In today’s Big Government post by Joel Pollack [link to biggovernment.com] readers were treated to an amazing glimpse into the political strategy that has been put into place over the past year by the Obama Administration to force the radical overhaul of the American health care system all under the guise of “Health Care Reform”.

If anyone doubts that the strategy blue print written by convicted felon Robert Creamer [link to www.amazon.com] (while he was serving his time in Federal Prison) was really put into action by the administration, one only needs to look at the endorsements page and notice a rave from none other than David Axelrod:

Bob Creamer has devoted his life to progressive causes. Here he provides a fascinating narrative of how progressives have won in the past and provides a blueprint for future victories.

When David Axelrod reads and endorses Creamer’s book and describes it as a “blueprint for future victories” then it might be more than just a coincidence that what Creamer suggested/predicted is exactly what has come to pass.

As odd as it seems that President Obama’s top political advisor would see fit to publicly endorse a book by a newly released felon, it is still instructive to actually look at Mr. Creamer’s “blueprint for future victories” and see how Mr. Axelrod and the Democratic leadership has used that blueprint for President Obama’s Health Care scheme.

For today we will focus on two specific passages of his plan:

“We must create a national consensus that the health care system is in crisis.” and “To win we must not just generate understanding, but emotion—fear, revulsion, anger, disgust.” – Page 545
In much the same way that advocates of “Global Warming” continue to repeat that “The debate is over” those pushing the President’s Health Care Scheme continue to parrot that “We can all agree that our current system is in crisis…” Right? How often do we hear that? Meanwhile, polls show that 80% of Americans are HAPPY with their health insurance. But politicians who cite these numbers are painted with a broad dismissal and vilified for wanting to do nothing while Americans are dying because they have no health care.

The plan, from the beginning was to manufacture a crisis in health care. And, with the willing media on their side (“This will require an ongoing highly integrated earned-media messaging program that brings the growing crisis into relief over the next two years” – Page 545) that crisis becomes a stipulated FACT, not a political position, not an opinion, but a given. This book was written in 2007 and the plan calls for implementation over “the next two years”… do the math.

So, now the “Crisis” has been manufactured and a solution has been put forth. Now, how do our progressive leaders plan to win the votes of politicians and the support of the American people?

“We must focus especially on the mobilization of the labor movement…” and “Over the next two years, we must design and organize a massive national field program” – Page 546

To fully understand Mr. Creamer’s ability to mobilize the labor movement and how his suggestion was put into action this Summer, you need to know a little bit more about him and his involvement with organized labor.

Readers of Big Government are by now familiar with Health Care for America Now (HCAN). Mr. Creamer is alternately described on LEFT-leaning web sites as either a over-paid consultant for [link to fdlaction.firedoglake.com] , or as a leader of HCAN [link to firedoglake.com] . As we described in these pages last week, HCAN provided the plan for the August offensive against grass roots protestors who were rallying against the Obama Care legislation. [link to biggovernment.com] . That offensive led to violence and mayhem. Or, as Mr. Creamer benignly predicted: “the mobilization of the labor movement” and “a massive national field program”.

But understand the most important element of this “massive national field program”: The participants in this program are SEIU, ACORN, HCAN, AFLCIO, AARP, AFSCME etc. These organizations are not just advocating for this health care scheme because they care about fictional people who are “dying because they don’t have health care”. These organizations stand to benefit the most from the elimination of the health insurance industry.

This is about money and this is about power.

If the health insurance industry in America is forced to collapse (the way advocates of the President’s scheme have publicly said they hope will happen) [link to www.youtube.com] then organized labor, specifically the SEIU, will be the largest beneficiary of such a collapse. And people like Creamer, who counts amongst his largest clients ALL of these organizations, will also benefit [link to www.stratcongroup.com] . (Here is a little secret of capitalism: If your clients get a huge windfall and it is directly attributed to your efforts, it will be very, very good for you.)

These two passages from Creamer’s battle plan to manufacture a crisis, foment outrage and revulsion at those opposed to the progressives’ solution to that crisis and then the mobilization of organized labor to bully those opposed to that solution are the essence of the political atmosphere we are living in at this very moment.

Just today, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid compared those opposed to his “Solution” to the “Crisis” with those who were in favor of slavery [link to www.foxnews.com] It is exactly as Creamer wanted it. You see: “People are dying because they have no health care… we have the solution so those people will live…. You are opposed to that solution… YOU ARE WORSE THAN A SLAVE OWNER!” No wonder people are willing to bite off the fingers of those standing in the way of this scheme. [link to www.ktla.com]

The problem is: It is all a lie.

Even the examples that President Obama used in his address to a joint session of Congress to illustrate why this scheme is needed were exposed as lies. [link to www.slate.com]

And ask yourself (and your progressive friends) this question: If this is such a crisis, if people are dying because of our current “crisis”, why does this “solution” not even go into effect until 2013? [link to www.cbsnews.com]

Hopefully, showing that ex-con Creamer’s fingerprints are all over the manipulated environment of crisis and outrage we are living in will help undermine this move toward a socialized, single-payer health system (that is what the President wants, [link to www.youtube.com] that is what the progressives want [link to www.youtube.com] , it is what Creamer’s wife wants) [link to www.youtube.com]

But, if the media will not take notice of this, perhaps they will at least point the spotlight on the embarrassing fact that ex-con Creamer was at the President’s first State Dinner two weeks ago… [link to gatewaypundit.firstthings.com] and unlike war-hero Senator John McCain, Creamer was invited, he didn’t even need to “crash the gate”.
T For Texas, T For Tennessee!

[link to snarkista.mybrute.com]

The virtue of courage is a prerequisite for the practice of all other virtues, because otherwise one is virtuous only when virtue has no cost. There are times when something needs to be done, and yet we know that if we step up and do this needful thing, we will pay a heavy personal price. -C.S. Lewis

On Robert Creamer the ex-felon, his wife Jan Schakowsky, and Cramer’s blueprint for commie control of healthcare.

On August 31, A health care town hall meeting was held for congressional representative, Jan Schakowsky (D-IL). It is suspected that she planned to stack the meeting with paid organizers, after she vowed on Real Time with Bill Maher [link to www.hbo.com] to bring “millions” of people into the streets to support the so-called “public option.”

Exposed was an organizer from the group Health Care for America Now (HCAN) instructing followers to block dissenting views: “So if they stand up and start asking questions, and you’re in that area, simply stand up, and start chanting… ‘Health care now! Health care now!’” [link to www.youtube.com]

Glenn Beck Show – December 7, 2009 – Pt 1 of 8

Glenn Beck Show – December 7, 2009 – Pt 2 of 8

Glenn Beck Show – December 7, 2009 – Pt 3 of 8

Glenn Beck Show – December 7, 2009 – Pt 4 of 8

Glenn Beck Show – December 7, 2009 – Pt 5 of 8

Glenn Beck Show – December 7, 2009 – Pt 6 of 8

Glenn Beck Show – December 7, 2009 – Pt 7 of 8

Glenn Beck Show – December 7, 2009 – Pt 8 of 8

ANSWER TO THE ENIGMA of a capitalized name

Canadian Rights researcher Russell Porisky has conducted extensive studies into common law versus Admiralty law, and its attendant natural persons versus legal fictions. Porisky provides us with the answer. In book one of his five part study series on, Canadian Rights and Freedoms, Mr. Porisky – who describes himself as a “natural person,” brings forth definitions from two credible sources…

Gage Canadian Dictionary 1983 Sec. 4 defines Capitalize adj. as… “To take advantage of – To use to ones own advantage.”

Blacks Law Dictionary – Revised 4^th Edition 1968, provides a more comprehensive definition as follows …

Capitis Diminutio (meaning the diminishing of status through the use of capitalization) – In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality; a loss or curtailment of a man’s status or aggregate of legal attributes and qualifications.

