Showing posts with label United States Constitution. Show all posts

Monday, October 24, 2011

Occupy Phoenix with AR-15's and The Right to Bear Arms.

The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments t...

Image via Wikipediahttp://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rjOwSIsgE8c
Finally. It's nice to see the REAL NEWS about all this. It's not politics. It's about our Freedom and our Constitutional Rights as Americans. Not a Democracy. We are a Republic. Not a MOB, What is going to be the Media's excuse for this one? Republican, Democrats and The Church needs to wake up. Now is that time to do something instead of sitting around complaining calling them names, like is see so many doing right now. Stop believing the Media The first and second amendments go hand in hand. I wonder how many people know them both today?

While Average Americans sit around gripping about the other side of politics. A movement is happening where not just one side is voicing what they believe and know. While Many and I mean many people are trying to make this all about Political issues and elections. The reality is this. We all have a chance to stand up right now. Instead of gripping and calling people names online thinking it's about taking away your jobs. We should be out there teaching and showing the Truth in all this.
I see the Tea Party calling these people Mobs for going out for doing exactly what they are doing. Yet, I have also come to realize that the Tea Party somehow is making all this Political as well? The really Tea Party should be out in the middle of all this.

If you don't own a bank, or a corporation that owns the Government. Or own the Media. Then you are not the 1 %. You are We the People. If we believe in Freedom at all. This is where we should be.
I have seen Christians complaining how Islam is in the streets praying. I'm not sure what they expect if they are not out in the Streets Praying in a time like this.

Quotes by Thomas Jefferson on Government and Rights.

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

Freedom of our Constitutional Rights is not Politics. Has this generation become so blind that they don't even know how we got Freedom in the first place?

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” (Quoting Cesare Beccaria)

The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.
The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.

No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.

To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association—the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.

I think myself that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious. (Back then!)
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.
Thomas Jefferson

Occupy Phoenix with AR-15's

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

FREE SPEECH SILENCED IN DEARBORN, MICHIGAN

Image via Wikipediahttp://www.teapartytribune.com/2011/04/22/free-speech-silenced-in-dearborn-michigan
April 22, 2012
Dear Patriots,
Today, The United West had a team of activists on the ground in Dearborn, Michigan assisting Michigan activists in maintaining their First Amendment right. They witnessed the City of Dearborn, Michigan standing firmly with Shairah Law and not with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Pastor Jones, who brought the issue to the forefront, is secondary to the issue of the United States Constitution losing ground to Shariah compliance.
The Government of Dearborn, Michigan is FEARFUL of Muslims and functions, de facto, as a Shariah compliant city.
Citizens of Dearborn must view this GOOD FRIDAY as a “day of awakening” and start the hard work to save their formally beautiful and proud city.
The United West is on the ground in Michigan assisting the activists who call Michigan their home and will retain a presence there to save the state from pervasive and destructive Shariah compliant doctrine.
We were there today to support the patriots of Dearborn and will remain there as the ONLY academic, resistance and confrontational activists in the nation.
God Bless you, our great patriots, on this Easter weekend. May God bless and Save America.
In Liberty,
Tom A. Trento
The United West
www.TheUnitedWest.org

Friday, May 27, 2011

SPECIAL REPORT: Indiana Citizens Take Back 4th Amendment

First page of Constitution of the United States

Image via Wikipediahttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhUhrlcSlQg&feature=player_embedded#at=136

http://RTR.org | After the unconstitutional Indiana Supreme Court ruling removing the protections of the 4th Amendment, the people of Indiana spontaneously organized in a trans-partisan alliance uniting for the Constitution at their state capitol. Gary Franchi was on the scene to report. Become a member of the social network of the revolution, login with your Facebook or Twitter account at http://RTR.org/signup

Indiana Supreme Court: Resisting an Unlawful Entry Into Your Home is… Unlawful

http://michellemalkin.com/2011/05/14/indiana-supreme-court/
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. — 4th Amendment to the US Constitution
The Indiana Supreme Court has ruled that the 4th Amendment needs a disclaimer when it comes to officers of the law acting unlawfully (at which point, by definition, wouldn’t they cease to be “officers of the law”?).
Bruce McQuain has the details:

That’s what the Indiana Supreme Court decided in what would be a laughable finding if it wasn’t so serious:

Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.
The author of the story reporting this is right – somehow the ISC managed, in one fell swoop, to overturn almost 900 years of precedent, going back to the Magna Carta.

