Apr 30, 2007

WV Supreme Court Upholds the Constitution--4th ammendment requires police need warrant for wires

On WCHS talk radio today Mike Agnello unleashed another rant and gross distortion of a recent decision by the Supreme Court which merely limited police to their constitutional limits by requiring warrants for "wiring" informants in drug cases. Rick Johnson was edited by Agnello, who barely acknowledged the police could still proceed if they obtain a warrant. Their complaint? It is too impractical to get a warrant! Agnello says "this is not a partisan issue", yet he then sets up the controversial Brent Benjamin (republican, and the dissenting judge) as the example. Just who is making this partisan? Agreed--it should not be partisan, but a constitutional issue alone, like all issues should be. But the constitution is insufficient for Agnello's desire for an Italian-fascist police state (something he should recall from his ancestor's history). Of course being from Chicago, reknowned for its police corruption well-documented, he is merely aspiring to "conventionalize" West Virginia into the same jack-boot culture of arbitrary police powers.

Apparently Agnello wants a Fascist Police State where warrants are unnecessary and police are the local and unaccountable Gestapo which can kick in doors, sneak and peak, and spy and conduct surveillance without accountability or limits (and similar to America's New Government under the Bush administration since 9/11). What kind of America, or West Virginia, would that be? What would then restrain the police from entering anyone's home? What then would constitute "probable cause"--mere arbitrary suspicion? Politicizing this as he did also incites and inflames the ignorant public against the Constitution itself and emboldens police to enter into conflict with anyone who regards constitutional law as "suspicious" or hostile--increasing tension and potential violence between people and police! Hostility and disrespect can be expected to police who trample our precious Bill of Rights and also by talk show hosts who want and irresponsibly advocate to overthrow the "rule of law" defined in the Constitution for totalitarian police powers. For if the principle is violated for the inflamed and exaggerated cause of "drugs" then it will also be overthrown for any other purpose as well. The "plea of necessity" is the despots plea as the West Virginia Constitution itself states:

1-3. Continuity of constitutional operation.

The provisions of the constitution of the United States, and of this state, are operative alike in a period of war as in time of peace, and any departure therefrom, or violation thereof, under the plea of necessity, or any other plea, is subversive of good government, and tends to anarchy and despotism.

The police merely have to get a warrant (something required since 1787), which states the evidence they want and expect to obtain, which is necessary for a conviction anyway. It is absolutely dangerous to empower police to act contrary to the constitution. Everyone needs to commit the 4th amendment to memory, and teach their children likewise, lest a political revolution lead to tyrannical police power and arbitrary government--something already well under way.

This is also very similar to the Federal government violation as well in domestic spying, where the violation is also discussed here:

NSA Eavesdropping and the Fourth Amendment

U.S. Constitution: Fourth Amendment

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.

Apr 29, 2007

Jose' Padilla--Another Example of the Terror Hoax

The article below sums up the situation fairly well, while the disaffected but still too gullible public entertains themselves while a phony "war on terror" continues to be propped up in the people's minds by baseless and false accusations where allegation and repetition (ad infinitum) equals truth. It is long time for all to watch the government attempt to present evidence to substantiate its claim of Padilla being involved with 9/11 and attempting to setoff a "dirty bomb". All the media should be held accountable for their headlines, and the Bush administration for its propaganda and assertions which have as much credibility as "WMD" in Iraq.

Where's the Beef?

Padilla and the Zucchini Prosecution


The only thing keeping Padilla in jail is the 9-11 hysteria which still lingers throughout the country. If the administration hadn't figured out how to exploit people's fear of terrorism, Padilla would be a free man right now. Instead, he faces life behind bars on charges that are just as unclear now as they were when they were first made.

The government has dropped all charges that Padilla is a "dirty bomber" or that he was planning to blow up apartment buildings in the US. In fact, they've changed their story completely. Now they're charging Padilla as a material witness in a "conspiracy to murder, kidnap and maim". They say that he is part of a "North American support cell that's part of a vast international movement of foot soldiers, recruiters and financiers who foment violent jihad around the globe."

It sounds creepy, but where's the proof? In 5 years, the government hasn't produced a shred of evidence that Padilla is guilty of anything....

Apr 28, 2007

REAL ID--West Virginia Prepares Resolution and Bill to Reject REAL ID

"The purpose of this bill is to provide that West Virginia will not participate in the "REAL ID Act of 2005" enacted by the United States Congress in Public Law 109-13."

Some of the most beautiful words I've ever seen!
Not bad for a Yankee state, eh? (C'mon Southerners...your late to the battle!) Check here for other state's current status: http://www.realnightmare.org/news/105/. Join the just Rebellion now to "defend freedom"! (Next step is to eliminate use of Socialist Security Number--a data-mining scheme--from being required as a condition for doing business or obtaining government documents).

This legislation is pending and needs to be pushed through in the next session so that "Mountaineers are always free" (WV Motto). The Resolution here is weaker than the bills in regards to stating Constitutional articles, both 10th and 4th ammendments respectively should be mentioned.

