PAUL REVERE of the Tea Party 2012 !!!

November 22, 2011

The Father of and Presidential Candidate of The Tea Party – Ron Paul 2012 link:!!!

The Tea Party Started In 2007 And Ron Paul Is The Godfather

News footage from 2007 mixed with other video that documents the origin of the modern day Tea Party movement and those responsible for it.

It was started in 2007 from the grassroots by Ron Paul supporters for his 2008 Presidential Campaign. After gaining momentum it was co-opted by certain Republicans with help from Fox News and other corporate entities. It’s no longer the spontaneous decentralized movement that it once was though Ron Paul’s message of limited government and a return to the Constitution is still at it’s core.

WHO IS RON PAUL !!!



Ron Paul: Has The Most YouTube GOP Views With Over 30 Million!

This clip took place on MSNBC on November 8th, 2011.

RON PAUL 2012

God Father of the Tea Party 2012 !!!

November 22, 2011

The Father of and Presidential Candidate of The Tea Party – Ron Paul 2012 link:!!!

The Tea Party Started In 2007 And Ron Paul Is The Godfather

News footage from 2007 mixed with other video that documents the origin of the modern day Tea Party movement and those responsible for it.

It was started in 2007 from the grassroots by Ron Paul supporters for his 2008 Presidential Campaign. After gaining momentum it was co-opted by certain Republicans with help from Fox News and other corporate entities. It’s no longer the spontaneous decentralized movement that it once was though Ron Paul’s message of limited government and a return to the Constitution is still at it’s core.

WHO IS RON PAUL !!!



Ron Paul: Has The Most YouTube GOP Views With Over 30 Million!

This clip took place on MSNBC on November 8th, 2011.

RON PAUL 2012

The ONE WHO CAN BEAT NObama !!!

November 22, 2011

The Father of and Presidential Candidate of The Tea Party – Ron Paul 2012 link:!!!

The Tea Party Started In 2007 And Ron Paul Is The Godfather

News footage from 2007 mixed with other video that documents the origin of the modern day Tea Party movement and those responsible for it.

It was started in 2007 from the grassroots by Ron Paul supporters for his 2008 Presidential Campaign. After gaining momentum it was co-opted by certain Republicans with help from Fox News and other corporate entities. It’s no longer the spontaneous decentralized movement that it once was though Ron Paul’s message of limited government and a return to the Constitution is still at it’s core.

WHO IS RON PAUL !!!



Ron Paul: Has The Most YouTube GOP Views With Over 30 Million!

This clip took place on MSNBC on November 8th, 2011.

RON PAUL 2012

Tea Party Founding Father 2007 !!!

November 22, 2011

The Father of and Presidential Candidate of The Tea Party – Ron Paul 2012 link:!!!

The Tea Party Started In 2007 And Ron Paul Is The Godfather

News footage from 2007 mixed with other video that documents the origin of the modern day Tea Party movement and those responsible for it.

It was started in 2007 from the grassroots by Ron Paul supporters for his 2008 Presidential Campaign. After gaining momentum it was co-opted by certain Republicans with help from Fox News and other corporate entities. It’s no longer the spontaneous decentralized movement that it once was though Ron Paul’s message of limited government and a return to the Constitution is still at it’s core.

WHO IS RON PAUL !!!



Ron Paul: Has The Most YouTube GOP Views With Over 30 Million!

This clip took place on MSNBC on November 8th, 2011.

RON PAUL 2012

Christmas, Remember the Reason for the Season….

November 22, 2011

The Nativity Scene and Birth of Jesus Christ …..the star of Bethlehem…..

My favorite short poem and video link:
http://www.TouchoftheMastersHand.wordpress.com

JFK Peaceful Revolution versus Violent Revolution !!!

November 22, 2011

John Fitzgerald Kennedy – Those who make Peaceful Revolution Impossible will make Violent Revolution Inevitable !!!

UC Davis Campus Police Lieutenant John Pike Email: japikeiii@ucdavis.edu & PH # 530 752 3989

The United States of America, INC. !!!