Capitis Diminutio Maxima (meaning a maximum loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. JOHN DOE or DOE JOHN) – The highest or most comprehensive loss of status. This occurred when a man’s condition was changed from one of freedom to one of bondage, when he became a slave. It swept away with it all rights of citizenship and all family rights.

“Slave- one who is under the power of a master, and who belongs to him so that the master may sell and dispose of him, of his able to so anything, have anything, or acquire anything, but what must belong to his master. Civ.Code La. 1838, art 35. Black’s Law Dictionary, rev. 4th ed. p.1559 ”

Capitis Diminutio Media (meaning a medium loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. John DOE) – A lessor or medium loss of status. This occurred where a man loses his rights of citizenship, but without losing his liberty. It carried away also the family rights.

Capitis Diminutio Minima (meaning a minimum loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. John Doe) - The lowest or least comprehensive degree of loss of status. This occurred where a man’s family relations alone were changed. It happened upon the arrogation [pride] of a person who had been his own master, (sui juris,) [of his own right, not under any legal disability] or upon the emancipation of one who had been under the patria potestas. [Parental authority] It left the rights of liberty and citizenship unaltered. See Inst. 1, 16, pr.; 1, 2, 3; Dig. 4, 5, 11; Mackeld. Rom.Law, 144.

Capite. - Lat. By the head

Diminutio. – Lat. In civil law. Diminution; a taking away; loss or depravation.

As Black’s Law Dictionary explains, the full capitalization of the letters of one’s natural name, results in a diminishing or complete loss of legal or citizenship status, wherein one actually becomes a slave or an item of inventory. The method by which the State causes a natural person to “volunteer” himself into slavery, is through forming legal joinder, implied or stated, with the entity or legal fiction (name all CAPS). Of course, most natural persons wouldn’t willingly form such an unlawful but legally reductionist joinder, so trickery and obfuscation are used. The initial joinder is formed when a legal Birth Certificate is issued by the State, name in all CAPS. In fact, both the Certificate of Birth AND Social Security number, are for “inventory” control purposes, similar to the Amistad Schooner’s manifest or those numbers or records used by legal entities or Corporations to track, account for, use and dispose of inventory. It is under the Admiralty jurisdiction Terri Schiavo’s fate was determined, and under this alien fictional jurisdiction many of today’s legal or other fictional entities such as “gay marriages” are fabricated. Commensurate with color of law, they appear to “be,” but they are not. Indeed, under common law and the American Constitution, “gay marriage” is unlawful and an oxymoron (contradiction). This, no legal maneuver can change.

Whereas one may have legal recourse in a Corporate or Admiralty Court, no lawful or moral remedy will be found. Administrative directives of the legal tribunal or Admiralty jurisdiction, while having the color or appearance of law, may be legal but are in fact unlawful due to the nature or status of the Court’s origin, which is predicated upon fiction. Admiralty Courts are in effect vastly inferior to the intentions and authority of those who founded the American Constitutional Republic. When searching America today, one would be hard pressed to locate an authentic Constitutional or Common law Court. This unlawful condition prevails in both Canada and the United States. A serious breech of Constitutional fidelity surfaced recently, when it was discovered Judges in Oregon were not properly sworn to uphold the Oregon Constitution and therefore were acting without Constitutional authority. The Courts and Judges in question, therefore, represent an alien power or entity.

It is worth noting the causes for the Colonist revolt against England (it wasn’t the Boston tea party)… On July 6 1775, a declaration by the representatives of the united colonies of North America, met in Congress at Philadelphia setting forth the Causes and necessity of their taking up arms.

“…They (England) have undertaken to give and grant our money without our consent (seizing from the colonies the right to issue their own colonial script which destroyed the colonial economy). Though we have ever exercised an exclusive right to dispose of our own property; statutes have been passed for extending the jurisdiction of courts of admiralty and vice-admiralty beyond their ancient limits; for depriving us of the accustomed and inestimable privilege of trial by jury, in cases affecting both life and property; for suspending the legislature of one of the colonies; for interdicting all commerce to the capital of another; and for altering fundamentally the form of government established by charter…”

Through obfuscation and trickery America has been attacked and occupied by Corporate or pirate ships of war, which are the privately owned Federal Reserve and the IRS. Under Admiralty jurisdiction, commercial pirates have kidnapped and commandeered the American people into servitude. In fact, American’s today enjoy a legal status no different from that of the Amistad Africans had they been found by the United States Supreme Court to be slaves or items of cargo owned by Spain and/or Spain’s representatives. Under terms used to facilitate slavery i.e., cargo, inventory etc., both Americans and Canadians now fall under these definitions i.e., as articles of commerce under Admiralty law and the UCC (Universal Commercial Code). America and Canada have been surreptitiously hijacked by pirates under “color of law.” It should be emphasized; piracy and kidnapping are crimes under most lawful jurisdictions. In law, today’s Admiralty courts are accessories to piracy.

In all human endeavors, it is the responsibility of each person to guard first his own dignity and freedom, then the dignity and freedom of his family, community and fellow man. Those who do not uplift and guard the freedom and dignity of their fellow human beings little deserve it for themselves. John Quincy Adams was successful in securing the freedom of his African defendants. Would it be he were here with us today and that all Americans could be the black Africans he so eloquently represented. His words are an inspiration for all time.

“Not slaves and therefore cannot be considered merchandise, but are free individuals with certain ethical and moral rights, including the right to engage in insurrection against those who would deny them their freedom – When there appears no hope at all, one must invoke one’s ancestors – who we are, is who we were and who we must become.” [Anthony Hopkins as J.Q. Adams in the movie Amistad]

Kevin E. Abrams is not a product of Academia. Rather he is a lay “psycho-historian,” who studies the “who,” and “why” of history. Over the past 25 years, he has written on the hidden history of the “gay” movement and other pertinent issues dealing with human rights and freedoms. In 1995 Mr. Abrams co-authored The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party with Mr. Scott Lively. The Pink Swastika can be read on-line at, The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality In The Nazi Party – Fourth Edition.

The preceding was copied from:

La Amistad & Slave Ship AMERICA

© 2005 Kevin E. Abrams – All Rights Reserved

The Following is the balance of the article:

“By the blessing of God, I will argue the case before the Supreme Court – I implore the mercy of God to control my temper, to enlighten my soul, and to give me utterance, that I may prove myself in every respect equal to the task.” [John Quincy Adams]

At the age of 74, elder member of Congress John Quincy Adams received a visitor at his home in Massachusetts – slavery abolitionist leader Lewis Tappan.

Tappan’s purpose was to persuade “Old Man Eloquent” to argue his defendant’s case in Washington in what today is remembered as the Amistad Trial. In Steven Speilberg’s film Amistad, the essential ingredients of the trial are brought forth, however, La Amistad also serves up a living template for jurisdictional issues which today directly impact the freedoms, liberties and human rights of both Americans AND Canadians. On Monday, February 22, 1841 Legal arguments commenced before the United States Supreme Court in Hartford Connecticut. John Quincy Adams began his argument on February 24th. The question to be decided by the nine Supreme Court Justices, was one of legal jurisdiction. Their decision would mean slavery and death, or life and freedom for the 36 black African defendants. Specifically, were these Africans items of commerce or inventory as Spain and the Spanish slave traders maintained, or, had these Africans been illegally kidnapped from their homes along the Ivory Coast where slavery had been outlawed? Was their rebellion against enslavement, in which the Africans killed all but two of their Spanish captors lawful, or not? The trial became a contentious national issue, and as we shall see, La Amistad is not only an important event which sailed into American history, but ominously, an accurate and significant portrayal of America and her people today – of Slave Ship America. We will explore and identify how we were “volunteered,” and how we “volunteer” ourselves into servitude. We will also uncover the primary covert machinations employed by self-appointed scientific and banking elite’s to maneuver and seduce freeborn human beings into slavery. Ironically, all Americans have been reduced to the same legal or commercial status the Spanish Crown sought to impose upon Amistad’s African “inventory” just 164 years ago. Whereas we appear to have come a long way in our cultural and legal battles for human rights, we in fact have landed far from our intended shore. In today’s fictional courts, all Americans are equally black.