Here is the pending Resolution:

Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 38
Urging the President of the United States and Congress to repeal the Real ID Act of 2005.
Whereas, The federal Real ID Act of 2005 mandates an unfunded national driver's license on the people of West Virginia; and

Whereas, Implementation of the Real ID Act would cost West Virginia taxpayers approximately $65 million; and

Whereas, The Real ID Act national database will invite theft of identity and invasion of privacy; and

Whereas, The Real ID Act will impose inconveniences and higher taxes on West Virginians with no attendant benefit such as protection from terrorism; therefore, be it

Resolved by the Legislature of West Virginia:
That the Legislature hereby urges the President of the United States and Congress to repeal the Real ID Act of 2005; and, be it

Further Resolved, That the Clerk is hereby directed to forward a copy of this resolution to the President of the United States, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Governor of West Virginia, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives and each member of West Virginia's congressional delegation.

Here is the bill, identicle in both House and Senate:

Note the proposed TEETH in this bill to prevent Homeland Tyranny from dealing directly with the DMV to entice, coerce, or otherwise come in by the back door! The DMV head in 2004 was completely agreeable to implementation. Bill is pending introduction in next session, having cleared judiciary.
§17B-7-1. Legislative finding; prohibiting implementation of "REAL ID Act."

(1) The Legislature finds that the enactment into law by the United States Congress of the "REAL ID Act of 2005", as part of Public Law 109-13, is inimical to security and well-being of the people of West Virginia, will cause unneeded expense and inconvenience to the people of this state, and was adopted by the United States Congress in violation of the principles of federalism contained in the tenth amendment to the United States Constitution.

(2) The State of West Virginia will not participate in the implementation of the "REAL ID Act of 2005." The Department of Transportation, including the Division of Motor Vehicles, is directed not to implement the provisions of the "REAL ID Act of 2005" and to report to the Governor any attempt by agencies or agents of the United States Department of Homeland Security to secure the implementation of the "REAL ID Act of 2005" through the operations of that division.

NOTE: The purpose of this bill is to
provide that West Virginia will not participate in the "REAL ID Act of 2005" enacted by the United States Congress in Public Law 109-13.

Apr 27, 2007

Right to Drive and Travel vs. State Claim of "Privilege"

This article by Phoenix police officer Jack McLamb lays out constitutional rights versus the state's claim that "driving is a privilege" granted by the state. Says who?

Right to Travel


By Jack McLamb (from Aid & Abet Newsletter)

For years professionals within the criminal justice system have acted on the belief that traveling by motor vehicle was a privilege that was given to a citizen only after approval by their state government in the form of a permit or license to drive. In other words, the individual must be granted the privilege before his use of the state highways was considered legal. Legislators, police officers, and court officials are becoming aware that there are court decisions that disprove the belief that driving is a privilege and therefore requires government approval in the form of a license. Presented here are some of these cases:

CASE #1: "The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.

CASE #2: "The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.

It could not be stated more directly or conclusively that citizens of the states have a common law right to travel, without approval or restriction (license), and that this right is protected under the U.S Constitution.

CASE #3: "The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.

CASE #4: "The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right." Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941.

As hard as it is for those of us in law enforcement to believe, there is no room for speculation in these court decisions. American citizens do indeed have the inalienable right to use the roadways unrestricted in any manner as long as they are not damaging or violating property or rights of others. Government -- in requiring the people to obtain drivers licenses, and accepting vehicle inspections and DUI/DWI roadblocks without question -- is restricting, and therefore violating, the people's common law right to travel.

Is this a new legal interpretation on this subject? Apparently not. This means that the beliefs and opinions our state legislators, the courts, and those in law enforcement have acted upon for years have been in error. Researchers armed with actual facts state that case law is overwhelming in determining that to restrict the movement of the individual in the free exercise of his right to travel is a serious breach of those freedoms secured by the U.S. Constitution and most state constitutions. That means it is unlawful. The revelation that the American citizen has always had the inalienable right to travel raises profound questions for those who are involved in making and enforcing state laws. The first of such questions may very well be this: If the states have been enforcing laws that are unconstitutional on their face, it would seem that there must be some way that a state can legally put restrictions -- such as licensing requirements, mandatory insurance, vehicle registration, vehicle inspections to name just a few -- on a citizen's constitutionally protected rights. Is that so?

For the answer, let us look, once again, to the U.S. courts for a determination of this very issue. In Hertado v. California, 110 US 516, the U.S Supreme Court states very plainly:

"The state cannot diminish rights of the people."

And in Bennett v. Boggs, 1 Baldw 60,

"Statutes that violate the plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void."

Would we not say that these judicial decisions are straight to the point -- that there is no lawful method for government to put restrictions or limitations on rights belonging to the people? Other cases are even more straight forward:

"The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice." Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22, at 24

"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491.

"The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller v. US, 230 F 486, at 489.

There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional rights." Sherer v. Cullen, 481 F 946

We could go on, quoting court decision after court decision; however, the Constitution itself answers our question - Can a government legally put restrictions on the rights of the American people at anytime, for any reason? The answer is found in Article Six of the U.S. Constitution:

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof;...shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or laws of any State to the Contrary not one word withstanding."

In the same Article, it says just who within our government that is bound by this Supreme Law:

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution..."

Here's an interesting question. Is ignorance of these laws an excuse for such acts by officials? If we are to follow the letter of the law, (as we are sworn to do), this places officials who involve themselves in such unlawful acts in an unfavorable legal situation. For it is a felony and federal crime to violate or deprive citizens of their constitutionally protected rights. Our system of law dictates that there are only two ways to legally remove a right belonging to the people. These are:

  1. by lawfully amending the constitution, or
  2. by a person knowingly waiving a particular right.

