The Ruthless Truth blog

Example:

1. I say what I want and believe what I want and exercise. my beliefs as I want so long as they do not damage another person or their property . If my beliefs say that I can exist in the country of my birth without documentation that is an intrinsic right of existence.

IF my belief is that I may labor for another without government documentation, that intrinsic sovereign right must be respected.

2. I can own any gun and protect our country and myself without restraints as to the type of weaponry.I claim the right to carry open or concealed without paying for documents establishing local governments permission. My right to self defense is existential and permanent. The intent behind this amendment was clear that anyone capable of owning any and every firearm for the protection of self and country is an intrinsic right that cannot be infringed upon by license or documentation that shows government authorization , where a personal liberty is automatic and requires no such permissive documents.

3. if I choose to quarter soldiers that is my choice and if i choose not to they must leave my property.

4. Any local or federal agent claiming the right to search any posession of mine must prove in a court of law that they have adequate proof of reason to do so.

See how easy this is? If you want rights claim them and make the government abide in your sovereign right to claim your rights.

Amendments

• First Amendment – Establishment Clause, Free Exercise Clause; freedom of speech, of the press, and of assembly; right to petition

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

• Second Amendment – Militia (United States), Sovereign state, Right to keep and bear arms.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed. ^[7]

• Third Amendment – Protection from quartering of troops.

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

• Fourth Amendment – Protection from unreasonable search and seizure.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

• Fifth Amendment – due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, eminent domain.

No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

• Sixth Amendment – Trial by jury and rights of the accused; Confrontation Clause, speedy trial, public trial, right to counsel

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

• Seventh Amendment – Civil trial by jury.

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

• Eighth Amendment – Prohibition of excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

• Ninth Amendment – Protection of rights not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

• Tenth Amendment – Powers of States and people.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

10. We the people as a union mandate all things we deem beneficial to us without regard to secular ideologies. Powers delegated in this country are by consent of the people not by consent of special interests or the senate or the courts. What rights the government is allowed to manage are rights specifically granted by the populace and should the populace decide to revoke ant and every right it is the duty of any body managing affairs or rights to oblige the populace.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

A bill introduced by two of America’s pre-eminent psychopaths in power – Sens. John McCain and Joseph Lieberman, entitled The "Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010," would allow the U.S. military to indefinitely detain U.S. citizens without trial or legal representation on the suspicion that they may pose a threat to the government.
In effect, this bill would mean that ANY public dissent by ANY US citizen could land them in military detention for as long as the government chooses.
This is the legislation that we have been predicting for many years. This is the evidence that a major goal of the phony war on terror has always been to criminalize ordinary US citizens and effectively remove the last vestiges of freedom of speech and even thought. This is the evidence that Americans today are living in a covertly fascist regime.
You see, any totalitarianism worth its jack-booted thugs is implemented by degrees. What self-respecting dictatorship-under-cover-of-democracy would come clean about its intent at the very start? That’s no way to introduce fool-proof fascism. To be successful, by the time the people realise, it must already be too late….
So, job well done, psychopaths in power 1 – American people 0.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

I really would like to paint a rosy picture here but I cannot.

The sheer amount of laws slipping under our noses to enforce the fact that in our absence to prevail as a unified belligerent claimant over our sovereign rights is a tsunami against freedoms as depicted in our founding documents that makes the movie 2012 look pale and quite relieving by comparison.

Gauging where we stand is as easy as monitoring anti freedom of speech areas like the capital areas in DC or in washington state as well as many other areas. Its as easy as trying to choke down the evening news and knowing your hands are tied, for all intents and purposes they are.

Any UN  membership comes at what seems like a benign cost of being labeled a nation state or as most UN sites call a member state; and to the unlearned eye it seems odd they arent called nations but one automatically surmises that it must just be how the terminology in the UN works.