“Any law that originates from the Constitution is lawful. Any purported law that does not originate from it is a fictional law without validity. The true test of any American law is whether it was created according to lawful process or outside of lawful process.” [July 2003 Idaho Observer]

Sir William Blackstone of Blackstone’s Law Dictionary, with his many teachings on common law lays the lawful foundation of the Constitutional Republic and American justice. Both America and the Dominion of Canada were founded under common law jurisdiction and the unalienable rights and freedoms enjoyed by our forefathers. The right to life, liberty and property, for instance, are lawful claims not legal privileges – the right to justice not sympathy. Legal privileges and sympathy sway with the wind and times, whereas unalienable rights supersede convention and legality. Lawful Government must uphold and protect the unalienable rights of its born or naturalized citizens. However, there is a second status of “person” or “individual” with which many people are unfamiliar. This legal or fictional “person” can also be described as similar to the straw man, as in the “persona” born without a brain in the movie Wizard of Oz. This also describes the persona of a Corporation – a legal fiction without a brain, except that is, for “its” articles of incorporation that define “its” character and legal capacity. Due to the fact, a Corporate entity has no life of “its” own, and that “it” serves only itself, “it” must derive “its” life from sources external to “itself” which is why Corporate entities often become such liabilities to both the individual and community within which they function. Unlike a natural person with autonomous volition, an entity or legal fiction not only doesn’t have a brain, but also lacks the ability to act morally. Indeed, Corporations often violate human rights codes outlawing slavery by classifying natural persons as resources whom they include in the sale of the Corporation or entity as “intellectual property” or “good will.” A straw man, legal fiction or entity could be likened to the image of yourself when you look into a mirror. The image looks like or has the “color” of you as in the “color of law,” and even moves like you, but, “it” is not the real flesh and blood you. However, within the legal scheme of things, you “volunteer” to become this image, fiction or entity through an involuntary or voluntary act of legal joinder every time you file a domestic income tax return or apply for a drivers license (invisible contracts). This license is issued not to you, but to the entity.

“It is to the property of the citizen, not to the demand of the creditor of the State, that the original faith of society is pledged. The claim of the citizen is prior in time, paramount in title, and superior in quality.” [Edmund Burke, Quoted in, The Coming Battle , Pub by, Paul & Loraine Walter]

In his arguments before the United States Supreme Court on behalf of the Amistad Africans, John Quincy Adams states, “I derive consolation from the thought that this Court is a Court of JUSTICE.” Adams quotes from the 2,000 year old, “Institutes of Justinian,” meaning, “the constant and perpetual will to secure to every one HIS OWN right.” Adams also alludes to this mirror image, fiction or “color of law” as, “that it said the thing which is not—too unfortunately it was so, as he said.” Meaning, the claims of the Spanish Crown and slave traders, while having the color or appearance of law, were in effect neither lawful nor predicated upon law at all. It must be noted, John Q. Adams was acting as an advocate FOR the Africans, rather than as an interpreter of the UCC or Universal Commercial Code which deals specifically with such matters as commercial damage or loss claims as in the Amistad slave “inventories” etc. In the strange world of legal fiction it is doubtful Adams’ lawful arguments could even be heard today in any American Court, including the Supreme Court, due to the fact the Supreme Court of the United States is today no longer capable of even “hearing” a natural or lawful person. In a future article, we will also explore how fraudulent science promoted by tax exempt Foundations has co-opted and undermined the American Constitution as the basis for American law and how this has extended into all areas of American life.

For purposes of understanding one’s legal or commercial status under the Admiralty system, it is necessary to examine the curious use of all CAPS in legal and domestic income tax forms. While seemingly a trite concern, this apparently small detail has deep significance. In 2003 the Idaho Observer conducted an inquiry into the meaning, or basis of capitalizing a natural person’s name in official Government and legal documents. A proper answer was never found. However, Canadian Rights researcher Russell Porisky has conducted extensive studies into common law versus Admiralty law, and its attendant natural persons versus legal fictions. Porisky provides us with the answer. In book one of his five part study series on, Canadian Rights and Freedoms, Mr. Porisky – who describes himself as a “natural person,” brings forth definitions from two credible sources…

A LITTLE TRUE HISTORY

In order to understand the income tax, you must understand how it came about and how it was originally meant to be collected.

So let’s just start at the founding of America and just work forward from there. The real start of America was with the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776. The real start of the United States was on September 17, 1787, with the ratification of the Constitution.  YES!  There is a difference! It will be explained as we go. That is why it is important to read this book in order.

FROM WHERE DOES THE POWER TO TAX ORIGINATE??

First we have to find out where the taxing powers came from.

Our forefathers designed this country to be a free country, with no king and no subjects. They had just left the oppressive government of England, and did not want to create the same thing all over again. This new country and its new government was to be a concept that was unfamiliar to the common people. It was based on the concept that every man was his own master and a king in his own house. Every individual was to be a SOVEREIGN with ‘inalienable’ rights. What is a sovereign?

Black’s Law Dictionary.
Sovereign. A person, body, or state in which independent and supreme authority is vested;
Sovereignty. The supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power by which any independent state is governed; supreme political authority; the supreme will; paramount control of the constitution and frame of government and its administration; the self sufficient source of political power from which all specific political powers are derived;

Sovereign means “having supreme rank, power and authority. The greatest in degree.” (from Webster’s dictionary) A king is sovereign. There is no one above him except his creator. The American people are the same. There is no government above you except your creator (whatever your concept of God is). NO human government! This country was based upon the concept of individual sovereignty. This country is owned by each and every individual, jointly, with everybody else. Like the song says, “This land is your land, this land is my land.” We own it together. But running a jointly owned country is complex, just like running a jointly owned corporation. So the sovereign people joined together and contracted to hire managers to run the country for them. These managers were called governments, local, state and federal. The government is just an employee of the sovereign people! In order to keep the employees in line, the people drew up employment contracts with these government employees. These employment contracts, spelling out the duties and limitations of the managers, are called state constitutions. Each sovereign state has its own constitution. And, like the sovereign individual people, each sovereign individual state also bound together with the other states and hired a manager to take care of the joint interests of the states. This manager was the federal government, and the employment contract between the states and the federal government is called the U.S. Constitution.

First comes the Creator! (Whatever your concept of God is!)

Next comes the individual sovereign people, whom the creator created. These individual sovereign people each had inalienable rights.

Who rules whom here? Are the people over the Creator?

Next the sovereign people created the sovereign states, and their governments.

Next the states created the federal government.

Therefore, do the people tell the government what to do, or does the government tell the people what to do? Are the state governments superior to the federal government? This whole picture has been turned upside down. Now the federal government is all powerful. It rules over the states and over the people. Both the federal government and the state governments rule over the people. And God has been booted out of the picture completely, through separation of church and state. The church is now just a corporation, dictated to by the government. In fact, you cannot even be recognized as a church without getting permission from the government and becoming a corporation. Now your allegiance is first to the government, and then to God! Again, the order is reversed!

