WikileaksWikiLeaks is a non-profit media organization dedicated to bringing important news and information to the public. We provide an innovative, secure and anonymous way for independent sources around the world to leak information to our journalists. We publish material of ethical, political and historical significance while keeping the identity of our sources anonymous, thus providing a universal way for the revealing of suppressed and censored injustices.
Click here for website Wikileaks: Gunship Murdering Iraqis on Ground | Consitution Is VoidThe U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark decision that serves to allow judges to void the Constitution in their courtrooms. The decision was issued on January 18, 2011, and the Court did not even explain the decision (Docket No. 10-632, 10-633, and 10-690). One word decisions: DENIED.
Presented with this information and massive proof that was not contested in any manner by the accused judges, at least six of the justices voted to deny the petitions: “There is no legal or factual basis whatsoever for the decisions of the lower courts in this matter. Â These rulings were issued for corrupt reasons. Â Many of the judges in the Northern District of Georgia and the Eleventh Circuit are corrupt and violate laws and rules, as they have done in this case. Â The Supreme Court must recognize this Petition as one of the most serious matters ever presented to this Court.” The key questions answered negatively by the U.S. Supreme Court was: “Whether federal courts must be stopped from operating corruptly and ignoring all laws, rules, and facts.” By denying the petitions, SCOTUS has chosen to sanction corruption by federal judges and to allow federal judges to void sections of the Constitutional at will. William M. Windsor has been involved in legal action in the federal courts in Atlanta since 2006. Windsor was named a defendant in a civil lawsuit (1:06-CV-0714-ODE) in which Christopher Glynn of Maid of the Mist in Niagara Falls, swore under oath that Windsor did a variety of things including the crimes of theft and bribery. Windsor stated under oath that Christopher Glynn made it up and lied about absolutely everything that he swore. Windsor then obtained deposition testimony from Glynn and the other managers of the Maid of the Mist boat ride, and they admitted, under oath, that charges against Windsor were not true. Despite this undeniable proof, 32-year federal Judge Orinda D. Evans declared that the grandfather of three should not have fought the lawsuit, and she forced him to pay a fortune in legal fees of Maid of the Mist. Windsor appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, but federal judges Dubina, Hull, and Fay rubber-stamped Judge Evans’ ruling. Windsor then took his appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court where the justices said the appeal was not worthy of their consideration (cert denied). After attempting to get the case reopened with new evidence that proved fraud upon the courts and obstruction of justice, Judge Evans and Judge William S. Duffey committed a variety of crimes and violations of Constitutional rights, as did judges with the Eleventh Circuit. All of this was detailed for the Supreme Court. Click here for full aricle |
Nobel Peace Prize For Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange?The vibrant protest movements across the Arab world, Russian human rights activists and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange will all likely be in the running for the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize, observers say as the deadline for nominating candidates approaches.
According to existing rules, the Norwegian Nobel Committee will only consider candidate proposals sent by February 1 for its pick, to be announced in October. Since news events often influence nominations, this year's list of candidates could be coloured by the recent waves of protests against authoritarian Arab regimes, including in Tunisia and Egypt. "That's a possibility," explained Nobel expert and historian Asle Sveen. "But no name really stands out. In Egypt, the (opposition) movement seems very spontaneous. And (the most visible opposition leader) Mohamed ElBaradei already received a Nobel prize" in 2005, he pointed out. The nature of the protests, which appear more motivated by socio-economic factors than ideological, could also complicate finding an obvious candidate. The names of nominees are kept secret for 50 years, and although those entitled to nominate candidates are allowed to reveal their picks, Nobel observers are basically condemned to making educated guesses as to who will figure on the list. Click here for full article The Path To Repealing ObamacareThe House Republicans have scheduled a vote to repeal Obamacare on January 12 and the statists are prepping their attacks in order to mislead the public about the repeal effort. From the New York Times:
"Senior Democratic officials said their effort would be managed by a rapid response operation modeled after the ones Mr. Obama used in his presidential campaign. That team will monitor Republican claims, send out fact-checks and deploy a team of surrogates to get their views on television. Paid television advertisements will be run, as warrants, said one senior Democrat, who asked not to be named because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the program. Organizing for America, the president's chief political apparatus, will host phone banks and schedule events featuring people who would lose their benefits if the health care law were repealed." It is up to us to make sure the Left's attempts to demonize the repeal effort are stymied. Since we don't have the fancy connections and money to put out ads and get on TV, it is up to us to get it done our way - the grassroots way. Here are some ways that you can combat the statist machine and their talking points, starting right now:
Click here for full article | Pending Lawsuits Against ObamacareVirginia and many other states have pending lawsuits against the federal government’s takeover of health care. These cases represent important battles in the fight to restore the constitutional balance of power between the states and the federal government that is necessary to maintain individual liberty.
