why?
Well, common sense dictates that either they were threatened if they didn't go along with treasonous actions or promised that if they did, they would become millionaires - or, at least increase their net worth tremendously. Then, of course, there is the increase in their own feelings of power over other people, that somehow they are above the people simply because they were elected or put in office by unknown controllers of the corrupted. How absurd.
Anyway, once more here is the authority given the United States President. Each is taken from Article II of the Constitution.
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the military of the United States but not of the militia unless called into actual service of the United States. Section 2, Clause 1. Note: Thus, the US Government fights against the militia of the people since it is not under its jurisdiction or the jurisdiction of any State. It is solely of the people.
He may grant Reprieves and Pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment. Section 2, Clause 1. Thus, he may NOT pardon for any crime not directly against the United States or for treason and dozens of other racketeering processes by government employees.
He will be the meter and greeter of Ambassadors and other public ministers. Section 2, Clause 2.
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate. Section 2, Clause 3.
And, most important of all is this quote:
". he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." Section 3
I know Bush lovers and others who believe the government works to preserve our freedoms are not going to believe this, that a President actually hasn't any authority to do much of anything. Remain fools if you wish but his primary duty is to preserve the law of the Constitution, not the laws made by Congress, or by any other agency/bureau head or whatever. And, he certainly does not have the authority to make laws applying to God's creation - We, the People - and to the many Republics known as States.
The only law-making authority is given to Congress but even it does not have power to make laws regarding our rights, whether enumerated or merely self-evident, nor does it have the authority to make laws concerning the many States. Its authority is to make laws governing the federal government and, in part, assuring it does not violate human rights.
People such as Bush who conceive of themselves as kings over men - possible through many years of excessive use of drugs or in drunken stupors - are nothing in reality other than other human beings with the same biological processes and psychological needs. They are not your "bosses" and haven't any authority to make any "law", nor to force those laws upon the people LAWFULLY. They may only do so at the point of a firearm or other weapon, including weapons such as creating terror in the people amongst other means of coercion.
Thus, the tool of the demented people we now have in government is terror and fear of retribution, either through alleged acts of terrorism by persons unknown to date in most cases, or acts done directly by law enforcers of not only the federal government, but also by State and political subdivisions, the latter of which hasn't any authority whatsoever over people.
And, now this stupid man ignorant of the principles of this nation and his job wants to create a monarchy/dictatorship for himself.
Good God, People, every action taken and every statement by this man since he was unlawfully put into the White House are acts of treason and his statements smack of treason when applied practically. He is not fighting for freedom of the people - he and his controllers are fighting for increased control of the people of this nation - the antithesis of "freedom".
Say what you will but the man (and his immediate collaborators in corruption - Cheney and that Fleischer guy who also pretend to understand liberty and our freedoms - along with every appointee by Reagan, Bush, Ford, Clinton, and Bush, along with the heads of every "agency" (most are bureaus lacking any jurisdiction over the people of the many States) of the US Government, and the members of Congress who respond to threats and other coercive pressures, or respond willingly with treasonous votes, should be tried for multiple war crimes, treason, racketeering, extortion, false documentation, SEC violations, and on and on.
Just as an added note - and once again - secrecy by government is forbidden. The people must be informed. See Title 5 and search this out for yourself. And, while you read through the many statutes, remember they apply only to the US Government and its jurisdiction, not to the people of the many States.
Lord, how I pray the American people wake up to the rotting process by the US Government of this once great country, particularly the unholy stench caused by the utter and complete corruption of the Bush Cartel, its lackeys, and those behind the scenes controllers, such as the Federal Reserve owners (look up the relationship between them and the freemasons and Zionism) and the unchristian and deadly group to the most of mankind - the Zionist Jews.
And, I pray it happens soon.
Ed Lewis is a veteran writer, having been published in many online journals and newspapers. Mr. Lewis, a Missourian dedicated to liberty and truth, may be reached for comment at elewis@mail.shighway.com
http://www.libertyforall.net/2002/archive/bush-and-freedom.html
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Comments
By ALISON MITCHELL and DAVID FIRESTONE
The New York Times
WASHINGTON - The FBI and the CIA would be required to turn over intelligence reports on terror threats to the proposed Department of Homeland Security, White House officials said Tuesday in submitting a bill to Congress that would reorganize much of official Washington.
