U.S. Supreme Court Issues Landmark Decision: Constitution is Void

This story is a perfect example of what is wrong with the community. A badly misrepresent case is mentioned, assumptions are made, several posts later assumptions magically turn into facts.

For the love of god, google critical thinking, and READ it.

This is similar to the thread about "Man curse cancer/aids/herpes/common cold" with apricot seeds and the government tries to ban it and hide the information"

when in reality, the guy was a scam artist scamming people online and over the phone making outrageous claims.

Seriously people, you need to start checking sources on stuff, not just assuming the report is accurate, in most cases the article you are reading is making assumptions from sources you failed to check out. In some cases, bringing completely opposite conclusions.

The constitution is quite null and void, but you will never see a court declare the fact.

reply to post by DjOsiris



ok ahhhaaa Doesn't the Federal Officials Swear an Oath to DEFEND & UPHOLD the Constitution ! ?

Would this Docket No. 10-632, 10-633, and 10-690 Make those Same Federals Officials that (If it WAS) passed TRAITORS !!!!!

In my Logic of Understanding ! I can Here Eric Arthur Blair say I told you SO ! Ive Tried to Warn you



Ohh Never Mind I have Forgotten what was on the Wall at the back of the Podium in the House of Representatives




even better



same symbol on the back side of a dime ..(Mercury)









www.lewrockwell.com...


Fascist Nation here we Come...

and the Final!! Pic!
US-Courts-AdministrativeOffice-Seal




Google Image it

This thread in 99% ignorance.

Denials of lower court reviews happen ALL OF THE TIME, and rarely is the conclusion that it necessarily means anything substantive beyond its obvious and specific impact to the parties of the denied case.

Moreover, just because one party asserted fraud and corruption, does not mean there was in fact fraud and corruption in the specific case. It could be that based upon the "record"-- and yes, even their impression of what might be off the record-- the evidence and legal positions asserted were not sufficiently compelling for the SCOTUS to hear.

The SCOTUS only has so much bandwidth. Is it any surprise they are compelled to pick and choose the most relevant or compelling cases???

What trash this thread is... People are so busy chasing fake examples of tyranny, they miss the very real ones-- and trust me, they're out there.



EDIT to add:

Moreover, this guy sounds like a litigious NUT.

MAID OF THE MIST CORPORATION v. ALCATRAZ MEDIA(.pdf)

We conclude from the record that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the injunction on Windsor based on his litigious behavior that undermined the integrity of the judgments and orders in this case. Although the case is closed, Windsor has repeatedly filed unsubstantiated, duplicative pleadings, many after the district court issued an order denying them. Moreover, his pleadings are long and repetitive, and the volume of his filings poses a burden to clerical and judicial operations and is an impediment to the administration of
justice. Windsor’s filings also have been costly and burdensome to Maid, who has repeatedly defended itself against unfounded accusations concerning a case in which it prevailed and which has been closed for over two years.

What is particularly amusing is how the owner of the "largest tour/activity broker in North America" claims foul on a 'billion dollar business opportunity' and almost no one on this board stops to think whether you are being manipulated by Windsor for his own commercial interests???





Also, isn't the real shocker that so many of you can on the most flimsy of assertions fall for such dribble and nonsense? Folks, what happened to your critical thinking skills?