Heres a pin to that bubble, its not incidental they call nations states; in fact the failure of the league of nations underlines this greatly. There is ample purpose and design behind the terminology and its called the success of the world bank as the leader in making world reserve notes for the states of the world.

Gauging how far gone we are is as simple as reading from un websites; According to the UN and the parent holding company the world bank , nations dont exist. In order to partake in the UN charters and World bank schemes they cant exist.

The larger question is wether or not it can be fixed and what is defined as a fix.

The elite are certain that they are preparing for the possibility of another extinction level event and have done everything they have done to prepare for it and its taken several thousand years to get there.

Obviously we need some unity but do we need them? well the answer is obvious; we dont need them as they have systematically removed bits of history to the point where all we want to believe of it is that we just started making spears about 100k years ago and that was all we needed to know.

never mind that Ooparts exist to tell a different tale and histories that survived their cleansing add to it.

The fact is you are as gone as you want to be, and in your absence more laws will be passed , more crisis created and more dead children piling up on the sleeping hands of a world and its nations people who should have done more than believe the lies of the agents of mans demise.

If the masses do nothing at the precipice of the ineligible Obama tipping this country past the brink of no return, it is on them to face the generations that come after to ask why and condemn. Its on you; I have done my part my whole life and bear none of the guilt for believing the lies. I never did,.

If you were men and not mice , youd get together with statesmen and form an immovable object called we the people and tell the bankers to cover their fraudulent debt on their own, we owe them nothing and will pay nothing  . And furthermore we will take what is theirs and make it  a thing that heals nations.

but were not all men here are we? Were cowards behind schemes we refuse to analyze because it makes us look safe in our peers eyes.

We are at the precipice, Obama is not the right man for the job and we all need some healing. As far as I can see today well be in the clutches of the elite UN scheme for the rest of our lives.I dont have enough faith in mankind getting past his lies to save himself but maybe it is I that am naive.

I guess well see. The crash of the 20’s did nothing nor did the crash in the late 1800’s; we are still in their grasp. And to be honest I dont think the masses are that smart to route this real problem; they have the potential but its not used; there are no clear leaders and no decisive manifestos that lack what is similar to the zeal of extremism.

This extreme partisanship is the great indicator, its my prophet that says you wont do what needs to be done in time to save anything. In the end youll be shooting each other and conducting heinous crimes against humanity because youre ignorant and self worshipping.

I suppose you could PROVE me wrong but I doubt you will. I doubt that youll realize what I have .

the atomic nature of existence makes us all equal.

The earths and our own measurable magnetic fields work in unison

war is the substitution of nature taking what is hers, as is genocide

being equals means we are all accountable for what we create and creating our space inside anothers paradigm makes us equally as guilty

At any time you can awake and wake up others and undo it all together; we are smart enough and we can do it.

The information of the entire cosmos and beyond is in your very atomic being

we are the manifested being of god

so why dont we act like it?

How close to being slaves are we? how close do you want to be? 

The Ruthless Truth blog

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

Freedom of speech is an oxymoron unless nothing is barred from being said. IF you cant say something, you dont have freedom of speech

speaking your mind threatens your first amendment rights

But thats ok right? i mean its not like any american is going to actually DO anything to change that, And chances are if anyone does anything it will jeopardize everyone trying to do ,,,,something.

Forget the fact that so many Americans forefathers bled for the right to speak every word that lay in his mind. Forget the fact that these rights are contractually unalienable if you as I , consider the declaration of independance a contractual addendum to the bill of rights which gives meanings to terms found in said bill. I call it the contractual definitions page of the constitution.

You might call it an antiquated notion that should be replaced by UN charters and globalist ideals. And thats fine if you are an idiot that does, you are simply living in the wrong country and need to get the fuck OUT !!! ooops!! there I go abusing language . Guess we need to eliminate my first amendment right before I say shit or fag or something worse like kike or wop.

Words are sounds produced by forcing air through the trachea and vibrating the vocal chords as the air passes; Once said there is silence, the completion of a thought spoken isnt a tangible force or item Unless those words are used to create something tangible.

