It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker’s decision was a major blow to the two suits testing warrantless eavesdropping and executive branch powers implemented following the 2001 terror attacks. The San Francisco judge said the courts are not available to the public to mount that challenge.
“A citizen may not gain standing by claiming a right to have the government follow the law,” Walker ruled late Thursday.
Originally posted by Doc Velocity
Originally posted by Lillydale
Well I guess the right wanted a piece of that pie as well.
The Right wanted their power back. It was taken away by McCain/Feingold, or at least hindered. But that's not the unconstitutional aspect of McCain/Feingold — the illegal part of McCain/Feingold is that it outlawed YOUR right to wage a negative campaign against a candidate for two whole months before a general election.
Not a big bad corporation's right to wage a negative campaign, but YOUR right. Under McCain/Feingold, even grassroots organizations and non-profit organizations cannot run negative campaign ads against a candidate for the entire TWO MONTHS before a general election.
THAT's the anti-free-speech reality of McCain/Feingold.
I don't care what sort of rotten crap you want to say about a candidate, you should STILL have the right to SAY IT until the election ends. Right?
And that is why McCain/Feingold is unconstitutional. It SILENCES dissent.
— Doc Velocity
Originally posted by spiritualzombie
I hope the judges that made this pass die horrible deaths. It's not a threat... Just a wish in the name of free speech.
Originally posted by Violater1
Originally posted by wiredamerican
and is it really treason committed by these judges, and can they really get put away for what i see as being a crime?
This is not treason. They are heroes.
Why?
Because they just stripped election funding from government control.
They gave more power to Corporations and Unions.
Corporations and Unions are made out of people.
This is more power to the people. And that is a good thing.
I find it confusing that people would rather have government control on election funding. I say let the people, fund it. And it is the people who make up the corporations and unions.
This is one step ahead toward a more perfect Union.
This law cuts the people with two edges!
The Supreme Court just rammed a double edged sword up the Americans rectum.
Originally posted by Doc Velocity
Originally posted by Lillydale
Well I guess the right wanted a piece of that pie as well.
The Right wanted their power back. It was taken away by McCain/Feingold, or at least hindered. But that's not the unconstitutional aspect of McCain/Feingold — the illegal part of McCain/Feingold is that it outlawed YOUR right to wage a negative campaign against a candidate for two whole months before a general election.
Not a big bad corporation's right to wage a negative campaign, but YOUR right. Under McCain/Feingold, even grassroots organizations and non-profit organizations cannot run negative campaign ads against a candidate for the entire TWO MONTHS before a general election.
THAT's the anti-free-speech reality of McCain/Feingold.
I don't care what sort of rotten crap you want to say about a candidate, you should STILL have the right to SAY IT until the election ends. Right?
And that is why McCain/Feingold is unconstitutional. It SILENCES dissent.
— Doc Velocity
Originally posted by neo5842
I have posted this mainly because I dont understand how a judge can override a decision made by government. Does this happen in the states a lot? and is it legal? and is it really treason committed by these judges, and can they really get put away for what i see as being a crime? Not being in the US, i do find some some things that go on in the legal system there very confusing, i guess i should study up on it more, but would that make any difference, especially as they seem to change it all the time, and a lot of it by judges, I mean are they elected or appointed?
Sorry if this is in the wrong place, i didn't want people to miss it in case it has significance to it. and i did look for it on ATS but couldn't find any reference to it anywhere. thanks.
www.veteranstoday.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
Originally posted by Asktheanimals
reply to post by neo5842
Foreign powers can't run our government because of this ruling, you still have to be an American citizen to hold office.
In practical terms I don't think this will actually change much at all.
Originally posted by Hemisphere
You are correct Doc. This is a victory for grassroots and non-profit organizations. Perhaps unintended but a victory none-the-less. That citizens can pool their resources and compete for attention against established lobbyists is critical. Look at this special Massachusetts Senate election. Who turned the tide? It was not Barrack Obama, Rudi Giulliani, Mitt Romney, Curt Schilling, the Kennedys, media outlets or the candidates themselves. It was Tea Party activism. These were frustrated citizens spending their time and resources to connect with other frustrated citizens so as to enact change in our inattentive, elitist Senate. This ruling keeps a dissenting public voice, pressure and activism viable into the future. Whether we take the ball and run with it is another story.
Originally posted by Kailassa
Originally posted by Asktheanimals
reply to post by neo5842
Foreign powers can't run our government because of this ruling, you still have to be an American citizen to hold office.
In practical terms I don't think this will actually change much at all.
You can't name any congressman who just might be willing to sell his loyalty to the highest bidder?
It doesn't matter who is in congress. What matters is who they've sold out to.
Foreign money can easily be used with this legislation in place, because foreigners can take over the board of an American company, or foreign shareholders can insist on a certain policy and Americans can do nothing about it.
How many "patriots" proudly announcing their love of "free speech," will stand and cheer when the Saudis "own" the ruling party? Not only is true democracy at risk here, but so is our beloved bikini!
Originally posted by Doc Velocity
Originally posted by Leo Strauss
Why the rush?? Could it be the fear of a liberal justice appointee or maybe the NWO is moving into high gear?
What rush? The American people have been screwed in the ass by McCain/Feingold for the last 9 years, and it's taken this long to get this unconstitutional piece of legislation before the SCOTUS.
See, liberals don't understand the concept of "rush"... When you take 18 months to decide on invading another country, that is NOT a "rush to war"... When you take 9 years to defeat an unconstitutional piece of legislation, that is NOT a "rush" to defeat the legislation.
However, when you ramrod through "economic stimulus" and "bailout" and "healthcare reform" legislation in LESS THAN A YEAR and BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, and WITHOUT allowing the American People to say "yay" or "nay" on the matter, THEN you are RUSHING.
That's what un-American cowards do, see? Understand now?
— Doc Velocity
Originally posted by neo5842
CALL FOR IMMEDIATE ARREST OF 5 SUPREME COURT JUSTICES FOR TREASON
www.veteranstoday.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
Five members of the Supreme Court declared that a “corporation” is a person, not a “regular person” but one above all natural laws, subject to no God, no moral code but one with unlimited power over our lives, a power awarded by judges who seem themselves as grand inquisitors in an meant to hunt down all hertics who fail to serve their god, the god of money.
Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.
[edit on 23 Jan 2010 by Hellmutt]