In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer’s entry.
Or said another way, your home is no longer your castle.

From the ruling (PDF):

Friday, April 15, 2011

Ariz. Senate OKs Presidential Birth Certificate Bill

Image via WikipediaI find it so sad that my children cannot go in to any school without the actual documents to prove they are citzens but the President of the United States don't have to show anything? I mean really? This could have been done and over with already if he would just show real thing nothing but a phone call on his part. Unless? He's got something to hide that is. Arizona Rocks! I'm actually surprise this isn't already in all state laws after all it is the law of the land already according the the Constitution of the United States of America that is.
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/BarackObama-BirthCertificate-ArizonaSenate/2011/04/14/id/392865?s=al
The battle over presidential candidates' birth certificates took its first legislative turn when Arizona’s Senate approved a bill requiring all presidential candidates to provide documentation proving they Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Arizona Senate

Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Arizona Senate

were born in the United States before getting on the state ballot.

The bill, which passed 20 to 9 on a party-line vote Wednesday, still has to be approved by Arizona's House. A Democrat who voted against the measure claimed that if it becomes law, it is likely to be struck down by the courts, reports the Arizona Daily Star.

The original bill, which would have required presidential candidates to provide their long-form birth certificate, was amended to allow other documents such as baptism, circumcision or hospital birth records.

Article Two of the Constitution requires the president to be a “natural born citizen.” The Arizona bill did not specifically mention President Barack Obama, who has consistently refused to release his long-form certificate. Many Republicans, led by prospective presidential candidate Donald Trump, have cast doubt on Obama’s claim that he was born in Hawaii.

Read more on Newsmax.com: Ariz. Senate OKs Presidential Birth Certificate Bill
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Monday, March 21, 2011

International alliance divided over Libya command. Is it Constitutional?

Constitution of the United States of America

Image by The U.S. National Archives via FlickrOne thing we don't seem to be hearing about at all in the news media today is, that we have a President that doesn't seem to think he has to go through Congress to make MAJOR decisions like this.
That's right our so called leader did not go through Congress to go to War.
ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8
The Congress shall have Power:
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress....

ARTICLE 1, SECTION 9

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

ARTICLE II, SECTION 2
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States....
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur....

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/03/21/kucinich_obama_ignored_constitution_his_own_advice_with_strikes_on_libya.html

"If this was so grave, Congress is still in session. The President could have said 'don't go home, I've got to talk to you about what's happening here. I may need your approval.' This is about the Constitution and if we don't abide by our Constitution, everything falls apart here. This is about the Constitution, not about whether you like President Obama or not. I like President Obama, but I love the Constitution," Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) said on FOX News this morning.

This has even seemed to have woke up a few on the Democratic side as well.
See more here.
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/congress-the-president-and-war-powers-under-the-constitution/
Over the past 48 hours, there’s been much commentary about President Obama’s failure to obtain Congressional approval for American involvement in the actions against Libya to enforce UNSCR 1973 on both sides of the political aisle. Some Democrats in Congress were quick to speak out against the President’s decision, which they said he lacked legal authority to make:

A hard-core group of liberal House Democrats is questioning the constitutionality of U.S. missile strikes against Libya, with one lawmaker raising the prospect of impeachment during a Democratic Caucus conference call on Saturday.
Reps. Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.), Donna Edwards (Md.), Mike Capuano (Mass.), Dennis Kucinich (Ohio), Maxine Waters (Calif.), Rob Andrews (N.J.), Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas), Barbara Lee (Calif.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.) “all strongly raised objections to the constitutionality of the president’s actions” during that call, said two Democratic lawmakers who took part.
Kucinich, who wanted to bring impeachment articles against both former President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney over Iraq — only to be blocked by his own leadership — asked why the U.S. missile strikes aren’t impeachable offenses….
Saturday’s conference call was organized by Rep. John Larson (Conn.), chairman of the Democratic Caucus and the fourth-highest ranking party leader. Larson has called for Obama to seek congressional approval before committing the United States to any anti-Qadhafi military operation.
“They consulted the Arab League. They consulted the United Nations. They did not consult the United States Congress,” one Democrat lawmaker said of the White House. “They’re creating wreckage, and they can’t obviate that by saying there are no boots on the ground. … There aren’t boots on the ground; there are Tomahawks in the air.”

