|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The interview in the article is attributed to George W, Bush - however, I can't find a reference for this anywhere on the Internet.
The bill in question was actually submitted to Congress by Rep. Ron Paul - is it possible he is the actual source of the answers to the interview questions, and not the president?
The bill never became law, by the way.
Posted Aug 20 2007 11:09AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Joe Stewart
, South Carolina |
| |
|
|
| |
Q. By its express terms your bill authorizes a letter of marque and reprisal to capture Osama bin Laden alive or dead. Isn't that just another way of authorizing the assassination of bin Laden?
A. No. Traditionally, a letter of marque and reprisal authorizes the use of armed force to deprive a nation's enemy of economic and other material resources that enables the enemy to wage war against that nation, or that nation's citizens, when outside the nation's protective umbrella. Obviously, to carry out such authority, the holder of a letter of marque and reprisal may use armed force against persons who resist the execution of the letter and in the process may kill those persons in self-defense.
I found this very interesting....if that is the case it appears this war was misrepresented to begin with....I think we all thought, although it was a declared War on Terrorism, mainly would be directed toward those directly responsible for masterminding 911. It seems, although this 'Letter of Marque,' was worded 'capture' Osama bin Laden, it appears our president and government ALWAYs intended to go over Hussein and the Iraq insurgents primarily - or else, why have we heard nothing for almost three years now about bin Laden?
"Letters of Marque" were British carryovers, and intended for acts of 'piracy' on the high seas, first and foremost. Since 'we the people' consent governing authority over those powers outlined in the Constitution, I would think this would be very iffy......however, there have been many 'powers' which our government has unconstitutionally instituted and assumed. The Constitution allows for members of Congress to be arrested and removed from office. Fraud is a criminal offense, and also provides that civil remedies are available and as 'representatives' should be available to individual citizens against members of Congress who vote to enact laws which result in the loss of their rights or property. Nowhere is it stated that judges at any level are 'sovereign,' as a matter of fact they are as accountable to the people as all others holding office. They are also sworn to uphold the Constitution, and if they break that sworn oath and it results in loss to any citizen, they have broken their end of the 'contract' - the Constitution. The assumed 'sovereignty' of government that many citizens assume is in direct violation of the Constitution - a government formed first and foremost to protect individual rights and freedoms, and ACCOUNTABLE to its people for its actions. The government as 'sovereign' is a British common law, not U.S., as that is what the founding fathers were fighting to be released from - sovereign rule and the lack of accountability of the monarch. Although three branches, no branch is given sovereignty in the Constitution, as a government of the people, by the people, for the people.
Anyway, I think the homeowners that have been burned in these actions need class actions against their respective cities and states which have passed these laws or mandated these 'unregulated' government passing statute after statute increasing their power, which have violated their rights, seized their property (either home or money), or criminally harassed or terrorized them (and I, unlike some homeowners do feel many times the Boards are not the instigators in the dissension, it is the management concerns and attorneys who only make money if they can create and prolong disagreements. Hey, the insurance company doesn't even pay their fees with those 'great' policies they have sold to these Board members unless a suit is filed, so you got to get raise the harassment to the 'threat' and terroism level until either Board or homeowner needs their services.
It is communism which the legislatures have created by towing the CAI line all these years, and no wonder there is discord and violence erupting in these communist communities.
Posted Apr 21 2007 3:12AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Linda Gehring
Phoenix, Arizona |
| |
|
|
| |
Void judgments may be more effective?
http://www.prosefights.org/nmlegal/voidjudgments/voidjudgments.htm#void
Posted Apr 21 2007 3:12AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
bill payne
(View Profile)
abq, New Mexico |
| |
|
|
Return to 'Make Letters NOT War!' |
Submit a comment
|
|
|
|