Some of the confusion on our present system has arisen because many millions of people have waived their right to travel unrestricted and volunteered into the jurisdiction of the state. Those who have knowingly given up these rights are now legally regulated by state law and must acquire the proper permits and registrations. There are basically two groups of people in this category:

More- http://www.land.netonecom.net/tlp/ref/right2travel.shtml

'deliberate and calculated lies'

from raw story: In a major hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the brother of deceased Army Specialist Pat Tillman, who appears to have been a victim of friendly fire, said that reports of his brother's 'heroic death' were "deliberate and calculated lies."

"These were intentional falsehoods that meet the legal definition for fraud," said Kevin Tillman, who served alongside his brother in the Army Rangers in Afghanistan.

Tillman testified alongside his mother, Mary, at a hearing on "Misleading Information from the Battlefield." Pat Tillman had been a safety for the Arizona Cardinals who turned down a contract extension in 2002 to enlist in the US Army Rangers.

Also at the hearing was Jessica Lynch, the Army Private whose tales of heroism were exaggerated in the aftermath of her capture and subsequent recuse from an Iraqi hospital in March and April 2003.

Lynch criticized the media for making too much of her heroism.

"My parent’s home in Wirt County [West Virginia] was under siege of the media all repeating the story of the little girl Rambo from the hills who went down fighting. It was not true," she said. "The truth of war is not always easy to hear but it's always more heroic than the hype."

Lynch, who still suffers from many injuries inflicted during her ordeal in Iraq, showed a quiet and reserved manner distinct from the Tillmans, who made it clear that they were pursuing truth and justice.

Kevin Tillman set the scene, arguing that the image of America's military campaign in Iraq was bruised after the US tactical defeat in Falluja, the Abu Ghraib scandal, and the call-up of 20,000 additional American troops to fight in Iraq.

"The media accounts, based on information provided by the Army and White House, were wreathed in a patriotic glow," he said of reporting on the circumstances of his brother's death.

"This was a terrible tragedy that might have further undermined support for the war in Iraq, and was instead transformed into a message," to build support for the war he argued.

When quizzed by one Republican Congressman, Darrell Issa of California, if there was any evidence of a conspiracy to falsify details of the Army Specialist's death, Tillman answered without any doubt.

"The evidence is leading to a point, which is why we came to your committee sir," Kevin Tillman responded.

Referring to the 'disconnect' between the stories told of Tillman's death and the truth about its circumstances, his brother said more investigation was needed.

"Based on how a lot of these wars are perception based, it's imperative that the committee take a look," Tillman argued. "[Politicians were] the ones who ultimately benefited from that story."

When Specialist Tillman's mother, Mary, was asked what gaps there were in the public record, she pointed to the large ring binder sitting on the table in front of her.

"See this binder?" she said to Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA).

misleading information from the battlefield

For starters, she suggested that the Army's awarding of a Silver Star to her son needed to be investigated, as it 'created a paper trail.'

She also challenged the Army Inspector General's report that a group of generals were the sole cause of the fabrications of the circumstances of Pat Tillman's death.

"That's a smokescreen, these officers are scapegoats," Mary Tillman said angrily, while answering a question asked by Rep. Christopher Shays (R-CT).

But while the Tillman family saw a political decision being made to falsify accounts of the Army Specialist's death, Lynch said to Issa that she didn't see any larger conspiracy beyond the media.

She blamed the media, "for letting the story keep going, they should have found out the facts before they spread the word like wildfire."

But in his opening statement, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), the committee's chairman, doubted that the media itself could be to blame for the story on Lynch's capture and rescue.

"Jessica Lynch was captured on March 23. The Washington Post published a completely factual article on her rescue on April 2. But by April 3, ten days after her capture, U.S. officials had become the source for a story that riveted the nation, but twisted the truth beyond recognition," Waxman argued. "It’s four years later and we still don’t know who’s responsible and why they did it. All we really know is that they did a great disservice to Jessica Lynch." ...

[source: http://mediamonarchy.blogspot.com/]
posted by mediamonarchy at Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Apr 26, 2007

War Push tied to Neoconservatives & Entanglement with Israel--WV Gazette

Brave and rare article by the Charleston Gazette on Jewish influence and Israel being a chief cause in the unjust Iraq war. A close look at the neoconservatives and their "dual citizenship" and corrupt teaching of Christian Zionism in America's churches demonstrates how it was done.
  • Iraq war cause

  • SEVERAL years ago, retired Ambassador Robert V. Keeley spoke in Charleston's former W.E. "Ned" Chilton III Leadership Lecture series. He criticized the U.S. policy that lets American Jews hold dual citizenship in both Israel and America, voting in both nations and serving in armed forces of each.

    Today, Keeley is chairman of a Washington think-tank — the Council for the National Interest Foundation — which focuses on harmful effects of America's excessive entanglement with Israel. This country's zealous support of Israel, plus providing U.S. weapons used against subjugated Palestinians, has made America hated by much of the Islamic world, the foundation contends.

    Worse, it says, America was sucked into the disastrous Iraq war partly because U.S. "hawks" allied with Israel wanted America to wipe out an Arab regime that menaced Israel. In a full-page New York Times ad, the CNI Foundation said:

    "Under the influence of well-positioned neoconservatives and the Israel lobby, we chose to go to war in Iraq and engage in what has proved to be an almost senseless war and occupation, now being overwhelmed by sectarian strife."