A government can also be sovereign, but in the United States of America, the government’s sovereignty is delegated to it, by the people. Since all the American people own this country together, (one large ruling family) who is actually going to run it and make the day to day decisions? How were the people going to secure their inalienable rights? This is why governments were created in this country. To protect our inalienable rights and handle the affairs of the state.

The Declaration of Independence tells us the true purpose of the government:
“That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just power from the consent of the governed…”

Most state constitutions plainly state this fact. Since I live in Colorado, I will quote the Colorado Constitution, Article II Section 2: “The people of this state have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves, as a free, sovereign and independent state:” If this is true, and we are free sovereigns, then why do we pay income taxes to the federal government? Why not to Mexico also? The answer will surprise you!

The people of Colorado, the ruling family, have the right to govern themselves as sovereign individuals, free and independent, as a republic, not a democracy. The U.S. Constitution Art. IV Section 4, “. . . guarantees to every state in this union a republican form of government . . .” Is your state run as a republic, or as a democracy? What’s the difference between a republic and a democracy?

In a republic, (Rule by Law) every individual has inalienable rights from their creator. These inalienable rights of each individual are protected by all the other individuals, even if 5 million others disagree with how you exercise your inalienable rights. They cannot be violated. You can exercise these rights in any way you please, as long as you do not violate the rights of others. They cannot be voted away by a majority vote. Remember in school when you pledged allegiance to the flag, and the ‘republic’ for which it stands? Are you a Republican?

In a democracy, (Rule by Man) each individual votes to see what rights you have and what rights you don’t. The majority vote rules. So if six people, 5 men and 1 woman, vote on a proposed new law that says the woman will provide sexual favors to the five men, and the 5 men vote for the law, and the woman votes against the law, then she loses and it becomes law. That’s a democracy. It has been called ‘Mob Rule’. The majority can decide anything they want, and it becomes law, even if it violates your rights. Are you a Democrat?

Would you rather live in a republic or a democracy? Remember, in a republic, you have inalienable rights, granted to you by God. In a democracy, you don’t, You have ‘civil’ rights, which are granted to you by the civil government, and can be taken away at will.

Colorado Constitution Article II Section 1: “All political power is vested in and derived from the people; all government, of right, originates from the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole.”

YOU and I are ‘the government’, with all political power vested in us! As the ruling family, we did not want to be bothered with the day to day affairs of the state, so we delegated part of our sovereignty to government servants, to protect our rights. We put limits on that delegated power though, to prevent abuse. Those limits are called the constitutions. The constitutions, federal and state, are really nothing more than employment contracts between the sovereign people and their public servants. These constitutions outline the powers that the servants can exercise and more importantly, the powers they do not have. If the power was not delegated, in writing, then the government servants do not have that power! The government has done a very good job of reversing these positions!

A Colorado court case helps clarify this.
“The individual, and not the state, is the source and basis of our social compact and that sovereignty now resides in and has always resided in the individual.” Colorado Anti-Discrimination Comm. v. Case 151 Colo 235, 380 p 2d 34 (1962)

This concept was hard for the people coming from oppressive governments to understand, back at the founding of our country, and it is hard for people to understand today. But stop and think about this a second. Can you be a sovereign individual without having inalienable rights? And can you have inalienable rights without being a sovereign individual? No! Sovereignty and inalienable rights are two sides of the same coin. You cannot have one without the other. In this country, sovereign means the same as American. But since governments want subjects to rule over, and not sovereign people ruling over it, this concept is not taught in public schools.

But, let’s follow this concept from its roots and see what kind of government we grew. It really is very simple once you understand it.

The Declaration of Independence states “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, and that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just power from the consent of the governed…”

Sounds great, but what does it mean? The government now claims to be the sovereign over the people. Is the government sovereign, or is it the people?

What this means, is that all Americans are created with equal rights. And those rights are unalienable. What does un-a-lien-able (or inalienable) mean? It means “incapable of being surrendered or transferred, or taken away.” They cannot be liened or taxed without permission Did you give your permission?.

Inalienable rights. Rights which are not capable of being surrendered or transferred without the consent of the one possessing such rights.

Just WHAT does the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness include? They would include the following:

Freedom of religion. Freedom of speech and of the press. The right to keep and bear arms. The right to travel freely within the states without restriction. The right to be secure in our persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. The right to not be a witness against yourself. The right to a trial by jury. The right to marry. The right to own property, real and personal. The right to engage in a profession to earn a livelihood. Plus many others. These rights were reserved in the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution, which is aptly named The Bill of Rights.

Your inalienable rights cannot be surrendered or transferred without your consent, but they CAN be waived, or contracted away! It is a legal principle that if you don’t claim your rights, you automatically waive them. Can you guess who came up with that principle? When you waive (by not claiming) your inalienable rights, you also waive your individual sovereignty. In the U.S. of A., if you are not a sovereign individual, then you are just a subject/slave of the government. And that is exactly how the government, especially the IRS, treats you, as a subject/slave. You also waive your rights when you contract them away.

Now where did these inalienable natural rights come from? The government? NO! Notice it says “governments are instituted to secure these rights”, not to grant these rights. The individual sovereign Americans delegated powers to the government, so that the government could secure these rights for them. The government is just your bodyguard, protecting your rights. The government is your public servant. Not the other way around. Your unalienable rights came from your creator. The creator is always above the created. Remember this important distinction. The government grants ‘civil rights’, and withdraws them as is pleases. More on this later.

Colorado Constitution Article II Section 3. “All persons have certain natural, essential and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; of acquiring, possessing and protecting property; and of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness.”

Natural inalienable rights are from your creator. Inalienable rights are really just property rights. No one can take your property from you without your consent. If they take it by force, then your rights are violated!

Colorado Constitution Article II Section 15. “Private property shall not be taken or damaged, for public or private use, without just compensation.”

One point to keep in mind here, is that your most fundamental inalienable property right is that of labor. (More on this later) So your labor (which is private property), or the income ‘acquired’ with your labor, cannot be taken without just compensation! When you are taxed on the income (property) exchanged (acquired) for your labor, is that taking your private property without compensation? Is that a violation of your inalienable right to property? You decide. If you decide yes, do you mind waiving your inalienable right to acquire property, and to pay a tax on that right, as a privilege? As you will learn in later chapters, the income tax is a tax on income from privileges.

The big question to ask, is, can an inalienable right be taxed as a privilege? The answer is yes, but ONLY if you first agree, and waive your inalienable rights of property. Have you waived your inalienable rights? Yes you have! I’ll show you how later.

Where does the government get its power? From the consent of the governed. You! Every thing the government does, is approved by you, with your vote or non-vote. Think about it. Is the government protecting your inalienable rights in a republic, or is it granting you civil rights in a democracy? Are you happy with the way your servants are running your country?

If not, only you can change it. YOU are the government!! The government is really only your personal company (the US of A, jointly owned with other Americans) and government employees are only your personal company managers, that you hired to manage the country for you, and to protect your rights. Remember, the Constitution is really just an employment contract with them.

But, the balance of power in this country has shifted, and the servant (the federal government) has become the master. At least that is what the government wants you to think. The power of the government is limited by the Constitution. The Constitution outlined the powers that were delegated to the government. The government only has the powers that were delegated to it by the people, and it’s power is not unlimited. Yet. The government is presently trying to change and rewrite the constitution, so it can have unlimited power.

THE CONSTITUTION OF the UNITED STATES of AMERICA

In America, every man’s home is his castle, every man is a king and every woman is a queen. Every individual has individual sovereignty. It is like each home is a sovereign country estate of its own. All these little countries, or estates, banded together and created states, with state constitutions to protect their rights. And then these states created a country, America, with a national constitution to protect the states’ and the individuals’ rights. The governing rights delegated to these governments were not all inclusive. Only certain ones were given and they were spelled out in the constitutions. What about the rights that weren’t delegated?