November 22, 2011

The United States is a corporation
You are here: http://www.abodia.com/2/United-States-is-a-corporation.htm
US is a Corp. Supreme Court confirms Federal Zone (zip codes)
District of Columbia, corporation possession of the Queen of England
1788 Original Constitution for the united states, original organic, of the people government.
1871 Amended version CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES, US is a private corporation.

The UNITED STATES was formed in 1871, which controls only the District of Columbia and the territories it purchases or acquires; Puerto Rico, Guam, Virginia Islands. Many think that income taxes, and some laws do not effect people in the sovereign states of the union as they are outside of the control / jurisdiction of the United States corporation. The United States of America is different from the “United States” [corporation].

The terms UNITED STATES and/or United States of America and/ or United States Government are all a private corporation, even with registered trademark

The US corporation (originally called the District of Columbia) does not effect or control the 50 sovereign states that are protected from the federal government by the US Constitution for the United States adopted in 1788.

There are 2 United States, one formed in 1787, the collection of the several sovereign states of the union, and another separate and different one formed in 1871, which only controls the District of Columbia and it’s territories. Others may can give you specific references and explain this further. Here is an outline of the concepts.
The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. I refer you to the “Acts of the Forty-First Congress,” Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: “An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia.” This is also known as the “Act of 1871.” What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.

The Constitution for the United States of America was adopted on September 17, 1787, by the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and ratified by conventions in each U.S. state in the name of “The People”.

– – –
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=129&invol=141
U.S. Supreme Court

STOUTENBURGH v. HENNICK, 129 U.S. 141 (1889)
129 U.S. 141

STOUTENBURGH, Intendant of Washington Asylum,
v.
HENNICK.

January 14, 1889

Sections 1 and 18 of the act of congress of February 21, 1871, entitled ‘An act to provide a government for the District of Columbia,’ (16 St. 419,) are as follows: ‘Section 1. That all that part of the territory of the United States included within the limits of the District of Columbia be, and the same is hereby, created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by which name it is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes, and may contract and be contracted with, sue and be sued, plead and be impleaded, have a seal, and exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation not inconsistent with the constitution and laws of the United States and the provisions of this act.’ ‘Sec. 18. That the legislative power of the District shall [129 U.S. 141, 144] extend to all rightful subjects of legislation within said District, consistent with the constitution of the United States and the provisions of this act, subject, nevertheless, to all the restrictions and limitations imposed upon states by the tenth section of the first article of the constitution of the United States; but all acts of the legislative assembly shall at all times be subject to repeal or modification by the congress of the United States, and nothing herein shall be construed to deprive congress of the power of legislation over said District in as ample manner as if this law had not been enacted.’ These sections are carried forward into the act of congress of June 22, 1874, entitled ‘An act to revise and consolidate the statutes of the United States, general and permanent in their nature, relating to the District of Columbia, in force on the first day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-three,’ as sections 2, 49, 50.

– – – also note:
And Whereas: The Constitution does provide that Congress has the power to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over such district not exceeding ten miles square, as may, by session of particular states and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of government of the United States.

And Whereas: On February 21, 1871, the Forty First Congress passed an act entitled “An Act to Provide a Government for the District of Columbia,” legislating the organization of a municipal corporation to run the day to day affairs of the District of Columbia, the seat of government, which transferred the United States of America, the Republic, into “a corporate entity” entitled UNITED STATES, in capital letters, having “no” jurisdiction outside the District of Columbia.

And Whereas: Congress adopted the text of the federal constitution as the constitution or charter of this municipal corporation. This municipal corporation was granted the power to contract to provide municipal services to the inhabitants of the District of Columbia and necessarily as an operation of the privileges and immunity clause of Article Four of the Constitution, any other person who chooses to contract for its services.

– – Is there fraud in our ranks ?

The Webster’s Dictionary states that Fraud means Deceit, Trickery, intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value or to surrender a legal right.