    In another such ad, Keeley's group asserted that "one of the major reasons we chose to put a priority on toppling Saddam Hussein was due to the lobbying efforts for Israel in Washington." It said a poll commissioned by the foundation found that 39 percent of Americans think "the work of the Israel lobby on Congress and the Bush administration has been a key factor for going to war in Iraq and now confronting Iran."

    Still another ad said "irrational concern for Israel by U.S. policymakers continues to be a prime motivation for our military adventures. ... So far, the United States and Israel have chosen a military solution to what is essentially a political problem."

    The CNI Foundation opposes Israel's occupation of captured Palestinian territory — "the imprisonment of the population on the West Bank into small bantustans, some 64 by one count" — and "the continuing Israeli siege of Gaza." It adds that U.S. fundamentalists worsen this problem, saying:

    "Some Christian evangelicals are joining in the fight to prevent the Bush administration from pressuring Israel to give up any West Bank territory for peace. This is based on their relatively narrow [ed. corrupt, heretical, and 20th century] interpretation of the Bible. The future is not bright, unless the American people come to realize how dangerous an 'Israel first' policy in the Middle East really is for the war in Iraq and for containing terrorism."

    When he was ambassador to Greece, Zimbabwe, Mauritius and other foreign posts, Keeley was a career diplomat, not a political appointee. Today, his CNI group recommends that a powerful international commission backed by the United Nations be appointed to arbitrate a solution to the deadly conflict between Israel and surrounding Arabs. This seems a better plan than sending more U.S. weapons to help Israel quell conquered Palestinians.

    Meanwhile, thinking Americans should ponder the CNI explanation of why President Bush plunged America into the unnecessary Iraq war. All his pretexts turned out to be untrue, leaving most people with no answer for why the war was started. Democrats now controlling Congress are trying to learn the reasons for the war. They should investigate this motive, along with others.

    [republished here for educational purposes only under Fair Use doctrine]


    BUYING THE WAR: Watch the Moyer's Documentary

    BUYING THE WAR: Watch the Show

    Watch and see how it was openly admitted that Bush's press conference was "scripted", and pre-prepared media questions were entertained for presentation to the public! THE PRESS ARE SYCOPHANTS, AND THE PUBLIC HAS BEEN SOLD CHEAP! It is very clear the 9/11 official story and "show" was also prepared for the public, and sold as well. Watch too how the corporation's officials DIRECTLY influence news content!

    Here are some previews:

    See Dick. Hear Dick lie. Watch the media parrot. See the collusion of some in media. Watch a real reporter see through the hoax and fraud, yet they were over-ruled.

    Watch the public get sold the lies. Watch how pressure and intimidation are used to control the media. Note that this same methodology continues to this day, and the SAME NEOCONSERVATIVE SOURCES--i.e. neocons like James Woolsey, Frank Gaffney, Bridget Gabriel (professional propagandist) of "American Congress for Truth" (not a "congress" but a neocon propaganda tank with Woolsey on board) are whom Mike Agnello solely relies on for "expertise" on WCHS Talk Radio to "educate" West Virginians into bald-faced lies and gross exaggerations!

    (Bear in mind the sponsors of this show, which is also only a politically-correct "limited hangout", for 9/11 was a psycopathic hoax designed to bring a "helpful wave of national indignation" which fueled it all.)

    Bill Moyers blog: Watch Video of Show recently aired


    Presidential Republican Candidate Ron Paul: Republicans Have Lost their Way

    Republican Roundup writes:

    Ron Paul

  • Ron Paul was interviewed by The Politico, and talked about a lot of issues, from war to spending to illegal immigration. On the big picture, why he's running, he said the following:

    I am arguing that (Republicans) have lost their way. Right now, on the surface, a lot of Republicans in Washington will be critical of my positions, saying "I don't support the president or the party," but if you look at our platform, our state platforms, our policy positions, I would say we have lost our way. And quite frankly, I have not seen anybody running for the presidency on the Republican ticket that's actually offering to stand up and stand for the principals the Republican Party has been built on.

    In the past six years, when the foreign policy really changed, when we accepted the notion of pre-emptive war, a strong violation of our personal civil liberties, (we) at the same time (became) the party of entitlements, doubling the size of the Department of Education, McCain-Feingold. These are all things that Republicans used to criticize and not support, and all of a sudden we accept them. In essence, we have accepted what has traditionally been the Democratic platform — increase entitlements and foreign intervention, getting involved in quagmires abroad.

  • Video of Paul talking with CNN:

  • Apr 25, 2007

    You Can Do Something to Fight REAL ID--Important "Townhall" on REAL ID by DHS

    This from REAL ID WATCH--important!  Dept of Homeland Tyranny's purpose of course is to permit controlled venting to cool down the opposition, and plant controlled opposition to defuse and disaffect the public.  (Watch for more "terror" news like Rudy "Fascist" Guliani's fear-mongering too).  This is not about "funding" for the states, it is about the 10th and 4th ammendments of the constitution, our precious bill of (trampled) rights!  Spread the word for this May 1, 2007 event coming up...

    You Can Do Something to Fight REAL ID

    1. You can send a message to the Department of Homeland Security.

    2. Also, you can read the notice to the public of the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. This notice contains information about an upcoming townhall meeting on REAL ID May 1, 2007:
    We encourage interested parties to attend the meeting and submit
    comments for discussion during the meeting. In addition, we will also seek comments via email for discussion during the meeting from any party who is unable to attend in person. The webcast of the public meeting will be viewable at www.realidtownhall.com.