U.S. of A. Constitution
9th Amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

10th Amendment: 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.

All the powers delegated to the federal government are stated in the Constitution, in Article I, Section 8, and are very limited. Some of those limitations are stated in Sections 9 & 10. Notice that the powers not delegated, are retained by the States in their constitutions. And the powers not delegated to the States, are reserved to the individual sovereign Americans, the people.

Another important point to remember. The federal Constitution delegated two categories of power to the government. The first power was only for legislating for the 50 states, as delegated, and the second power was delegated to run the affairs of the federal government itself. This second power was an exclusive, unlimited power, under a democracy, because it did not apply to the 50 state republics, it applied only to property that the federal government owned, within it’s geographical jurisdiction.

The federal government has spent the last 150 years trying to expand its jurisdiction to include the 50 states also. They have been successful.

The constitution divided the taxing powers — for the 50 states only — into two categories that all taxes must fall within to be legal. They are ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ taxes. This restriction did NOT apply to federal government jurisdiction over its own property.

The first category is that of DIRECT TAXES. There are two authorities in the constitution delegating this power of direct taxation from the sovereign American people to Congress. The first is:
Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3: “Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the states which may be included within this Union, according to their respective numbers…”
The second is:
Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4: “No capitation, or other direct tax, shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.”

What does ‘apportioned among the states’ mean? It means “to distribute or allocate proportionally.” (Webster) It means divided up equally among the states, based on their population. That is one of the reasons a census is taken every ten years. Also note that the federal government can impose a direct tax on the states, BUT NOT on the people. This power was not delegated to them!

Notice that the first clause says that direct taxes are to be apportioned among the states according to their numbers. It doesn’t say among the individual people, but among the states. If the government wants to raise 10 million dollars, it divides that amount proportionally among the states, based on their population. The states then collect it as they want, usually as a property, or other tax that is acceptable to them. Also note, that “no direct tax” shall be laid unless in proportion to the census. And since it is apportioned ‘among the states’, this restriction does not apply when taxes are laid outside the states.

That is why the government needs to take a census, so it knows how much tax it can raise from the states through direct taxation. This method of taxation was only used four times after the founding of America. The direct tax is levied on each separate state, according to the census, and then each state must collect its share of the national tax from its Citizens. The state Citizens cannot be taxed by the federal government, with a direct tax, without apportionment among the states, except when the state does not comply with the direct tax imposed on them. Remember, a direct tax is levied on the individual states, NOT on the citizens of that state. Some people think the 16th amendment removed the apportionment feature of direct taxes. This is not true. Even if direct taxes did NOT have to be apportioned, the tax must STILL be applied to the states, not to the individual people!

An important distinction is to be made here. A direct tax is ALWAYS on property. On your property rights.

It is on something you OWN. Your inalienable rights are either personal or real property. Therefore, your rights cannot be federally taxed with a direct tax. This restriction does not apply to the states and states CAN impose a direct tax on your property, i.e. property tax. Also note that the inalienable right of property also includes the income from that property.

The second category is that of INDIRECT TAXES. There is one constitutional authority delegating this power of indirect taxation to Congress. It is:

Article 1 Section 8, Clause 1: “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.“

What does uniform mean? It means that all subjects in a taxable category or class, will be taxed at the same rate. If the tax on distilling alcohol is 5% of the net income, then all distilling of alcohol must be taxed at the same rate, 5%. Indirect taxes CAN be levied on activities engaged in by individuals.

A tax on duties, imposts and excises is NOT on the person (capitation tax) engaged in an activity, and it is NOT on the income (property) received from an activity, but is on the activity itself. And this taxable activity is a ‘privilege’ that is granted and regulated by the government How MUCH tax is imposed on that activity is determined by the income produced by that activity. The income is just a guideline for determining the amount of tax. The tax is NOT ON the income!

The important distinction here is that an indirect tax is on an activity, it is on something you DO! You can avoid the tax by not engaging in the activity! The income itself is not taxed. It is the ACTIVITY that produced the income that is taxed. And that activity is always a taxable privileged activity.

For example, a gasoline excise tax in not on the gasoline, it is on the sale of the gasoline. Gasoline is property, not an activity. Property can only be taxed with a direct tax. It is the ’sale’ of the gasoline that is taxable, an activity.

These are the only two legal categories for all federal taxes in the 50 states, direct and indirect. All taxes must fall into one or the other, and each class must be collected as directed in the Constitution. All direct taxes must be apportioned among the states, and all indirect taxes must be uniform. Remember, this applies only to the 50 United States of America, and not to D.C. or the U.S. possessions. These constitutional mandates have never been repealed.

Now, of all the things that are taxable in the 50 states, they can be boiled down to 2 main categories:
(1) Inalienable rights, which include property (real and personal), and the income from that property.
(2) Privileges, which are always granted by the government, and are always activities.
The Constitution tells us how each type of tax is to be administered.

Inalienable rights, exercised by the people, can only be taxed directly with a capitation (head) tax, or a direct tax apportioned among the states. A capitation tax is on your body, which is your personal property, and is imposed on the state where the people live, not on the people directly.

Privileges, are taxed through duties, imposts and excises, and they must be taxed uniformly. These activities are taxed indirectly. The tax is not on the people or the property, because these can only be taxed directly, through apportionment. Therefore, the tax is called indirect, because it is on a privileged activity (such as the manufacture of alcohol), but the tax is indirectly passed on to the people buying the alcohol. Any tax on a company activity is really passed on to the customers. That makes it an indirect tax. The government is saying that an excise tax is not on you personally, but it really IS, indirectly. If you don’t like the tax, don’t buy the product.

Another important distinction must be made here. As you will learn, the income tax has been declared by the Supreme Court to be in the category of an excise tax. An excise tax is not on property, but is on privileges. Privileges granted by the government. Before you can be liable for an income tax, you must be exercising a government privilege that is producing income. The question to ask here is: When I receive income, am I receiving it in connection with the exercise of an inalienable right, or in connection with the exercise of a government privilege? What is the SOURCE of that income, and is there a tax imposed on that source activity? The Internal Revenue Code (IRC), in section 61, lists items of income from taxable ’sources’, whatever that source may be. It does not list the sources though!

If the items of income are received ‘in connection with’ the exercise of an inalienable right (the source), then that income can only be taxed with a direct tax with apportionment among the states,

If the items of income are received ‘in connection with’ the exercise of a excise taxed activity, a privilege (the source), then that income can be taxed with an indirect excise tax on the privileged activity that produces the income.

Is your income received from the exercise of an inalienable right? Or from the exercise of a privilege? What is the source? To stack the deck in their favor, the federal government ALWAYS presumes that your income was received from an excise taxed activity, unless and until you claim otherwise.

What if you use the inalienable right of property in a privileged taxable activity, then how would the income be taxed? The 16th Amendment was passed for that very situation. It basically says that if you are engaged in a privileged activity, then any income received from anything ‘connected’ to that privileged activity is taxable with an income tax. (From whatever taxable source) ie: A tax on the income from your personal inalienable right to farm (real property) would have to be a direct tax. But if you used that same farm in a corporate activity, (a privilege) then the income would be taxable as an indirect excise tax on the privilege. Do you see why the government recommends incorporation for any business. It converts your inalienable right to a taxable privilege!

The way the laws are set up in this country, the government automatically presumes that your income is received from a privileged taxable excise activity, and therefore is taxable with an excise income tax. It is up to you to prove otherwise.

You must exercise your inalienable rights and claim those rights, or the government will claim your rights are privileges, and tax them accordingly. If the government calls your inalienable rights privileges and then taxes them as privileges, and you don’t object, WHO IS TO BLAME?