The Blacks Law Dictionary states pretty much what the Webster’s Dictionary does but adds about two pages full of information. My favorite part is: A false representation of a matter of fact, whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of that which should have been disclosed, which deceives and is intended to deceive another so that he shall act upon it to his legal injury.
– – – –
February 21, 1871 Congress Passes an Act to Provide a Government for the District of Columbia, also known as the Act of 1871*
With no constitutional authority to do so, Congress creates a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, a ten mile square parcel of land (see, Acts of the Forty-first Congress,” Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62).

The act — passed when the country was weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War — was a strategic move by foreign interests (international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the coffers and neck of America.
Congress cut a deal with the international bankers (specifically Rothschilds of London) to incur a DEBT to said bankers. Because the bankers were not about to lend money to a floundering nation without serious stipulations, they devised a way to get their foot in the door of the United States.

The Act of 1871 formed a corporation called THE UNITED STATES. The corporation, OWNED by foreign interests, moved in and shoved the original Constitution into a dustbin. With the Act of 1871, the original Constitution for the united States (1788) was defaced in effect vandalized and sabotage when the title was capitalized and the word “for” was changed to “of” in the title
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (1871)
is the constitution of the INCORPORATED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

It operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it governs the Republic. It does is not !

Capitalization is significant when one is referring to a legal document. This seemingly “minor” alteration has had a major impact on every subsequent generation of Americans.

What Congress did by passing the Act of 1871 was create an entirely new document, a constitution for the government of the District of Columbia, an INCORPORATED government. This newly altered Constitution was not intended to benefit the Republic. It benefits only the corporation of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and operates entirely outside the original Constitution.

Instead of having absolute and unalienable rights guaranteed under the original Constitution, we the people now have “relative” rights or privileges. One example is the Sovereign’s right to travel, which has now been transformed (under corporate government policy) into a “privilege” that requires citizens to be licensed.

By passing the Act of 1871, Congress committed TREASON against the People who were Sovereign under the grants and decrees of the Declaration of Independence and the original Constitution.
– – – –
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/dccases/metrorrc.htm gives this discussion

JUDICIAL INTERPRETATIONS

District of Columbia

On May 3rd, 1802 an Act was passed to incorporate the City of Washington. (2 Stat. at L. 195.)
In 1871 an important modification was made in the form of the district government — a Legislature was established, with all the apparatus of a distinct government. By the Act of February 21st, of that year, entitled “An Act to Provide a Government for the District of Columbia (16 Stat. at L. 419), it was enacted (sec. 1) that all that territory of the United States included within the limits of the District of Columbia be created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia by which name it was constituted a “a body corporate for municipal purposes,” with power to make contracts, sue and be sued, and “to exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States.

This Constitution lasted until June 20th, 1874, when an Act was passed entitled “An Act for the Government of the District of Columbia, and for other purposes.” (18 Stat. at L. 116) By this Act the government established by the Act of 1871 was abolished.
p 234

By a subsequent Act, approved June 11th, 1878 (20 Stat. at L. 102), it was enacted that the District of Columbia should “remain and continue a municipal corporation,” as provided in section two of the Revised Statutes relating to said District, and the appointment of commissioners was provided for, to have and to exercise similar powers given to the commissioners appointed under the Act of 1874. All rights of action and suits for and against the District were expressly preserved in status quo. p. 234

All municipal governments are but agencies of the superior power of the State or government by which they are constituted, and are invested with only such subordinate powers of local legislation and control as the superior Legislature sees fit to confer upon them. p. 234

The people are the recognized source of all authority, state or municipal, and to this authority it must come at last, whether immediately or by circuitous route. Barnes v. District of Columbia, 91 U.S. 540, 545 [23: 440, 441]. p 234