How many of the whinings and wailings are sheer crocodile tears.
The writing has been clearly on the wall for the best part of two years.
Soetoro is clearly a bogus president and is in violation of the Constitution's requirement on being natural born.
How many of you cared or did anything as people like Phil Berg challenged and challenged and came up against the barrier of the SCOTUS.
That should have told you everything you needed to know.
SCOTUS is corrupted and your constitution is down the pan.
Yet because of race and politics you preferred to ignore the controversy.
Now your bogus President has appointed two appalling women to the Supreme court. Totally unqualified and placemen of the worst kind.
How many of you protested?.
Particularly as one was the creature who had stopped any of the cases about Soetoro's eligibility going further and was rewarded thus.
So your corrupt and bogus President has corrupted your Supreme court even further and it was bad enough before.
What you going to do?.
All we will see from Americans is hot air, huffing and puffing and sound and fury and sod else.
You are becoming an international joke as you watch your freedom and liberty drained away. Its a sick joke because you demand the right to bomb and murder and destroy purportedly to promote the values you are just giving away in complete apathy.
All for corporate profit, industrial/military etc etc.
Saying that, sadly, because I know there are many very good Americans who would agree with every word of the above. The FEMA camps wait for them. And will the rest of you do anything? Not on your pathetic nellies!
Your best hope is for Ron Paul/Judge Neopolitano/Ralph Nader and others to run an independent ticket of some kind.
And would you vote for them?.
Come on! They are white and independents and you will prefer your corporate slavery rather than have the brainpower to vote outside the box for one reason or the other.
Enjoy your fascism and slavery. Most of you deserve nothing else.
But then if you get food stamps, cans of beer, fat butts on sofas watching often corrupted sports and Oprah which of you will care?

reply to post by soficrow


color me embarrassed that's what I get for trying to spit something out in 30 sec before getting the kids off to school

Thanks for that. and shame on me

I'd like to point out that this event is something Professor Murry Rothbard has commented on dozens of times.

The judiciary is a tyranny unto itself.

It is a lawless organization that voids the application of law to itself.

Judges are above the law, and our entire “archist” system of enslavement revolves around this fact.

The story of Linda Kay Spitler and the power of judges.

Read and be amazed just how unaccountable Judges really are.

The eminent Murray Rothbard explains in this 1978 Libertarian Review article:

One of the fatal flaws in the concept of “limited” government is the judiciary. Endowed with the compulsory monopoly of the vital power of deciding disputes, of ultimately deciding who can wield force and how much can be wielded, the government judiciary sits as an unchecked and unlimited tyrant.

Pledged to preside over the rule of law, law that is supposed to apply to everyman, the judges themselves are yet above the law and free from its sanctions and limitations. When clothed in the robes of his office, the judge can do no legal wrong and is therefore immune from the law itself.
…
the United States Supreme Court ruled, in 1872, that judges were immune from any damage suits for any “judicial acts” that they had performed — regardless of how wrong, evil, or unconstitutional those acts may have been. When clothed in judicial authority, judges can do no wrong. Period. Recently a case of an errant judge has come up again — because his action as a judge was considered generally to be monstrous and illegal. In 1971, Mrs. Ora Spitler McFarlin petitioned Judge Harold D. Stump of the DeKalb County, Indiana, Circuit Court to engage in a covert, compulsory sterilization of her 15-year-old daughter, Linda Kay Spitler. Although Linda was promoted each year with her class, Mrs. McFarlin opined that she was “somewhat retarded” and had begun to stay out overnight with older youths. And we all know what that can lead to.

Judge Stump quickly signed the order, and the judge and mamma hustled Linda into a hospital, telling her it was for an appendicitis operation. Linda was then sterilized without her knowledge. Two years later, Linda married a Leo Sparkman and discovered that she had been sterilized without her knowledge. The Sparkmans proceeded to sue mamma, mamma’s attorney, the doctors, the hospital, and Judge Stump, alleging a half-dozen constitutional violations.

All of these people, in truth, had grossly violated Linda’s rights and aggressed against her. All should have been made to pay, and pay dearly, for their monstrous offense. But the federal district court ruled otherwise. First, it ruled that mamma, her lawyer, and the various members of the “healing professions” were all immune because everything they did had received the sanction of a certified judge. And second, Judge Stump was also absolutely immune, because he had acted in his capacity as a judge, even though, the district court acknowledged, he had had “an erroneous view of the law.” So, not only is a judge immune, but he can confer his immunity in a king-like fashion even onto lowly civilians who surround him. …

I might also add that the federal Supreme Court decides all cases dealing with state’s rights and over-reach of federal power.