SUMMARY

The U.S. Constitution is clear.

The American people, are all individual sovereigns, who collectively created the state and federal governments. They delegated certain powers, via constitutions, to these governments, to protect their rights and run their political affairs for them. They reserved all powers not delegated, to themselves.

Sovereigns have inalienable rights.

Subjects of the government have privileges and immunities, also called civil rights.

The powers delegated to the federal government, to legislate for the 50 republic states, are enumerated in the Constitution. The powers delegated to the federal government, to legislate for its own property and jurisdiction, are unlimited and a democracy.

Taxes on the income from the exercise of inalienable rights (property) are always direct taxes, (directly on you) and must be apportioned, among the states, to be constitutional.

Taxes on privileged activities (excises, duties and imposts) are always indirect taxes and must be uniform. They are not directly on you, but you indirectly pay them anyway.

Direct taxes are on something you OWN. Rights and property, including the income from that property.

Indirect taxes are on something you DO. Privileged activities.

WARNING!

Do NOT use these arguments when confronting the IRS or any branch of state or federal government, IF your are a citizen/subject of the federal government, also known as a U.S. citizen. The governments in the United States do not recognize inalienable rights and the court systems do not uphold the constitutions, except when it benefits them.

Kevin D. Annett
Republic of Lakotah
Sat, 19 Sep 2009 18:59 EDT

Last week, many of the aboriginal people in the remote west coast village of Ahousaht were inoculated with the tamiflu vaccine. Today,over a hundred of them are sick, and the sickness is spreading.

In the same week, body bags were sent to similarly remote native reserves in northern Manitoba that have also received the tamiflu vaccine.

On the face of things, it appears that flu vaccinations are causing a sickness that is being deliberately aimed at aboriginal people across Canada, and this sickness will be fatal: a fact acknowledged by the Canadian government by their “routine” sending of body bags to these Indian villages.

Before you express your shock and denial at the idea that people are being racially targeted and killed, remember that murdering Indians with vaccinations is not a new or abnormal thing in Canada. Indeed,it’s how we Europeans “won the land”, and it’s one of the ways we keep it.

In 1862, Anglican church missionaries Rev. John Sheepshanks and Robert Brown inoculated interior Salish Indians in B.C. with a live smallpox virus that wiped out entire native communities within a month, just prior to the settlement of this native land by gold prospectors associated with these missionaries and government officials.

In 1909, Dr. Peter Bryce of the Indian Affairs department in Ottawa claimed that Catholic and Protestant churches were deliberately exposing native children to smallpox and tuberculosis in residential schools across Canada, and letting them die untreated. Thousands of children died as a result. (Globe and Mail, April 24, 2007)

In 1932, B.C. provincial police attempted to lay charges against Catholic missionaries who had sent smallpox-laden Indian children back among their families along the Fraser river near Mission, BC. The RCMP intervened and protected the church, even though whole villages were wiped out as a result of the church’s actions.

In 1969, native children who escaped from the Nanaimo Indian Hospitalon Vancouver Island described being inoculated with shots that caused many of them to die “with bloated up bodies and scabs all over”, to quote one survivor.

Knowing this history, it’s not surprising when Indians on isolated Canadian reserves start sickening  and dying en masse from sudden illnesses, after receiving flu shots. After all, it’s still the law in Canada, under the apartheid Indian Act, that no on-reserve Indian can refuse medical treatments or experimentation. So it’s small wonder that these reserves are the places being targeted first to be injected with untested, unsafe and potentially lethal flu vaccines.

As an entire race of involuntary test subjects, Indians in Canada are a weather vane for what will befall all of us, and very soon. For the very techniques and weapons of genocide perfected against aboriginal people are now being deployed against “mainstream” Canadians.

Under Bill C-6, which is about to pass third reading in Parliament and become the law, no Canadian will be allowed to refuse inoculations for the swine flu, despite the fact that it is relatively benign and mild,and has killed only people who are already immune-compromised. Indeed,it is astounding that such coercion and dictatorial laws are being employed to deal with what the chief Canadian Health Officer has called a “mild seasonal flu”.

Clearly, another agenda is at work; but the time to ascertain and challenge that agenda has all but run out. This coming month, forced inoculations and imprisonment of those who refuse them may be a reality across Canada. And for what reason? Clearly, not for public health,considering the sickness and death caused by previous swine flu vaccines.

I believe that the real pandemic is about to be unleashed through the very vaccines being pushed by governments and pharmaceutical giants like Novartis and Glaxo Smith Kline. The shots will be the cause, not the cure, of the pandemic. Of course, those in power can disprove thisby simply being the first people to take the swine flu shot: an event about as likely as these companies forgoing the multi-billion dollar profits they will reap from the mass vaccinations.

It’s indeed ironic that, very soon, many “white” Canadians may be suffering the same fate that aboriginal people have for centuries.Perhaps it’s fitting. For if we are indeed being targeted for extermination, or at the least martial law and dictatorship, we finally can have the chance to shed our complicity in the genocide of other people, and get on the right side of humanity – simply by having to fight the system that is causing mass murder.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Last updated:
September 22nd, 2009

(Unfictional) — Today, the MSM are not talking about this case any more. Yesterday, they wanted us to believe that Joseph Moshe was a nutcase and a terrorist, arrested for threatening to bomb the White House. Interesting detail about his arrest (the “Westwood standoff”) was that he seemed to be immune to the 5 cans of tear gas and 5 gallons of law-enforcement grade pepper spray they pumped into his face. He very calmly remained in his car, as the video footage of his arrest shows.

Professor Moshe had called into a live radio show by Dr. A. True Ott, broadcast on Republic Broadcasting claiming to be a microbiologist who wanted to supply evidence to a States Attorney regarding tainted H1N1 Swine flu vaccines being produced by Baxter BioPharma Solutions. He said that Baxter’s Ukrainian lab was in fact producing a bioweapon disguised as a vaccine. He claimed that the vaccine contained an adjuvant (additive) designed to weaken the immune system, and replicated RNA from the virus responsible for the 1918 pandemic Spanish flu, causing global sickness and mass death.

Sources tell us that Bar-Joseph Moshe made no threat against the President or the White House. He did not mention any bomb or attack. He then proceeded to inform the White House he intended to go public with this information. When he noticed men in suits in front of his house and feared that the FBI was about to detain him, he packed some belongings into his car and, him being a dual Israeli citizen, tried to reach the Israeli consulate located in close proximity to the federal building where the standoff took place. The FBI and the bomb squad prevented him from reaching it. Who is this man? His profile on biomedexperts.com says he is a plant disease expert with many publications on his name involving the genetic manipulation of virii. Photographic evidence that Moshe is who he says he is can be found here.

Joseph Moshe was soon after his arrest sent or let go to Israel. Nothing has been heard from him since. The Secret Service was not the agency involved in the surveillance of Moshe at his home in California. This was done by the FBI, who had orders to detain or arrest him. Mounted on top of a large black vehicle used in his arrest was a microwave weapon that possibly damaged the electronics in Moshe’s car as well as any communication devices he had which might have been used to contact the media or others who could help him.

Moshe did not suffer the same effects of the gas and pepper spray that others would have because he had built up an immunity to such weapons as a by-product of his Mossad training. Moshe was not handcuffed because he was not placed under arrest.

Does this sound like an insane conspiracy theory? Sure it does. Due to the scarcity and anonimity of the sources we would dismiss it as exactly that, if it weren’t for some uncomfortable facts: Baxter Pharmaceutical has been caught, red-handed, in spreading a live, genetically engineered H5N1 Bird flu vaccine as a lethal biological weapon all over the world, destined to be used for human vaccinations. This happened just a few months ago. And only luck prevented a global catastrophe of epic proportions.