The bill would also remove the State Department's traditional authority to issue visas and transfer it to the new department, although the secretary of state would still be able to deny visas for foreign policy reasons. State Department consular officials around the world would continue to issue the visas through a grant of authority from the homeland security secretary.
The White House measure, which must now pass through many hands at the Capitol, is a clear response to congressional concerns that the new Cabinet-level department would be too detached from the FBI and the CIA. An analysis by the White House that accompanied the bill to Capitol Hill said that all executive agencies have "an affirmative obligation" to submit such reports.
The bill does not require the agencies to turn over raw intelligence material, such as tapes or transcripts of clandestine conversations, but a White House official said such material probably would be submitted to the department regularly, upon request. The department could also direct other agencies, including the FBI, to take necessary measures to protect the nation from specific threats, according to the bill.
As an indication of its importance to the Bush administration, the bill was drafted in the White House, only the third time that this has been done.
The decision to give the department such unambiguous powers to collect intelligence information and protect the nation seemed to placate some in Congress who had been concerned that the department was incomplete without the FBI and the CIA.
"The question was the FBI and the CIA - can they talk to one another?" said House Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Flower Mound, who earlier had expressed concern about the separation between law enforcement and the department. "If they're both required to talk to the secretary, then they're talking to each other."
Also Tuesday, FBI Director Robert Mueller, CIA Director George Tenet and National Security Agency Director Lt. Gen. Michael Hayden appeared together behind closed doors before the joint inquiry of the House and Senate intelligence committees.
Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Bob Graham, D-Fla., said afterward that "there were lapses, in my judgment, in all three" agencies.
This report contains material from The Associated Press
ONLINE: White House, www.whitehouse.gov http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/news/nation/3498457.htm
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
1992 Ruby Ridge standoff left question of immunity for agents unresolved
By Gail Gibson
Sun Staff
Originally published June 19, 2002
As prosecutors in Anne Arundel County prepare to ask a grand jury whether an FBI agent who mistakenly shot an unarmed man should be indicted, they face a confusing legal roadmap stemming from one of the most divisive events in recent FBI history - the deadly standoff at Ruby Ridge, Idaho.
When the 11-day siege at separatist Randy Weaver's cabin ended in August 1992, state prosecutors in Idaho took the rare step of bringing involuntary manslaughter charges against the FBI sharpshooter who shot and killed Weaver's wife.
What followed was a lengthy legal battle, but ultimately little clarity, on the question of whether federal agents should stand trial in state court for actions taken in the line of duty.
A federal appeals court rejected claims that Special Agent Lon T. Horiuchi was immune from state prosecution because he was acting in his official capacity when he killed Vicki Weaver. But the ruling was rendered moot after a new Idaho prosecutor decided last year to throw out the case.
"For all the Sturm und Drang, which took place over almost a decade, very little came of it," former U.S. Solicitor General Seth P. Waxman said yesterday. Waxman argued against Horiuchi standing trial, and he maintains that resolving the issue for future cases is critical.
"Subjecting federal officers to state criminal sanctions for acts that carry out their federally appointed duties would make it impossible for the federal government to function," Waxman told law students at the University of Kansas this year.
The issue is expected to be revived before an Anne Arundel County grand jury next week. Prosecutors will ask the panel to decide whether Special Agent Christopher Braga, who is assigned to the FBI's Baltimore field office, should be indicted for the March 1 shooting of an unarmed Pasadena man.
Joseph Charles Schultz, 20, was shot in the face with an M-4 rifle by Braga, who was part of an FBI team searching that day for a bank robbery suspect. The shooting was the result of mistaken identity, FBI officials quickly acknowledged. Schultz, who survived the shooting, had nothing to do with the crime.
Charles F. Peterson, a criminal defense attorney who represented Weaver, said such a review is appropriate.