These liberal Democrats have been joined in their position by Republicans ranging from Richard Lugar to National Review’s Andrew McCarthy who wrote yesterday:
The Security Council is powerless to “authorize” the U.S. military to do a damned thing. The validity of American combat operations is a matter of American law, and that means Congress must authorize them.
Read more here. http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/congress-the-president-and-war-powers-under-the-constitution/
News from Yahoo today. Lets leave the States and explain it away out there. Does this seem fishy at all?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theenvoy/20110321/ts_yblog_theenvoy/international-alliance-divided-over-libya-command

President Barack Obama, speaking in Santiago, Chile on Monday, defended his decision to order U.S. strikes against Libyan military targets, and insisted that the mission is clear.
And like a parade of Pentagon officials the past few days, Obama insisted that the United States' lead military role will be turned over—"in days, not weeks"—to an international command of which the United States will be just one part.
The only problem: None of the countries in the international coalition can yet agree on to whom or how the United States should hand off responsibilities.
The sense of urgency among White House officials to resolve the command dispute is profound: with each hour the U.S. remains in charge of yet another Middle East military intervention, Congress steps up criticism that Obama went to war in Libya without first getting its blessing, nor defining precisely what the end-game will be. (On Monday, Obama sent Congress official notification that he had ordered the U.S. military two days earlier to commence operations "to prevent humanitarian catastrophe" in Libya and support the international coalition implementing UN Security Council Resolution 1973.)
Below, an explainer on the military mission in Libya, the dispute over who should command it after its initial phase, and whether the military is concerned about mission creep.
What is the U.S. military task in Libya?
The military mission in Libya is implementing U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973, which calls for Gadhafi's forces to pull back from rebel-held towns, and the establishment of a no-fly zone to protect Libyan civilians from attack by Gadhafi, and for civilians to be allowed access to food, water and other humanitarian supplies.

Saturday, December 4, 2010

Action Alert 12/2/10 - Constitutional Emergency

"The American people don't believe anythi...

Image by afagen via Flickrhttp://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=2734278%3ABlogPost%3A229983&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_post

Ignoring the will of the people and betraying us (once again), the members of the Senate voted to PASS S 510 Food "Safety" Bill! FOURTEEN REPUBLICAN SENATORS were among those voting to pass this bill!

This bill, as you know, has NOTHING to do with Food "Safety" and EVERYTHING to do with exercising more control over the American people! If you had thoughts about planting a garden this coming Spring, think again! S 510 robs us of our God-given right to supply our own food!

If you feel betrayed as we do, join us in letting the fourteen Republican Senators know just what we think of their vote!
Visit our FAX Center and read the FAX. If it meets with your approval, request to send "S 510 Traitors" fax

Sunday, November 14, 2010

Obama’s Claiming More Power Over Americans Than King George III, Says Virginia Attorney General | CNSnews.com

Image via WikipediaAs I view what our own Government keeps pushing on the American People daily. I can't help but to look at all the facts from not just both sides, but also back through history. The time when the Constitution was made. What our forefathers actually fought against with Britain, and the rest of the World in order to keep a free Nation intact.
I here about Global Banks, Global Governments, Global currency, and Global Power every day now, and it continues on and on. Have Americans really forgotten what makes this great nation what it is? Are people so bent on Globalizing everything that they really want to encourage a Global destruction?
When the United States Constitution was signed. The people who signed it were there. They saw the Tyranny and the Socialized communists and dictatorships. They were there. They saw how the Governments and Kings raise taxes and destroyed nations.