Baxter International Inc. had mixed live, genetically engineered avian flue viruses in vaccine material shipped to 18 countries. Only by sheer luck, a Czech laboratory decided to test the vaccine on a dozen ferrets, which all died in days. The World Health Organization was notified and catastrophe was averted. This was clearly a deliberate act on Baxter’s part, because they adhere to BS3, bio-safety level three. Baxter admitted a “mistake”. Such monumental screwups are totally impossible at that level. Many safety systems would have needed to be sabotaged, many key personell would have needed to be bribed. It simply can’t be done without direction from the inside. They did not send out the wrong vial – they produced dozens of gallons of biological-weapon agent (genetically engineered live H5N1 / Bird flu virus), then sent it out as a “vaccine”.

Baxter knew full well that their vaccine was lethal, because the year before they had tested it on a few hundred homeless Polish people – dozens died as a result.

Where’s the meat? Well – Baxter is now being sued for the deliberate, repeated contamination of vaccines with biological weapons designed – by them – to mass-murder people. Here is the complaint (PDF). By some kook nutcase? Not likely – Jane Burgermeister is an experienced, respected journalist. She is not the only one suing Baxter for planning and executing a plan for global genocide: Other are filing complaints as well. Read a well-researched complaint here (PDF).

Motive? The latter complaint alludes to it. Have you heard of the Georgia Guidestones? An enormous monument loaded with Masonic symbolism costing millions of dollars, it has been erected by unknown, powerful elites (multimillionaires with the clout to erect monuments wherever they please, obviously) around 30 years ago. It gives an “alternative ten commandments”, of which the first is the extermination of six and a half billion people from the face of the Earth. Half a billion will remain. This is the number of people the planet can sustain indefinitely, so that the descendents of the Rothschilds and Rockefellers can live in peace and affluence indefinitely. Slaves are needed to produce that luxury, but 500 million will do just fine. But how does one go about killing off most of the world?

“Vaccinating” the planet with a bioweapon with near-100% mortality would do the trick. Baxter would provide both the bioweapon as well as the vaccine against it to “civilized” Western peoples. Result: We can plunder Africa, we have no more competition from SE Asia, the oil is for our taking and only Western and perhaps Chinese sheeple remain.

Rockefeller said this in 1994 at a U.N. dinner: “We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order.” PNAC said something similar right before 9/11

For article with clickable ‘links’ to more relative information click url:

http://www.inteldaily.com/news/126/ARTICLE/11902/2009-09-22.html

===

MA(Massachussetts)”Pandemic Response Bill”–$1000/day fine for refusing vaccines

The United States of America is devolving into medical fascism and Massachusetts is leading the way with the passage of a new bill, the “Pandemic Response Bill” 2028, reportedly just passed by the MA state Senate and now awaiting approval in the House. This bill suspends virtually all Constitutional rights of Massachusetts citizens and forces anyone “suspected” of being infected to submit to interrogations, “decontaminations” and vaccines.

It’s also sets fines up to $1,000 per day for anyone who refuses to submit to quarantines, vaccinations, decontamination efforts or to follow any other verbal order by virtually any state-licensed law enforcement or medical personnel. You can read the text yourself here:

http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/senate/186/st02pdf/st02028.pdf

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1480672

Should this not be a worldly decision… and not just one of the United States NASA…?

The American Peoples need to eliminate NASA $17.6 Billion Budget. In doing so the United States could enhance the lives of many , such as adequately taking care of the elderly, providing quality health care for all American citizens. Housing for the homeless. Perhaps we need to mend our relationship with the earth before raping another planet.

The Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) is now traveling to the moon at 5592 mph and will crash-land on Oct. 9 in order to gather data from the 6-mile-high impact cloud it will create. Today, as NASA announced the crater where LCROSS will land (Cabeus-A), the mission continues to drum up controversy. Is crash-landing on the moon really necessary for science? Will it be worth the damage done to the moon? To both these questions, PM answers a resounding, Yes. Here’s why we’re rooting for NASA’s October mission to bombard the moon.

Published on: September 11, 2009

REF: http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4317333.html

NASA today announced the site of a mission that aims to send an empty fuel tank into a lunar crater to assess the amount of frozen water that is kicked up by the impact. On October 9, a kamikaze spacecraft will crash into the moon’s Cabeus-A crater, kicking up a 6-mile-high debris cloud that a follow-on craft will surf through, using infrared spectrometers and video cameras to determine how much—if any—water ice exists. A series of space-based and terrestrial telescopes will also examine the plume.

So it appears the mission is on track, but it’s been a tough summer for LCROSS. For several weeks in August, the spacecraft suffered from a strange software malfunction that caused it to consume too much fuel. After two weeks spent in an emergency mode, mission planners last week returned operations to normal. While this 240,000-mile reprogramming was underway, a chorus of online readers of mainstream science websites were rooting for the mission’s failure. These armchair space critics call LCROSS crude, violent and silly. But even a cursory look at the mission reveals a clever, scrappy mission that should be cheered instead. Here’s why we like LCROSS, and are looking forward to its date with Cabeus-A.

1) It’s a cheap, creative and scrappy mission. This is what many people want NASA projects to look like in the future.

LCROSS is a Class D mission, denoting one with the highest risk of failure. Once-in-a-lifetime missions and those with human passengers are considered Class A missions, and carry a high cost in time and money to ensure that the equipment won’t fail. The extra testing, custom-built gear and redundant equipment drives up costs to levels that give even members of Congress pause. NASA could launch more risky missions like LCROSS instead of just a handful of marquee ones, and reap more rewards even if some fail.

The cost of LCROSS is about $79 million—cheap in the spaceflight world—and its planners delivered it on budget and on time. The engineers adapted available parts and technology for their craft: commandeering an empty fuel tank for its mass, crafting an internal fuel tank from a communications satellite and copying avionics from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, which is to be delivered into the lunar orbit on the same ride as LCROSS. (The impactor mission is hitching a ride on the Lunar Reconnaissance Obriter’s launch.) LCROSS’s skeleton, an aluminum ring that looks like a section of sewer pipe with six portholes, is leftover from an Air Force project designed to release multiple satellites from a single rocket. The moon-bombing engineers cobbled these parts together to make a cheap spaceship in just two years. Some risks are worth taking: LCROSS is one of them.

LCROSS Image Gallery
+ CLICK PHOTOS TO ENLARGE

2) It will have conclusive results.

So many space missions leave people scratching their heads. Sometimes the science is obscure, or simply a preparation for some other event that may or may not occur in some future decade. For example, LRO will provide ground-breaking images of the moon, and will support any return by America, but people can rightfully ask, “Don’t we have images of the moon? And are people really going to return in 2020?” LCROSS has a specific scientific mission and a payoff that is almost immediate. In 1998 a probe called Lunar Prospector spotted tantalizing signs of hydrogen in craters at the lunar poles. But no one’s entirely sure if the hydrogen is the chemical signature of water ice, possibly deposited by comets and meteors. LCROSS should not only confirm that water-ice is on the moon, but in what quantities. Any future moon base would rely on this water, so love or hate lunar aspirations, the information will be useful.

3) The scar will be very small.

LCROSS will create a 6-foot-deep crater inside another crater on the south pole. The moon has suffered much worse from the cosmos, and this latest gouge pales in comparison. Note that there are no explosives on board—the mass of the impactor alone is enough to create a plume. Also, the craft will be empty of all fuel before impact, to keep results uncluttered.

4) Humans have been crashing things into the moon—not to mention leaving trash behind—for a long time, so what’s one more if it actually gleans some data?