People  give words more sway than they deserve, as action is always more substantive, and to be honest , by way of comparison words are nothing, Most people utter only lies and not because they intend to but that they dont know the actual truth , as most people try relaying the truth but curiously those trying to limit the ability to speak freely also do everything possible to limit the availability of truth.

For the most part people are unenlightened reactionaries who wouldnt have a clue or couldnt have a clue on problem solving due to the fact that truth is so sparse any attempt to solve problems only creates more.

heres a real solution, befriend your elected reps, and i mean all of you procrastinating bastards and bitches ( damnit there I go again) why is that a solution? the best way to defeat a foe is to make him a friend. Why the harsh language? because you dont have your head outr of your self sympathizing ass enough to save yourself or anyone else from the loss of freedom and it takes some insult to make your damn monkey brain move.

Sorry but thats the ruthless truth. call me an asshole and a son of a bitch, shit ; use all your words but for once in your fucking sleepy ass life use some fucking words to get shit done.

Verndewd

By James J. Zogby

The last US administration displayed a rather perverse and dangerous penchant for dressing up its behaviour, providing it with religious or patriotic intent.

President George Bush packaged the Iraq war, for example, as America’s mission – having been charged by God to bring the gift of freedom to the world. The "war on terror" was presented through the lens of World War II and the cold war, and transformed into a battle of cosmic proportions against those who "hate our freedom" and "our way of life". US troops who were sent into battle in Iraq were seen as "defending our freedom" or "making America safe".

One could, of course, argue with this crass manipulation of potent symbols, though, at the time, few did. Politicians were especially hesitant to criticise this hyper-inflated rhetoric, not wanting to appear insensitive to the public’s fear or disrespectful of the sacrifices of those who had died or been maimed in the Iraq war.

Left unchallenged, this abuse of language continued to grow and become accepted in some quarters, doing damage to our political discourse and distorting our sense of reality.

Speaking to the National Tea Party Convention last month, for example, former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin rebuked the Obama administration for treating a would-be terrorist as a criminal defendant and providing him the opportunity to "invoke our Constitutional right…".

She went on: "Our US Constitutional rights. Our rights that you fought and were willing to die for to protect in our Constitution. The rights that my son, as an infantryman in the United States Army, is willing to die for. The protections provided, thanks to you, we are going to bestow them on a terrorist who hates our Constitution and tries to destroy our Constitution and our country."

While Palin is wrong on so many levels, her comments, reflecting the degree to which the national discussion has become distorted and out of touch with reality, must be rebutted.

First of all, it is just plain silly to bestow upon a pathetic failed would-be airplane bomber the capacity or even the intention to "destroy our Constitution and our country".

I have no doubt of his evil motives or of the hatred in his heart, but making him or those who sent him larger than they are serves no useful purpose.

Second, as painful as it may be to look at reality, head on we must. After seven years of the Iraq war and nine years of Afghanistan, it must be clear that these were not wars to defend "our Constitution".

One of these wars was designed to depose and punish those who cruelly attacked us on September 11 murdering 3,000 innocents. The other was based on a series of fabricated motives, none of which playing a role in making America safer or defending the constitution.

And while we’re on the subject of the constitution, it is important to take Palin to task for embracing what has become a popular misconception, and this is that the rights detailed in the constitution are "ours" alone.

Leaving aside former president Bush’s disturbing claim that America was charged by the Almighty to bring the "gift of freedom" to the world, US courts have continually affirmed that the rights described in the constitution apply to all "persons" who reside in the United States, not just citizens. Not only that, but US courts have also determined that the constitutional rights of habeas corpus and due process, and protections against "cruel and unusual punishment" and self-incrimination also apply to prisoners in US custody in Guantanamo or even some of those detained at Baghram in Afghanistan.