    DATES: Public Meeting: We will hold the meeting on May 1, 2007, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. documents submitted to DHS at the
    public meeting, including any comments that were not discussed at the meeting, will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection electronically at www.regulations.gov.

    3. Be sure to write you representative and senators.

    Don't sit back. Take advantage of your ability to speak out against REAL ID.
    Hat tip to Privacy Digest. Thanks!

    Online Presidential Debates are Planned--A historical first

    This is a historical first I believe, alternative media with alternative forums for a Presidential race.  Now this circumvents (until it too is corrupted) the major news organizations.  Candidates like the censored Congressman Ron Paul and others will be very strong in such forums.  Prediction:  Guliani and Romney will not show well in these venues!  They already refused to debate where some of these other candidates are present!  Let's see if local newspapers give publicity to these events, and their results by online polls.

    Online Presidential Debates Are Planned
    Adweek - New York,NY,USA
    Confirmed for the GOP debate are John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Sam Brownback, Jim Gilmore, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo ...
    See all stories on this topic

    We Just Marched In: Rep. Ron Paul
    Antiwar.com - Redwood City,CA,USA
    Ron Paul. All the reasons given to justify a preemptive strike against Iraq were wrong. Congress and the American people were misled. ...
    See all stories on this topic

    AN OPEN LETTER TO THE HISTORY CHANNEL; General Sherman's Atrocities and War Crimes

    Recently Bush compared himself to Lincoln in the news. There is actually much truth to that statement, but not in the sense that most government-schooled Americans would recognize, as some more recent sources have noted:

    "Some historians say Mr. Bush seems captivated by Theodore Roosevelt, who grabbed more power for his office than any other president since Abraham Lincoln."
    --New York Times, 1/1/02

    "George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt never claimed war powers close to what Bush is claiming"
    --Bruce Fein, Constitutional Scholar, Deputy Attorney General, Reagan Administration

    It is necessary to understand the Real Lincoln in order to see the just comparisons with George W. Bush and the so-called war for 'enduring freedom' to "rid the world of tyranny". It is long past time for all to be re-educated and awakened. Indeed the U.S.S. Lincoln was the symbolic battle carrier chosen to be the flag vessel to launch the Iraq war.

    The truth of history is something not to be trifled with, and the history of unjust wars and brutal wars for "democracy" and "emancipation" began under Lincoln, and by his psychopathic General "Burning" Sherman. Read the facts here, from a historian and author, as he sets the record straight to the History Channel, which the public is not taught by the Government schools. Imperialistic wars for "democracy" began in 1860, and cost the lives of over 623,000 Americans, more than all other U.S. wars combined! But ne'er a word about this, except to glorify it all through propaganda and fiction the poured out of Northern presses during and after the very uncivil War which trampled States rights and setup a Federal despotism by pure force.

    (See our links and bookstore below for more accurate history and biography on Lincoln and others).

    Subject: Program: Sherman's March April 23, 2007

    To the Damn Yankee liars and propagandists at the History Channel:

    Never in my more than sixty years of life have I started a letter with
    such an ugly salutation; never has a recipient so richly deserved such
    an opening! You falsified, deleted, and skewed data to change Sherman
    from the most heinous general in American history into a great United
    States hero. This was nothing short of criminal!

    My latest book,
    A General History of the Civil War, the Southern Point
    of View
    , is over five hundred pages long and does not focus on
    Sherman. However, it contains the following facts about Sherman. It
    would be easy for me to write over five hundred pages on the man I
    describe as, "The closest thing we have in the American experience to
    Attila the Hun." It is not creditable to believe that your researchers
    didn't know the following facts; I am appalled that you presented none
    of them!

    As the United States Army was leaving the burnt city of Atlanta, they
    unlimbered their artillery and fired into the city. There were no
    Confederate forces there, only civilians. That wasn't war; it was murder!

    Not once did you mention the hundreds of Southern civilian,
    non-combatants, who were murdered by United States Forces.

    Not once did you mention the wanton, brutal, rape of women both white
    and black by United States Forces.

    You tried to justify Sherman by speaking of the "cruelties of both
    sides." There is no comparison between the mass inhumanities inflicted
    by the United States Army to the feeble retaliation the Confederate Army
    could marshal.

    You didn't tell how Sherman and his officers stole themselves rich. An
    officer of Sherman's staff said, "Sherman had stolen enough gold in
    Georgia to start his own bank."

    You didn't tell that Sherman refused a request by his cavalry leader to
    go to Andersonville and remove the United States captives there.
    Following the war the United States made much about the suffering and
    death at this camp. However, all the deaths from the time of his march
    to the end of the war are on Sherman's head!

    You did tell that Sherman welcomed military age slaves to go with the
    United States Army. You didn't tell that Sherman sold the slaves back
    into "slavery" as substitutes for Northern civilians that didn't want to
    place their lives in danger in the United States Army.

    You didn't point out that Sherman's hordes burnt and stole everything,
    leaving nothing for masters or slaves to eat. The United States Army
    stole during the day; starving slaves stole from the army during the
    night. Most slaves followed the United States Army because they were
    without food. You did admit that Sherman hated the Negro. You did admit
    that Sherman ordered the bridge destroyed so the starving slaves
    couldn't cross the river. You omitted the fact that when the slaves
    attempted to swim the river, the United States Army lined the shore and
    "shot their black, bobbing, wooly heads." A war to free the slaves in deed!