"The reason that a state grand jury should consider indicting a federal agent is to protect a state's interest in enforcing its laws - no matter whether it's a federal agent involved or not," Peterson said yesterday, speaking by phone from his office in Boise, Idaho.
For a prosecutor making such a decision, Peterson said that in Idaho's later-abandoned case against Horiuchi, "you at least have a road map for where it might go in the courts."
Horiuchi, a trained sniper, was part of an FBI hostage rescue team rushed to the Weavers' cabin in 1992 after an attempt to serve a warrant erupted in gunfire that left a deputy U.S. marshal and Weaver's teen-age son dead. During the ensuing siege, Horiuchi fired the shot that struck Vicki Weaver in the head, killing her as she held her infant daughter.
After he was charged in state court, Horiuchi filed an appeal in federal court, asking that the case be dismissed based on his immunity claim. A federal district judge granted Horiuchi's request, and a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Court of Appeals upheld that decision.
Early last June, however, the full 9th Circuit reversed that finding. In a 6-5 ruling, the appeals judges said that Horiuchi could be tried if evidence showed he acted illegally in his official capacity. Less than a week later, the new Idaho prosecutor who had inherited the case announced that he was dropping it.
In a statement, prosecutor Brett Benson said "too much time has passed," and that the case "would probably not stick."
The 9th Circuit decision was vacated after Benson's decision - leaving as the leading Supreme Court precedent an 1890 case in which California authorities tried to prosecute a deputy U.S. marshal who, while assigned to protect Supreme Court Justice Stephen Field, shot an unhappy - but unarmed - litigant who had stormed the judge's dining car.
The high court in 1890 immunized the federal marshal from state prosecution, writing that if in carrying out his federal law-enforcement duties, "he did no more than what was necessary and proper for him to do, he cannot be guilty of a crime under the law of the state of California."
The 9th Circuit judges acknowledged that immunity for federal agents, but said it has limits.
"When an agent acts in an objectively unreasonable manner, those limits are exceeded, and a state may bring a criminal prosecution," the court said.
Its ruling drew intense discussion and attention. Waxman argued the federal government's position that Horiuchi should not face state charges. Four former U.S. attorneys general filed a brief supporting the government's position.
Ira H. Raphaelson, a former U.S. attorney in Chicago and one of the lawyers who represented the attorneys general, said yesterday that federal criminal and civil justice systems are the proper place to review the actions of a federal agent.
"You can't have 50 states determining what is the standard of conduct for federal agents," Raphaelson said.
http://www.sunspot.net/news/custom/guns/bal-md.fbi19jun19.story?coll=bal-crime-headlines
Copyright c 2002, The Baltimore Sun
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Many in Congress are so terrified the FBI will blackmail them, they are afraid to criticize the Bureau.
A top aide to Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) told the New York Times that many Congressmen and Senators won't speak out against the FBI "because rightly or wrongly, they think the FBI will find dirt on them, and it will wind up in the public domain."
Kris Kolesnik, who was Grassley's chief investigator for 18 years, told the New York Times that the Iowa Republican has been more vocal than other Senators "because he's such a Boy Scout; he has no skeletons in his closet."
The Times reported today how little criticism about the FBI has emanated from Capitol Hill, with the sharpest criticism of the FBI and CIA "has not come from liberal Democrats but from two conservative Republican senators," Grassley and Richard Shelby of Alabama.
"Mr. Grassley, a senior member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, speaks almost daily nowadays about the 'culture of arrogance' and the 'cowboy mentality' at the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Mr. Shelby, the top Republican on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, tells anyone who asks that George J. Tenet, the director of central intelligence, has failed in his job and should resign."
Grassley said: "I consider myself more a watchdog than a critic. The FBI seems to be the one now that needs some watchdogging."
The two senators aren't especially close, the Times says, but "speak almost as one when they blame Congress for being too deferential over the years" to the FBI and CIA.
"Everyone's in awe of them," Grassley scoffed. "Everyone just melts in their presence, and so they have always gotten a long leash. I think that may change now."
"You can be too cozy with the people you are supposed to have oversight of," Shelby said. "I don't think that's healthy. And I think that after Sept. 11, it's going to be different."