Obviously there is a conflict of interest here.

How can a FEDERAL court decide on limitations of FEDERAL power?

To quote Jefferson:

“It is a fatal heresy to suppose that either our State governments are superior to the Federal or the Federal to the States. “

reply to post by phishybongwaters


I also looked into this and it appears this guy is wanting to get his name out to sell some books.

I'm starting to see how bad this country obsession with greed and power is ruining it.Jobs being taken over seas is destroying this country.

Just as Chinese president makes a trip the U.S. China has censored CNN and shut them off so people cannot see the human rights violations.How much dumber can this country possibly be getting.

Doesnt surprise me either, I just dont see how we have strayed this far from the constitution in the first place. I still have my bumper sticker that reads "pursue truth, defend liberty" ...no matter what some judge says. ...how much longer until martial law now?

Here's my question, perhaps someone can help me out.

Niagara Falls, while not being considered a National Park, it is considered a National Heritage Area, which means that it is managed by a partnership of organizations and local governments, as well as receiving some federal funding (typically).

Windsor was attempting to sue because he was not allowed to bid on a contract to operate boat tours. There was no posting that they were interested in expanding and were interested in outside participants. The governing body of the falls informed him that they were not entertaining bids.

What gives him the right to set up this business? I have been to a few parks/heritage areas and to my recollection I do not remember many different competing tours, most were owned by the same company, or more often the board who has been entrusted to protect and preserve the area and they either used volunteers or hired people to conduct tours.

As I understand it, the governing body of Niagara Falls has the right to decide who and when they do business. It seems to me, that Windsor thought of a way to make a lot of money and is trying to force them to do business with him.

reply to post by sirhc0329


How exactly has this case separated or cut us off from the constitution?

The revolution begins now. Be ready.

I hate to break it to you all, but this is a non-story. This man lost his civil trial, lost his appeal, and the Supreme Court denied "cert." Then when he lost, he sent out a press release, written by himself no less, that over-sensationalized the issue and falsely claimed that SCOTUS denying him Certiorari is somehow tantamount to nullifying the Constituiton. It isn't. It isn't even close.

What they are saying is that the evidence before them does not present a question of law which needs resolution by the Highest Court in the land. Rather, that the appeals court did not err, and no question of Constitutional Law is at hand in this matter.

The man in question here is obviously a publicity hound and is trying to sell his upcoming book. But just because he lost his case, and accused the opposition of lying, then accused the judges and appellate courts involved of being criminals, and then asked the Supreme Court to hear his case doesn't mean he's right, or that he's even telling the truth.

Rest assured the Constitution is still valid... I know this may come as shock to some of you chicken-littles out there, but the sky did not fall. Sorry for the interruption, just attempting to deny ignorance.

Carry on...

-Peace
AAH

reply to post by loam

Well put, Loam.

I ask the Mods to throw this piece of sh!t thread into the HOAX bin. It's hard to believe this thread has 111 flags; just reading through some of these posts makes me absolutely certain ATS has been infiltrated by a bunch of uneducated lums who haven't ever really reflected on the motto here, "Deny Ignorance," or are deliberately derailing a very useful website by jumping on inaccurate and misleading information so they can espouse hateful and violent rhetoric.
Knowledge is power, and ignorance is downright deadly. - where is your common sense, folks; do you always believe everything you read on the net?
NOTHING HAPPENED- THE ARTICLE IS NONSENSE.

The reason the majority of people don't take us seriously is because most of us will use a BS source like this and act as if it's the word of god. You're hurting the credibility of the whole group of us by using such crap articles for sources. No wonder people think we are nuts.

Originally posted by PsychNurse
reply to post by soficrow

 

This isn't the first time I've heard of the North American Union.

The idea keeps getting repackaged and resurfacing. Bush' baby was the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). Along with NAFTA, the SPP agenda which continues to move forward through other initiatives, is essentially laying the foundation for a North American Union. The latest permutation is the "perimeter security pact."