    You didn't tell of Yankees setting a hospital filled with Confederate
    wounded on fire and burning Southern soldiers alive!

    You didn't tell of churches being desecrated, burnt, and preachers,
    priests, and nuns murdered!

    You continued the United States government's lies about the causes of
    the war. That is to say, the war was started by the South (making our
    ancestors the evil villains) and that the war was about slavery. Lincoln
    started the war and Lincoln said repeatedly, this war is not about
    slavery. You tried to justify the unjust war and Sherman at the same
    time. What an odious crime you have inflicted on the American people.

    You have also damaged the History Channel's credibility! Now when I or
    any informed person watches a program we will always wonder if we are
    getting the truth or false, lying propaganda. By presenting corrupt
    history, your channel has become corrupt!


    Gary C. Walker

    3747 New Spring Branch Rd. S. E.

    Roanoke, Va. 24014

    Apr 23, 2007

    Lawmakers push to align state, federal gun laws

    Lawmakers push to align state, federal gun laws
    Two New York Democrats, Sen. Charles Schumer, and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, announced legislation Sunday that would require states to upgrade their reporting of mental health records to the federal database. The bill would provide new money to states to help them automate their records, but also apply financial penalties on states that do not comply.

    Please help inform all of this seemingly tame ruse which should be rejected as contrary to both the 10th ammendment states rights (vs. Federal despotism) and 2nd ammendment right to bear arms. The stratagy (in lieu of V Tech) seems innocuous, but is a danger in that talk shows were birraged with calls for "mandatory mental health screening" as (preemptive) action to "prevent this from happening again". So the plan is this: 1) mandatory mental health screening, 2) arbitrary criteria about who is considered "mentally ill", and 3) therefore unable to buy a gun. This legislation sets the framework for the mental health Inquisition, an entirely broad and arbitrary power against "liberty of conscience". Again the abused doctrine of "preemption" is all over this, and is the same basis for Total Surveillance Police State "to prevent crime"--establishing "guilt" in advance, without jury trial. The public entirely accepts this arbitrary "presumption of guilt" with arbitrary standards as "moderate" legislation! Those who control what is deemed "mental health" control gun ownership by their laws.

    Apr 20, 2007

    The Party of Brownshirts--Republican Party has become Constitution-hating Fascists

    ..and the Democrats (always pushing a Socialist agenda as well) are very selective about which powers they oppose, leaving Americans outside of the two-party tyranny for relief.  But this is nothing new, since the Yankee rebellion in 1860 where "radical republicans" overthrew and consolidated Federal power over the states, by force of arms.   Bush has done more to enlarge Federal power, contrary to the Constitution, than any President since Lincoln, and the neoconservatives are today's "radical republicans", that have no respect for the Constitution whatsoever.

    (Paul Craig Roberts was in the Reagan administration).

    The Party of Brownshirts

    Neoconservatives have turned the Republican Party into a Brownshirt Party. Look at the evidence. While real patriots flee the party, the remaining supporters cling to power by asserting dictatorial dominance for President Bush. The Republican Attorney General denies that the US Constitution provides habeas corpus protection to American citizens. Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, Republican candidates for the 2008 presidential campaign, believe the president has the power to imprison US citizens indefinitely without warrants or trials. The "conservative" Federalist Society favors concentrating more power in the executive. Neoconservative ideologues claim the right to impose American hegemony over all others—especially over Muslims. All of these Republican tyrants and budding tyrants claim to be protecting liberty and democracy....(cont.)

    Vermont Senate Calls for Bush Impeachment

    Vermont Senate Calls for Bush Impeachment --Lawmakers Also Call for Impeachment of Cheney 20 Apr 2007 Vermont senators voted Friday to call for the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, saying their actions in Iraq and the U.S. "raise serious questions of constitutionality."

    Apr 19, 2007

    Cho was expert on "Counter-Terrorism" Game; Glorification of violence begins here

    The Virginia Tech shooter was discussed today on WCHS talk radio where Agnello with the help of a psychologist was zealous in addressing the "images" given to young people now through various forms of media in the home, as contributing to violence.  Good point, now let's apply that directly addressing a remarkable example. 
    Cho was an "expert" at this game below.  The fictional glorification of a "war on terrorism" (including through Hollywood's propaganda machine as well as other media) has made violent gaming and shows like '24' into popular fantasy, and based upon fabricated tales and relentless propaganda.  So if "desensitization of violence" is an issue to address in raising children, let it begin here.  But those who promote "war on terrorism" and the military taining young men and women to "kill ragheads" and "get some" ("cool dude"), and glorify military action that is based upon lies and deceit, do not like to apply the same principle to their favorite form of "violent imagery", which they daily condone and promote.  CHO LOVED THIS GAME AND SO DO MANY AMERICAN CHILDREN AND EVEN ADULTS.  CONSIDER THEN THE PROPENSITY TO ACT VIOLENTLY ON IMPULSE WITHOUT JUST CAUSE OR SUBSTANTING EVIDENCE, WHICH ONLY INFLICTS VIOLENCE BECAUSE IT WANTS TO, UPON WHOMEVER THE "GROUP THINK" LEADERS DESIGNATE.  It is dangerous when fantasy and games become reality in the mind of the depraved, yet oh so popular.  War is the ultimate game for those whose "feet are quick to shed blood".
    Jack Thompson, Esq. on MSNBC TODAY SAID THAT

    COUNTER-STRIKE (TM) is the #1 online action game in the world. After a one-year public Beta, Counter-Strike was commercially released in Fall 2000. It has gone on to sell over 1.5 million copies worldwide, been named Game of the Year by several gaming publications, and is the headliner at competitive gaming tournaments around the world.