There is nothing pristine about the moon. It’s lifeless surface is cluttered with spent probes, landing craft, seismic sensors and moon buggies. Every time an Apollo mission took off, the crew threw out all unneeded equipment to save weight on the return. The idea that the moon will somehow be ruined by LCROSS is bizarre. Besides, even if a fraction of previous impacts hit the moon in the future, any human traces will in time be pulverized. So the moon will recover, you thumb-sucking Luddites!

]]> http://oyate-oti.com/?feed=rss2&p=872 0 http://oyate-oti.com/?p=862 http://oyate-oti.com/?p=862#comments Fri, 04 Sep 2009 20:28:44 +0000 admin http://oyate-oti.com/?p=862 Note: The United States government can evidently track a single Bovine (Cow)  location within over 100, 000 farms, to protect the cattle industry, but yet are incapable of finding this diseased racial menace to the American Indian peoples.

By Clarke Canfield of the Associated Press

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — The FBI is trying to find the person who posted online advertisements saying he had two-century-old “Maine Indian scalps” that he wanted to sell to white people.

The FBI executed a search warrant last month at Yahoo Inc. for information related to two e-mail addresses linked to the Craigslist postings, according to documents filed in U.S. District Court in Portland.

It is illegal to traffic in Native American remains. Kirk Francis, chief of the Penobscot Indian Nation, had reported the ads to state and federal officials and said he has reason to believe they were real.

The seller offered six scalps and related artifacts from a private family collection said to have been obtained by bounty hunters in the 1700s. Back then, bounties were offered for Penobscot Indians or for their scalps, Francis said. One proclamation, dated 1755, offered 50 pounds in British currency for every male Penobscot above the age of 12 and 40 pounds for their scalps.

Ads Ran Twice in June, Says Affadavit

If the scalps exist, Francis said they should be returned to the Penobscot reservation in Maine and given a proper burial.

“These are human beings that were murdered under genocidal policies, so we’re concerned that in 2009 the effects of that policy are still here and there are still people who look at these pieces as nothing more than some kind of conquering piece of art,” he said.

An FBI spokeswoman declined to comment, citing the agency’s policy of not commenting on or confirming ongoing cases.

The ads, which are no longer accessible, ran twice in June, according to the FBI affidavit. The ads, which included a Maine cell phone number, said the scalps and other artifacts were part of a privately owned museum and were being sold because of a recent death among the owners.

A 1990 federal law makes it illegal for museums to have Native American remains and requires institutions to return remains to their rightful tribes, said Jason Brown, spokesman at Bar Harbor’s Abbe Museum, which is devoted to Maine’s Native American heritage.

Brown said he has never heard of people keeping scalps in private collections, but said it is hard to know exactly what is out there.

“Once they go into a private collection, it’s hard to know unless they rear their head,” he said.

—————————————————————————————————————

BY TREVOR MAXWELL
Portland Press Herald

PORTLAND –– The FBI is investigating recent posts on craigslist that offered to sell “Maine Indian scalps” to “white people only,” according to court documents and the leader of the Penobscot Indian Nation, who reported the situation to state and federal officials.

The person who posted the items claimed to have six scalps and related artifacts that were obtained by bounty hunters in the 1700s and came into his possession through a private family collection.

The posts included a Maine cell phone number and the contact name “Whitely Bradford.” The phone was not accepting calls this week, and the posts are no longer accessible on craigslist, a popular Web site that allows people to sell, buy and trade goods and services.

It is unclear whether the scalps exist, or whether the person who posted the ad was trying to carry out an elaborate hoax. But based on dates and other details in the posts, federal investigators and Penobscot leaders have proceeded under the assumption that they are legitimate.

“The big thing for us is to be able to deal with those remains properly,” said Penobscot Chief Kirk Francis. “It is a hard period of time to look back on anyway. To have the tribe reminded of that in such a blatant fashion, and then trying to have someone profit on it, that just doesn’t sit well.

“To have parts of dead Native people and to be selling them, this obviously is not acceptable,” Francis said.

The posts were brought to Francis’ attention by an anonymous e-mail. After reviewing them with members of the Penobscot Tribal Historic Preservation Office, Francis reported them to the U.S. Department of Justice and the state Attorney General’s Office.

Last month, the FBI obtained e-mails and other computer evidence affiliated with two Yahoo e-mail addresses that were linked to craigslist posts on June 4 and June 6.

In a five-page affidavit filed in U.S. District Court in Portland, FBI Special Agent James Lechner said the posts gave him probable cause to investigate a possible violation of federal law: trafficking in Native American remains.

That specific offense was created in 1990 as part of the federal Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, and is punishable by as much as one year in prison.

Todd DiFede, the FBI’s supervisory agent in Maine, said Wednesday that he could not comment on an ongoing investigation. Halsey Frank, an assistant U.S. attorney who has been involved with the case, also declined to comment.

Francis said he and other tribal leaders initially doubted the craigslist posts.

“We said, ‘Well, maybe someone is just trying to get our hair up here,’” he said. “It started to become more and more credible.”

The posts claim that the scalps were obtained for bounties between 1700 and 1760.

Francis said that during that time, British colonists offered bounties for the capture or killing of Penobscot men, women and children. One formal proclamation was made in 1755 by Spencer Phips, the lieutenant governor of the Province of Massachusetts Bay.

If the scalps do exist, Francis said, he will do whatever it takes to retrieve them and provide a proper burial on Penobscot land. Francis said he is confident that the FBI investigation will uncover the truth.

“It has been three months, so of course we would like things to be moving a lot quicker,” he said. “At this point, we are getting a little impatient, but we are also trying to let them focus on what they need to do.

“This really is on a whole new level,” Francis said. “Something like this is not representative of Maine. It has no place here.”

One craigslist post appeared on June 4, offering “a rare collection of museum quality Maine Indian scalps. Included is two squaws, two children and two ‘noble indigenous savages.’”

The post said the items –– including “beads, tattoos and leather tags to identify the sex and approximate age” –– were in shadow boxes and were part of a “private Fesseden museum.”

“There was a recent death in the ownership,” the post said. “The family were among Maine’s earliest settlers and will discriminate in selling to white people only.”

Another post appeared on June 6, with much of the same information. It said the scalps were from the “Fesseden-Avery collection which was a privately owned museum.

Julia Clark, collections manager at the Abbe Museum in Bar Harbor, said private collections of Native items do exist in Maine but she has never heard of anyone possessing human remains.

She said she has never heard of a “Fesseden” or “Fesseden-Avery” collection. Clark said there are no known examples in New England of Native American scalps preserved from the era of bounty hunting.

The Abbe Museum offers exhibitions and programs on Maine’s Wabanaki heritage. The Wabanaki people include Maine’s four Indian tribes: Maliseet, Micmac, Penobscot and Passamaquoddy.

Clark does not believe that anyone has ever been prosecuted in Maine for trafficking in Native American artifacts or remains. She said the posts deserve the full attention of law enforcement agencies, even if they turn out to be a hoax.

“The cultural insensitivity in the posts, that alone is distressing,” Clark said.

John Bear Mitchell said it is hard for him to understand how human remains could be so devalued. Mitchell is a member of the Penobscot Nation who teaches at the University of Maine and is associate director of the school’s Wabanaki Center.

“Even if it is hair, with a little bit of flesh on it, that is human remains. That could be one of our ancestors,” Mitchell said. “This doesn’t just affect people in the past. It affects us today, people who are living.”

A few years ago, it came to Mitchell’s attention that someone was trying to sell a “Penobscot Indian skull” on eBay. He helped inform Penobscot leaders, who contacted representatives of the Internet auction site. The posting was immediately removed.

“Things that are taken from graves, that is bad enough because those are human objects,” Mitchell said. “But to take a scalp or a skull, to say this was on our family shelf for 100 years and we don’t have use for it anymore. To turn them into money, that is perversion.”