Chief Justice Marshall, speaking for this court, in the case of Hepburn v. Ellzey, 6 U.S. 2 Cranch, 445 [ 2:332 ], where the question was whether a citizen of the District could sue in the circuit courts of the United States as a citizen of a State. The court did not deny that the District of Columbia is a State in the sense of being a distinct political community; but held that the word “State” in the Constitution, where it extends the judicial power to cases between citizens of the several “States,” refers to the States of the Union. It is undoubtedly true that the District of Columbia is a separate political community in a certain sense, and in that sense may be called a State; but the sovereign power of this qualified State is not lodged in the corporation of the District of Columbia, but in the government of the United States. Its supreme legislative body is Congress. The subordinate legislative powers of a municipal character which have been or may lodged in the city corporations, or in the District of Columbia, do not make those bodies sovereign.
– – –
Text of the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871
( a copy of the pages here:http://www.nikolasschiller.com/blog/index.php/archives/2009/01/30/2215/
– – – –
The United States Isn’t a Country
—It’s a Corporation ! by Lisa Guliani
http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm
more here: http://www.wariscrime.com/2009/01/15/news/the-usa-isnt-a-country-its-a-corporation/

– – – – –
Constitution for the United States of America
http://www.barefootsworld.net/constit1.html
– – – – – –
United States – US- U.S.-USA-America ( a possession of the Queen of England)

Means: (A) a federal corporation . . . Title 28 USC Section 3002(5) Chapter 176. It is clear that the United States . . . is a corporation . . . 534 FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT 724.

`It is well settled that “United States” et al is a corporation, originally incorporated February 21, 1871 under the name “District of Columbia,” 16 Stat. 419 Chapter 62. It was reorganized June 11, 1878; a bankrupt organization per House Joint Resolution 192 on June 5, 1933, Senate Report 93-549, and Executive Orders 6072, 6102, and 6246; a de facto (define de facto) government, originally the ten square mile tract ceded by Maryland and Virginia and comprising Washington D. C., plus the possessions, territories, forts, and arsenals.

The significance of this is that, as a corporation, the United States has no more authority to implement its laws against “We The People” than does Mac Donald Corporations, except for one thing — the contracts we’ve signed as surety for our strawman with the United States and the Creditor Bankers. These contracts binding us together with the United States and the bankers are actually not with us, but with our artificial entity, or as they term it “person”, which appears to be us but spelled with ALL CAPITAL LETTERS.

All this was done under,

VICE-ADMIRALTY COURTS.

In English Law. Courts established in the queen’s possessions beyond the seas, with jurisdiction over maritime causes, including those relating to prize.

The United States of America is lawfully the possession of the English Crown per original commercial joint venture agreement between the colonies and the Crown, and the Constitution, which brought all the states (only) back under British ownership and rule. The American people, however, had sovereign standing in law, independent to any connection to the states or the Crown. This fact necessitated that the people be brought back, one at a time, under British Rule, and the commercial process was the method of choice in order to accomplish this task. First, through the 14th Amendment and then through the registration of our birth certificate and property. All courts in America are Vice-admiralty courts in the Crown’s private commerce.

Supreme Law Library : The Federal Zone : index
“Supreme Law Library. The Federal Zone: Cracking the Code of Internal Revenue Electronic Eleventh Edition [Note: Small numbers indicate number of bytes in …”
http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/index.htm
2. Supreme Law Firm
“The Supreme Law Firm holds informative seminars nationwide, and maintains the … His massive book entitled “The Federal Zone: Cracking the Code of Internal …”
http://www.supremelaw.org/
– – – – – –
The Illegal Quasi-Government
in Washington D.C.
The “Federal” Government is a Separate Nation
and should be called the United States, Incorporated.
http://home.iae.nl/users/lightnet/creator/federalgovernment.htm
– – – – – –
Fraud in government ? Wake up, learn, act, become a sovereign, free again
http://www.nmcservices.net/governmentfraud.html

If you doubt anything, learn to check it !

Go to Truth Seekers (below) At top left, click on Search
Learn how to find anything quickly on internet w/ Thought Print ©
Back to Truth Seekers

Big Six Pesticide Manufacturers to Face Human Rights Tribunal

November 21, 2011

According to the Ecologist, the “Big 6,” – Monsanto, Bayer, Dow, Syngenta, DuPont, and BASF, – control 74 percent of the global pesticide market.