    Counter-Strike: Condition Zero (TM) advances this award-winning series by introducing objective based single-player action, the official CS bot, and special enhancements for online play. CS:CZ is a tactical action game that challenges you to compete with and against cunning computerized opponents in a Tour of Duty across the globe.

    As a squad leader in an elite counter-terrorist operative, use new intel and weapon skills to complete an incredible collection of single-player missions. Lead your team in increasingly challenging scenarios -- from harsh jungle environments to severe arctic terrains, unforgiving deserts to dangerous international city streets. Rescue hostages. Escort VIPs to safety. Locate and defuse bombs. A collection of entirely new objectives challenge your ability to think quickly and strategically.


    Cho's Ability to Kill with handguns was extraordinary, according to expert

    Apr 18, 2007

    REAL ID--Montana Gov signs law rejecting Real ID act!

    Here is a Governor that cares more about the good of the people of his state than flattering the "powers that be" in Washington! 
    HELENA - Gov. Brian Schweitzer signed a law Tuesday rejecting national driver's licenses for Montanans, saying the message to the federal government was "no, nope, no way, hell no."...
    "We also don't think that bureaucrats in Washington D.C. ought to tell us that if we're going to get on a plane we have to carry their card, so when it's scanned through they know where you went, when you got there and when you came home," Schweitzer said.

    "This is still a free country and there are no freer people than the people that we have in Montana."

    Apr 17, 2007

    Articles of Impeachment to Be Filed On Cheney

    Incredible timing.  So far the V Tech incident has stopped the Alberto Gonzales testimony before Congress, and introduction of these articles, both of which should be national precedence over a local shooting, always handled by local and state authorities.  Incidents that are local should not obtruct federal government proceedings.
    By Mary Ann Akers
    17 Apr 2007
    Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio)... declared in a letter sent to his Democratic House colleagues this morning that he plans to file articles of impeachment against Vice President Dick Cheney... Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to impeach the president, vice president and "all civil Officers of the United States" for "treason, bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

    Virginia Tech Shooter's Girlfriend Identified; Official Story appears credible, but politically abused

    This blog below is well documented, sums up the first victims and the shooter quite well, consistent also with mainstream sources, but checked from another angle closer to campus. 
    This official story appears true so far, they now finally having identified the shooter (who shot his face off, disfiguring), and having finally revealed the murder weapons (apparently waiting for BTF analysis).  UNLIKE THE DC SNIPER STORY THE EVIDENCE IN THIS APPEARS REASONABLE AND SUSTAINING.  The "explosion" caught on cell phone video, however, has not been explained either.  The shooter apparently was a student on campus, wrote alot, and his family has not been interviewed.  (Not to be confused with another well-armed Asian student who others falsely labeled, who makes an excellent argument now for permitting guns on campus for self defense, which would have prevented the slaughter of the unarmed).  The only questions remaining are the shooter's adeptness, accuracy in firing, and rapid loading, with a recently purchased pistol (March 13th, Glock 9mm is standard choice by experts for training), and motive for taking out so many in the engineering building, and German classHe dressed as if going to war, and a premeditated fashion.  He was on a mission.  He was proficient in the weapons use, and was definitely literally "mad" about something bigger than just loss of girl.  After checking these Professors had no links to Defense contract work (the recent DARPA projects at VT or others), and the other Prof was German language instructor.  (One wonders why he entered a German language class.  Typically only crazed Jews do violence due to holocaust indoctrination and fanaticism, against Germans and/or Christians, like at Columbine or the Alabama church serial arsons.  Motive must derived to answer this important question). 
    Bush's grandstanding (particularly the feigning of non-existent emotions, of one who has been documened in lies and deceit to the American people and Congress) is suspicious (and mentioning of gun laws), but perhaps using the event for his own political agenda.  There is alot of gun legislation that has expired or is pending, that this event could be used toward an unconstitutional agenda. 
    Still, saw no need to shut down Gonzales hearings for a university incident (this used to be handled as local routine police work by State authorities, size of incident does not change the jurisdiction)....or flags at half staff for those who have no positions of office in government, despite the tragedy"Homeland Security" will be pushed by whatever circumstances can be made use of, planned or coincidentalBush is trying to reestablish "leadership" again based on this tragedy--like 9/11!  Has 9/11 made every incident into a national crisis?  This should not be permitted.
    It also proves Americans are mathematically more vulnerable to other incidents other than "Islamo fascists" who "want to kill us all", or Dick Cheney's threat (in today's news) of "nuclear bomb in American city"--the incredible fear-mongering based upon their "catalyzing event".  If Islamo Fascists are trying to kill us, they are doing a very poor job and less of a threat than annual traffic deaths (exceed even 9/11) and typical American crimes, and acts of random madness like this.  Everything should be kept within proportion, and not blown into national fanaticism, or anti-constitutional legislation as a "crisis".
    Tuesday, April 17, 2007
    Virginia Tech Shooter's Girlfriend Identied