Just like the Bible the Constitution is NOT UP FOR your personal interpretation. It says what it says and that is it.
When the Tea Parties formed back then. Do you remember why they did what they did?
Lets try to help refresh just a little bit of our memories of history in this article. We need to remember to Never let any other Country Rule over America.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/va-attorney-general-obama-s-claiming-mor
Virginia Atty. Gen. Ken Cuccinelli, who has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to overturn the health-care law signed by President Barack Obama last March, says Obama and the Congress that enacted that law--which mandates that individuals must buy government-approved health insurance plans--are seeking a power over the lives of Americans that even King George III did not claim to possess.
“We now have a Congress and a president who believe they can order you to buy a product when King George III and the Parliament of Great Britain, whom we rebelled against, acknowledged that they could not,” Cuccinelli said in a video interview with CNSNews.com.
In October, U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson heard arguments on the merits of Virginia's case against Obamacare.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

GOPUSA » Commentary » Malkin: Arizona vs. the U.N. Human Rights Police

Philadelphia - Old City: Second Bank of the Un...

Image by wallyg via FlickrMy God what is going on in the White House that makes them think they defy the United States and the Constitution?
Are they actually trying to create a War? This has got the be the stupidest thing I have ever seen from any United States Government. This is going to a foreign country to deal with a state in the US.
Where is that in the Constitution? This is what causes Kings and Queens to be overthrown.

http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2010/09/arizona-vs-the-un-human-rights-police.php

An indignant President Obama complained last week, "I can't spend all of my time with my birth certificate plastered on my forehead." Fine. How about plastering a copy of his presidential oath of office there instead? The kowtowing commander-in-chief is in dire need of a daily reminder that his job is to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" -- not international law or global diktats.
Case in point: Last week, Obama's State Department handed in America's first-ever report to the United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights in conjunction with something called the "Universal Periodic Review." In short, the 29-page document is a self-aggrandizing report card touting the administration's far-left domestic and foreign policy initiatives for the world's approval. The report boasts of racial- and gender-bean-counting in the executive branch; Justice Department outreach to Muslim grievance groups opposed to post-9/11 security measures; teachers' union payoffs in the federal stimulus law; continuing commitment to closing the Gitmo detention facility for enemy combatants; and the illusory lifesaving effects of Obamacare on minorities through "expanding community health centers" (which have yet to be built, but not that it matters in our Nobel Peace Prize-winning president's age of post-achievement).
The report also includes a section on "values and immigration," which essentially singles out Arizona's immigration enforcement law as a human rights deficiency "that is being addressed in a court action."
In response, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer rightly blasted Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration for succumbing to "internationalism run amok." Brewer pointed out in a letter to Clinton, "Human rights as guaranteed by the United States and Arizona Constitutions are expressly protected in S.B. 1070 and defended vigorously by my Administration. In fact, the Department of Justice has correctly not included these so-called 'human rights' issues in the current litigation against the State of Arizona." Somehow, that inconvenient detail escaped the Foggy Bottom bureaucrats' notice.
Read more: http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2010/09/arizona-vs-the-un-human-rights-police.php#ixzz0yLHAxBDW

Friday, July 23, 2010

It's freedom of 'religion,' Mr. President

11th amendment of the United States Constitution.

Image via Wikipedia

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/billofrights#amendmenti

clipped from www.wnd.com

Officials with the Faith and Freedom Institute have dispatched a letter to the president, asking that he correct himself.

"The First Amendment of the United States Constitution uses the word 'religion'

"Your use of the word 'worship' implies that we have freedom ONLY within the confines of structures set aside for religious expression (i.e. churches, synagogues, etc.). This is not only a gross departure from the original intent of the First Amendment, but is also the first step toward eliminating faith expression in the public marketplace."

"Worship" usually is done behind the walls and closed doors of a building set aside for that purpose. "Religion," on the other hand, includes the biblically mandated activity of declaring the Gospel to all nations.

Freedom of religion, he said, "actually means that we can practice religion in public space. Freedom of worship is more personal and often behind the doors of a church."

Sunday, July 4, 2010