It is vitally important to pierce through the cloud of obfuscation and inflated rhetoric of the past decade and to advance a clearer understanding of who we are as a people and the exact nature of our role in the world. The reality we will discover is neither Bush’s divinely ordained America with its saving mission nor Palin’s more narrowly defined chauvinism.

It will require that we undergo a painful process of self-examination demanding full transparency and full accountability for past behaviour.

As difficult as it may be to acknowledge it, we cannot continue to ignore the fact that innocent lives were lost in an unnecessary war and America’s reputation was sullied by horrific and illegal acts committed in our name.

Finally, it is important that Americans study our history and our foundational documents.

It is shocking to note how few know the Bill of Rights. Even more disturbing is to note, as F. Lee Bailey, one of our nation’s great defence attorneys, once did, that if the language of the constitution and the Bill of Rights were reintroduced today, they would be seen as "unpatriotic" and would in all likelihood not receive public support and would not pass Congress.

In the end, the damage done by this abuse of language goes beyond a wasteful war and confusion in our national discussion of critical issues. By inflaming passions in support of unconstitutional behaviour, this rhetoric puts at risk the very freedoms it claims to be defending.

Abuse of language threatens American freedoms | Jordan Times

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

by Michael Boldin

The following is based off a speech I gave at the first annual Tenth Amendment Summit in Atlanta, GA on February 26, 2010.

How can a “crazy” Californian and a “conservative” Georgian be friends? It’s simple – through the principles of ’98. In 1798, the John Adams administration signed into law that Alien and Sedition Acts, which made it a crime to publish “false, scandalous, and malicious writing” against the government or its officials. In practice, it was used to quell the freedom of speech in dissent against the sitting administration.

In the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, Thomas Jefferson responded:

“the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government”

But wait – that’s not all. He went on to say that all undelegated powers exercised by the federal government are “unathoritative, void and of no force.” And, that a “nullification of the act is the rightful remedy.”

NULLIFICATION?

There’s been plenty of people talking about nullification lately, but many people don’t know what it really means. I can think of no better way to define it than how my friend Derek Sheriff from the Arizona Tenth Amendment Center has done:

Nullification is not secession or insurrection, but neither is it unconditional or unlimited submission. Nullification is not something that requires any decision, statement or action from any branch of the federal government. Nullification is not the result of obtaining a favorable court ruling. Nullification is not the petitioning of the federal government to start doing or to stop doing anything. Nullification doesn’t depend on any federal law being repealed. Nullification does not require permission from any person or institution outside of one’s own state.

Nullification is something that’s already happening around the country – and Derek explains the process:

Nullification begins with a decision made in your state legislature to resist a federal law deemed to be unconstitutional. It usually involves a bill, which is passed by both houses and is signed by your governor. In some cases, it might be approved by the voters of your state directly, in a referendum. It may change your state’s statutory law or it might even amend your state constitution. It is a refusal on the part of your state government to cooperate with, or enforce any federal law it deems to be unconstitutional.

At its very core, nullification is mass civil-disobedience to the federal government with the support of the state apparatus. It’s about “We the People” exercising our rights whether the politicians or judges in Washington D.C want to give us “permission” to exercise those rights or not.

ROSCOE FILBURN

During the Great Depression, while millions of people were out of work or starving, the FDR administration required American farmers to restrict production of wheat in order to raise prices.

As a farmer, Roscoe Filburn was told he could plant a little over 10 acres of wheat, which he did grow and sell on the market. He also decided that it was in his best interest – possibly because he had less revenue due to the production limitations – to plant another 10 or so acres. But, the “excess” wheat grown was used at home to feed his livestock, among other things. He never sold it, so he saw this as being outside the scope of Congressional power to regulate “interstate commerce.”

What did the federal government do? The expected – they ordered Roscoe to destroy his crops and pay a fine. Think about that for a moment and you’ll really understand the evil of having too much power in too few hands. At a time when large numbers of people were starving, these thugs in government forced people to reduce production for the sake of raising prices. From this, it seems clear to me that corporate bailouts have been going on a long, long time in America.