Big Six Pesticide Manufacturers to Face Human Rights Tribunal

Brandon Turbeville
Infowars.com
November 21, 2011

Beginning on December 3, 2011, some major international chemical companies will be facing a public tribunal dealing with their well-documented and systemic human rights abuses that have occurred all over the world.

The tribunal is not legally binding as it is not being administered by any governmental body. However, it will serve to shed light upon the egregious assault on human health and economic independence by the major chemical corporations.

The public trial will be directed by The Permanent People’s Tribunal, an organization that has held human rights tribunals in the past dealing with issues as diverse as Tibet, the Armenian Genocide, and the United States intervention in Nicaragua.

The tribunal will hear expert testimony from medical doctors, scientists, and lawyers in order to prove the charges against the chemical giants. It will also hear from the victims – farmers, consumers, and parents – who will testify as to their experiences and injuries stemming from the policies of major international corporations who have made fortunes while destroying the health and environment of billions of people.

Pesticides Action Network (PAN) International, a worldwide organization that is “dedicated to challenging the global proliferation of pesticides, defends basic rights to health and environmental quality, and works to ensure the transition to a just and viable society,” has exerted enormous effort and years of research and data collection in order to present indictments before the tribunal.

PAN UK activist Nick Mole stated

The pesticide industry is massive and incredibly powerful. It is difficult to prove corporate manslaughter even when these products are killing hundreds of people a year. We’ve spoken to people who have been abused and we are allowing them to give voice to their individual stories. We will be presenting the outcome of the Tribunal to the corporations and will be inviting their responses.

Obviously, Mole’s statement is accurate regarding the scale of corporate crimes. If anything, it is an understatement.

According to the Ecologist, the “Big 6,” – Monsanto, Bayer, Dow, Syngenta, DuPont, and BASF, – control 74 percent of the global pesticide market. Not only that, but statistics provided by the World Health Organization show that around 355,000 people are suspected to die each year from “unintentional toxic chemical poisoning,” many of them from use or exposure to agrochemicals; specifically pesticides like the ones produced and distributed by the Big Six. Yet even these numbers are likely understated due to corporate interests within the United Nations structure.

In regards to this, Mole states:

The aim of taking the Big 6 to the PPT is to give a voice to the otherwise voiceless victims of pesticides around the world who have suffered as a result of the relentless promotion of toxic poisons by these multinational companies.

There is no doubt that pesticides have been causing numerous health problems in humans and animals the world over, as well as producing harmful effects on the environment. From birth defects, infertility, and hormone disruption, to Parkinson’s Disease and cancer. Pesticides, particularly those manufactured by the Big 6, have been implicated in a plethora of adverse health effects.

Not only that, but pesticides also have been identified as a potential cause for the massive bee die-off occurring all over the world. This is yet another area in which PAN has been instrumental in building a case against the Big Six. The cases being brought from the UK and Europe will focus on neonicotinoid pesticides sold by Bayer specifically.

As beekeeper Graham White said:

Bee losses in the UK and Europe have been catastrophic, with over a million colony deaths since 1993; there is a massive body of peer-reviewed scientific evidence from European universities, which indicate that neonicotinoids are having a lethal impact on bees and other pollinating insects. It is high time that the companies that manufacture these toxic pesticides are held to account for the damage they have done.

Again, largely due to the tireless work of the Pesticides Action Network, not only are the Big 6 corporations being brought under indictment at the PPT, but so are the national governments of the United States, Switzerland, and Germany on the grounds of collusion and failure to regulate corporate power. Likewise, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization have been indicted for “facilitating corporate concentration of power through their policies and programs.”

Interestingly enough, it is not the first time that at least two of the corporations have been selected for prosecution by the PPT for human rights abuses.