Kolesnik's comments are sure to spark speculation about which Capitol Hill power brokers fear being blackmailed by the FBI, and why. Here's one case where lame-duck Rep. Gary Condit is not alone. http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2002/6/19/190656
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
Posted: June 20, 2002
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Editor's note: WorldNetDaily Editor, Chief Executive Officer and daily columnist Joseph Farah is working on a new book set for release in early 2003 called "Taking America Back," delineating the problems the country faces and their solutions. In the meantime, you may wish to consider purchasing his most recent book, "This Land Is Our Land."
c 2002 WorldNetDaily.com
When you write a treatise titled, "Why I am not a conservative," and follow it up with one titled, "Why I am not a libertarian," you are, according to popular demand, obligated to publish a third discourse titled, "Why I am not a liberal."
This may prove to be the toughest challenge of all. For me, it is like explaining why I am not a communist, or why I am not a Nazi. Where does one begin? I've never been mistaken for a liberal.
Let's start here: Liberalism, as we know it in the United States in 2002, is an evil ideology inflicting massive suffering, misery, injustice, oppression and death wherever it gains power and influence.
You will notice I never use "liberal" or "liberalism" as an epithet. I rarely use the term at all, because I believe it is a misnomer and a label that is widely misunderstood. But, for the purposes of this column - and this column alone - I am going to critique liberalism just as I critiqued conservatism and libertarianism.
Liberalism is the dominant ideology in Washington, D.C., today - no matter which political party runs the White House or Congress. Liberalism controls the Republican Party only to a slightly lesser degree than it controls the Democrats.
Liberalism proffers that it is a good idea to forcibly take the wealth and property rightfully and legally acquired by one party and redistribute it to others. Of course, liberals always take a sizable cut of the transaction for themselves - sometime as much as 80 percent.
My friend Walter Williams accurately describes this process as "legalized theft." There is no better way to explain it. Legalized theft is the central creed of liberalism. Liberalism is not possible without it. All manner of justifications and rationalizations are made for this process - the greater good, helping the poor, leveling the playing field. No matter what you call it, theft is theft.
But theft is only the beginning of the evil liberals spread.
Liberalism also kills.
It kills in a thousand different ways. Let me give you a few:
Since the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court ruling, more than 30 million unborn babies have been killed in America. Liberals, in general, seem to have more respect and reverence for bald eagle eggs than unborn humans.
By actively working to disarm the American population, in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution, liberals condemn the defenseless to death - often at the hands of criminals they help spring from prison.
Through opposition to missile defense and civil defense, liberals leave the entire civilian population open to annihilation at the hands of a nuclear-armed madman, an accidental launch by a nuclear power and terrorist attacks.
Through over-deployment of the armed forces all over the world and wars like Vietnam, liberals kill U.S. soldiers and foreign soldiers and civilians without so much as a care about the constitutional basis for their actions.
Liberalism is less an ideology than utopian wishful thinking. It cares not about the actual results of its policies, only about doing something. The "something" that it does always empowers government at the expense of people.
Liberalism, as we know it today, is simply a new name for an old-fashioned idea formerly known as socialism. It stands on its head the basic concept of liberty as the Founding Fathers thought of it. Liberals think the government that governs most, governs best.
The sheer volume of laws it passes is staggering. No one has the time to read them, let alone live by them. Yet, each new law is another nail in the coffin of a free society.
Liberalism believes government is the best vehicle for solving problems - not the worst, not the course of last resort.
Government is the god of liberalism. And that's why I am in no danger of being mistaken for one. My god is God.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28022
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
I wonder if this same guy spoke out aginst the immoral communist Klinton whos has been, by far, the one president that has taken away more rights than any other, who's neglect by doing nothing permitted and led to the 9-11 events ... oh, dont get me started .....
=================================
The only bad thing about choosing a Kimber ...
... there are so darn many models to choose from!
kimberkid@gunbroker.zzn.com
? otherwise, you'll find an excuse.
When Clinton left office they gave him a 21 gun salute. Its a damn shame they all missed....