    Apr 13, 2007

    Vent reveals Government worse than Big Oil

    He makes an excellent point about how government taxation at the gas pump is overlooked as cause of high prices (e.g. subtract at least 50 cents from today's price).  The venter, however, turns a blind eye to the manipulation of the oil market, including how Exxon's accounting methods gouge the consumer immediately upon sudden change of the market while they have already processed the petrol into gas, and sold it at cheaper price, thus making a killing.  The oil industry has artificially increased prices by LIMITING PRODUCTION (refinery capacity has declined), thus decreasing supply and increasing prices.  More than anything else "fears of war" (i.e. Iran, military movements by U.S. in Mideast) drive the emotionally-driven market based upon NOTHING BUT SPECULATION, NOT COSTS.
    "Most everyone who vents about being gouged at the gas pump clearly doesn't understand economics or even basic math. Exxon profits about 9 percent on every gallon of gas sold. The federal tax on a gallon of gas is around 18 cents and the West Virginia tax on a gallon is 32 cents. Nine percent profit is 9 percent regardless if gas is $1 a gallon or $10 a gallon. You are still paying more than five times that in taxes for each gallon. Who's gouging who?"

    Apr 12, 2007

    The Security-Industrial Complex; Profiting from "Terror" Propaganda

    Aint it the truth, American's constitutional rights (4th ammendment privacy; 10th ammendment state's rights; 2nd ammendment arms rights, etc.) are being sold by corporate security industry, and state and local governments are buying it hook, line, and sinker.  Thus the "war on terror" is bolstered by those who profit, in an increasingly lucrative industry.  Paranoia and propaganda is thus supported because its profitable.  Thus Americans are actually paying for the demise of constitutional government and the precious bill of rights.

    The Security-Industrial Complex

    Paul Craig Roberts / LewRockwell.com:
    The War on Terror is a marketing campaign for security industries and terrorism experts. The latter are pulling in the consulting fees, and the former are rapidly inventing new products that enable "our" government to watch our every move and to know our location at every moment. Although it should be working on its corporate ethics, BAE Systems is working on an "Onboard Threat Detection System." The system consists of tiny cameras and microphones implanted in airline seats. The Onboard Threat Detection System records every facial expression and every whisper of every passenger, allowing watchful eyes and ears to detect terrorists before they can strike. BAE says its system is so sophisticated that it can differentiate between nervous flyers and real terrorists.

    Apr 9, 2007

    U.S. Rep. James Moran of Virginia: Jews behind buildup for War with Iraq--Jews Protest

    Oh, how dare he say so!  Where is freedom of speech?  The Israeli Inquisition is after him now, trial without jury of peers through the press.  But the Israeli press already published the same thing, without protest:
    "The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history."

    U.S. Rep. James Moran of Virginia: Jews behind buildup for War with Iraq--Jews Protest

    original article here:
    alternative news site here:
    Be sure and see Israel & 9/11 too: 
    and this too:
    The original neocons were a small group of mostly Jewish liberal intellectuals . ... that the neoconservatives pushed the war in Iraq for Israel's benefit. ...
    www.twf.org/News/Y2003/0722-Spies.html - 25k - Cached - Similar pages
    ...protests continue against U.S. Rep. James Moran of Virginia, who said last week that Jews were behind the buildup toward war with Iraq. Six fellow Democrats in the House of Representatives said that his comments were "offensive," "ignorant" and "grossly irresponsible," and that if he seeks another term, they would not back him. The six, all of whom are Jewish, are Henry Waxman of California, Martin Frost of Texas, Tom Lantos of California, Sander Levin of Michigan, Benjamin Cardin of Maryland and Nita Lowey of New York. The Washington Post also came out strongly against Moran, saying that his remarks perpetuate anti-Semitic views and "confirm our opinion that he is unfit to serve in Congress."

    Moran told a church forum on March 3rd that "if it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing this. The leaders of the Jewish community are influential enough that they could change the direction of where this is going, and I think they should."' He has since apologized, but said that he would not resign.

    Apr 1, 2007

    9/11: BBC Announces "Collapse" of WTC7 while still standing!

    There is no logical or rational explanation for this very embarrassing discovery of their live coverage on 9/11, except that someone told them, well in advance, that the WTC7 "Solomon building" had "collapsed", while it is plainly still visible over the reporters shoulder! Therefore, the collapse was both timed and known in advance, as well as having all the observable elements of controlled demolition.

    Further, this video shows how the propaganda machine went into full gear, how Bin Laden's name is floated, without evidence, while yet other facts were not carried in U.S. media, such as that the motive had to do with Israel being supported by the U.S., and that Bin Laden was a former CIA asset. Finally, in their analysis, they maintain that it could not have been done by a small terrorist rogue group, but had to be "state sponsored", yet it was irrational to believe any state would attempt such against the U.S.. All good questions, that cast doubt on the official story immediately, largely unseen by American audience.

    'US ready to strike Iran on Good Friday'--Jerusalem Post

    'US ready to strike Iran on Good Friday'

    01 Apr 2007

    Jerusalem Post

    The United States will be ready to launch a missile attack on Iran's nuclear facilities as soon as early this month, perhaps "from 4 a.m. until 4 p.m. on April 6," according to reports in the Russian media on Saturday.