Both Bayer and BASF were “persons” of interest during the Nuremburg Trials after World War II when their merger known as I.G. Farben was broken up for acting as the manufacturing wing of Nazi Germany.

Bayer and BASF, as part of I.G. Farben, essentially provided Germany with the vast majority of explosives and synthetic gasoline[1] used by the Nazi war machine as well as the Zyklon-B gas used in the gas chambers. In the end, the Tribunal convicted 24 board members of I.G. Farben, including Fritz Ter Meer who served on I.G. Farben’s executive committee and was the individual most responsible for Auschwitz’s infamous Section II. Upon his release in 1952, Ter Meer was appointed board member of Bayer and, after only one year, was appointed chairman. To this day, it is possible to receive a scholarship* from the Fritz Ter Meer Foundation* maintained by Bayer. The history of I.G. Farben, along with Bayer and BASF, are discussed in the first chapter of my book, Codex Alimentarius – The End of Health Freedom.

However, with the crimes of the Big 6 now being investigated by an international human rights tribunal, it is important for those of us who have dedicated so much of our time and effort to fighting corporations like Monsanto to guard against walking into a trap. We must become streetwise.

Although the Big 6 absolutely need their crimes exposed to the world, we must be careful not to allow ourselves to be guided into a one-world government structure, regardless of the short-term outcome.
We must remember that the PPT is working under the banner (unofficially) of the United Nations — and it is international law to which the PPT is appealing.

Obviously, there are some who tend toward the philosophy of using the existence of international law to reign in major corporations in a “use their own system against them” type of mentality. Of course, there is nothing inherently wrong with those who wish to use this method of resistance.

However, we must be very careful not to apply to international law in such a way as to legitimize it and sacrifice our own national sovereignty for a short-term goal. We cannot allow ourselves to become so enraged at our own national governments that we begin to appeal to a supranational government to save us. This can only play directly into the hands of the globalists.
Training national governments and their citizens to obey and appeal to international law for justice is not a solution to our problems with the likes of the Big 6 or any other issue. The answer is not to have the United Nations pass a new law regarding these entities; it is to force our own governments to reject the overuse and environmentally destructive use of these pesticides within our own borders — a power each of these governments obviously have.

Although shining the light on the Big 6 Corporations is most definitely a welcome exercise, and one that should be encouraged, it is also one that must not be outsourced to international governmental bodies. We must all work together as human beings regardless of our national boundaries, but we cannot allow ourselves to be played into accepting the dictates of a world government that will be even less open to the concerns of its citizens than the National, State, and Local governments we suffer under today.

To be clear, the above commentary should not be taken as a denigration of the work of the PAN or even of the PPT who, to their credit, have indicted branches of the United Nations as well as three national governments and six international corporations. However, it should serve both as a warning and a call to remain vigilant against potential pitfalls in the fight against the Big Six.

We should always fight the fire, but the frying pan should not be an option. Let’s build the case against the Big Six. Let’s expose them for what they are, and do so in a unified and global manner. But, after we do so, we must force our own governments to dismantle the power these agents wield over the world.

* Dr. Weimbs was a recipient of the Fritz Ter Meer Foundation Undergraduate Scholarship. This link is provided only to show the existence of the Foundation and scholarship, not to link Dr. Weimbs to anything or anyone discussed in this article. Beyond this mention and the article cited next, there is little available online regarding the Foundation and its operations.
[1] Griffin, G. Edward. World Without Cancer. 2nd Edition. American Media. 1997. P.235-236.
This post first appeared on the Activist Post website.

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Mullins, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor’s Degree from Francis Marion University where he earned the Pee Dee Electric Scholar’s Award as an undergraduate. He has had numerous articles published dealing with a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, and civil liberties. He also the author of Codex Alimentarius – The End of Health Freedom, 7 Real Conspiracies and Five Sense Solutions.

Tyranny ?

November 21, 2011

Police State Enough Yet – Oath Keepers – Three Percenters – III Percenters –

Visionary Ron Paul 2012 !!!

November 21, 2011


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 5,167 other followers