For many years, the creeping overreach and centralization of power in Washington has eroded our foundational constitutional framework. The U.S. Constitution provides to the federal government only certain limited powers, such as providing for national defense or regulating commerce between the states and other nations. The Bill of Rights to the Constitution emphatically protects individual rights and plainly expresses that all powers not granted to the federal government are reserved to the states and the people. Critics of the court challenges to the health care law think that devotion to the Constitution and local decision-making must give way to their centralized vision of America with the federal government requiring that each citizen must purchase health care insurance by force of law. But Virginians understand that the issue is not just about health care, it is about the rule of law and liberty. If the federal government has the power to tell you that you must buy health insurance, then the federal government is unrestrained and omnipotent over our lives. The American Revolution was fought to free us from the tyranny of the British king and establish representative government and secure individual rights, not to cede our hard-fought God-given rights to another unresponsive government on the north banks of the Potomac that ignores us. The people understand that the Constitution protects American citizens from unfettered, remote and out-of-touch power in Washington. Hence, the Constitution established the idea of federalism, where the national government had limited enumerated powers and the states, which are closer to the people and would be responsive to local concerns, retained their general powers of practical and responsive governance. Another reason why the federal government should not be permitted to usurp the powers of the states is that it prevents the states from serving as “laboratories of innovation.” Many of the best ideas come not from Washington, but from the states, localities and the private sector. Welfare reform is a good example of innovative policy led by the states. Before the federal government enacted welfare reform in the mid-1990s, Virginia and other states led the way by reforming the failed welfare system that promoted dependency and waste, and instead transformed it into a short-term helping-hand on the way to the dignity of work. Click here for full article Net Neutrality? Or Media Marxist?Net neutrality is an innocuous sounding term for what is really media Marxism. This is an ideological attempt by those on the left to control the greatest means for the distribution of information ever devised. It provides a playing field which the government does not control, and this is immensely troubling to those on the left.
There are two pieces to net neutrality: Equal Access: Equal access says that everyone should always have equal priorities to the flow of information on the internet. In practice, this means that if I am updating my Twitter account, and my neighbor is downloading a movie, he shouldn't have access to more bandwidth than me. Right now, the large providers manage access, with some handling over one million URL requests a second. They are doing a phenomenal job. Net neutrality would prevent them from doing so, and would essentially "socialize" the internet. This would also create some horrendous situations with the providers being unable to provide more bandwidth and priority to a hospital downloading an emergency transmission of an MRI, than they provide to me while I update my Twitter feed. We are obviously against this. Equal Rates / Equal Service: Proponents of net neutrality are also trying to stop providers from offering "tiered" service plans. Think "first class," "business pricing plans for phone service etc." According to proponents, under net neutrality, everyone has to be charged the same, and provided the same services. This is the antithesis of capitalism, and would result in the stifling of technology development. Providers spend billions developing the technology; it is their right to charge as they see fit, and to create pricing plans that serve the needs of real customers in a real marketplace. Our position is that net neutrality is simply government interference in the most important communications medium in history. Tea Party Patriots across the nation are very concerned about government regulation and interference in the internet, and we will be continuing to educate them about the reality of net neutrality, and the damage it will do to both the progress of technology and to the operation of the free market. Click here for full article |