I think much more has to be done with each of our individual deficits and border rights/regulations before anyone will be intensively discussing a union. Canada has the lowest deficit in the G7, so I don't believe it would be a to difficult. But I'm not sure that Mexico could absorb the amalgamation of deficit's to make an equal monetary value amongst the three countries.

Good analysis. The planned signing date for the new "perimeter security pact" has been delayed.

A highly touted meeting between Stephen Harper and Barack Obama on a perimeter security pact has been pushed back as Canada and the United States wrestle with the difficulties of making the complex arrangement a reality.

Insiders say the signing summit is now expected no earlier than February and possibly as late as spring.

Source: CTV.ca "Canada-U.S. summit on perimeter security delayed"

"The North American Union (NAU) is a theoretical economic union, in some instances also a political union, of Canada, Mexico, and the United States. The concept is loosely based on the European Union, occasionally including a common currency called the Amero or the North American Dollar.

Seems the US might be more interested in playing with the big boys, and hooking up with the EU. The new US-EU agreement is here: U.S.-EU Transatlantic Economic Council Joint Statement 17 December 2010, Washington D.C.. Here's a bit of news coverage:

In December of last year, the TEC met in Washington where “European Commissioners and leading US government representatives took the first concrete steps to ensure the TEC process creates a forward-looking business environment that reduces regulatory barriers and encourages innovation, shared standards and high-tech business.”

The Transatlantic Economic Council (TEC) has given a significant boost to business between the EU and US by creating a more robust and efficient economic partnership. The TEC which met on Friday in Washington and brought together four European Commissioners and leading US government representatives took the first concrete steps to ensure the TEC process creates a forward-looking business environment that reduces regulatory barriers and encourages innovation, shared standards and high-tech business.

The EU and US leaderships agreed at the recent EU-US Summit in Lisbon to make the TEC central to their shared vision for growth and jobs. Participants signed an agreement on common standards of electronic health records and a declaration on energy efficiency. They also kicked off an initiative for electronic cars and related infrastructure and launched a joint website against counterfeiting. The TEC further identified key areas for joint activities in the innovation sector and discussed ways to ensure secure trade and strengthen the customs cooperation between the two partners.

"In the current economic climate, it is evident is that the EU and the US should give a renewed focus to their transatlantic trade relationship to restore growth." said Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht. "We have agreed to reduce the burden of regulations that far too often 'get in the way' of us doing business together and make high-tech and innovative business key to our strategic vision for more jobs and a better standard of living for all our citizens on both sides of the Atlantic.”

The TEC has been compared to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). Along with NAFTA, the SPP agenda which continues to move forward through other initiatives, is essentially laying the foundation for a North American Union.

NOTE: The US-EU trade deal works towards a Free Trade Area of the Atlantic and an eventual Transatlantic Union.
aka NWO

While the idea for some form of union has been discussed or proposed in academic, business and political circles for many decades, government officials from all three nations say there are no plans to create such a union ...

And you believe that?!? NAFTA, Plan Mexico and all the summits indicate otherwise. ...Everyone is scrambling for partnerships - especially now that China's flexing a bit of muscle.

...no agreement to do so has been signed.

Lots of agreements have been signed - and in consequence, the US, Canada and Mexico are required by international law to "harmonize" their laws with one another, and all other free trade "partners." To benefit global corporations, not individuals or nations.

The formation of a North American Union has been the subject of various conspiracy theories."

As it should be.

reply to post by DjOsiris

reply to post by Artephius Abraxas Helios



Exactly!

'nough said.

reply to post by DjOsiris


Part of the constitution says, we are innocent until proven guilty. Know with this tyranous decision, we are guilty until proven innocent....Im pizzd...I say it is about time we protest the governments, the supreme court and any other unlawful laws being forced into our american freedoms rights....If we do not stand up and stop this treason of our leaders soon very soon we will be another communist states.