Roscoe sued, and the case went all the way to the Supreme Court. In Wickard v Filburn, the Court ruled against him and the result was that the Federal Government assumed a power that was new in the history of this country. It now had the power to control the growing and consuming of something that never left one’s back yard.

LOST LIBERTY

John Adams, who as we can see from his signing of the Alien and Sedition Acts-, was no saint, did give us a great warning on the growth of government power. In 1775 he wrote, “liberty once lost, is lost forever.” He went on to explain that when the People allow government to gain power and restrict liberty, it will never voluntarily give that power back. Liberty given up to government power will never be returned to the people without a long and difficult struggle.

If we fast forward to present times, we can see this principle at work.

ANGEL RAICH

In the 1990s, the People of California voted to legalize consumption of marijuana for medicinal purposes. Angel Raich, who has a huge cancerous tumor in her brain was told by her doctor and California law that using marijuana to relieve some of the pain associated with her cancer was acceptable.

The Feds don’t take too kindly to states passing laws in direct contravention to theirs. Marijuana, for example, is illegal on a federal level in all circumstances, and federal agencies have consistently said they don’t recognize state laws. You can probably guess what happened, right?

Federal agents destroyed Angel’s homegrown marijuana plants without much resistance. Like Roscoe before her, Angel sued, and the case went all the way to the Supreme Court. In 2005, the Supreme Court once again ruled that growing and consuming a plant in one’s own back yard qualified as “interstate commerce.” And, because of that, the federal government was then authorized to control, regulate, or outright ban such activities under the threat of fine or prison.

Clarence Thomas, in his famous dissent, got it right when he wrote, “If the majority is to be taken seriously, the Federal Government may now regulate quilting bees, clothes drives, and potluck suppers throughout the 50 States. This makes a mockery of Madison’s assurance to the people of New York that the “powers delegated” to the Federal Government are “few and defined”, while those of the States are “numerous and indefinite.”

PARTISAN CONSTITUTIONALISTS?

The main problem we face is that much of the support for the 10th Amendment is little more than partisanship. For many years, conservatives have rightly railed against policies such as the ones that FDR used against Roscoe Filburn. But, at the same time, they’ve turned a blind eye to those same policies when used against Angel Raich and her use of marijuana. And on the other hand, liberals have done just the opposite.

The bottom line, though, is this. When you allow politicians to bend the rules of the Constitution – even for things you may support – over a long period of time, sooner or later you’re going to end up with politicians who feel that the rules don’t apply at all. And, if we’re not there right now, we’re pretty darn close.

EVERY ISSUE, EVERY TIME

That’s why we at the Tenth Amendment Center demand adherence to the Constitution – Every Issue. Every time. No exceptions. No excuses. That means that much of what the federal government does is unconstitutional, including:

The Department of Education, The Patriot Act, Federal Gun Laws and Regulations, National Health Care Mandates, and something that’s been going on since 1941, wars without a Congressional declaration of war from Congress.

LIBERTY

From this we can see that the Tenth Amendment is not about political parties. It’s not about political ideologies. It’s not even about political candidates. It’s about liberty. It was designed to promote your liberty by strictly limiting the powers of the federal government.

Over the past year or so, I’ve been interviewed by mainstream media sources literally dozens of times. And whether it’s Fox News, or CNN, or the New York Times, the reporters invariably ask the same question, “What political party do you support?” Each time, I give them the same answer, “The Tenth Amendment Center is a non-partisan think tank that supports the principles of strictly limited constitutional government.”

They always have virtually the same follow up question too – “what about you? As the founder of the Center, what’s your political background, what political party do you support?”

“None,” I tell them. I don’t know if they believe me, but it’s true.

I’m no conservative, and I’m no liberal. I’m not a Democrat or a Republican. And I’m not a green or a libertarian, or a socialist or an anarchist. I’m not even an independent.

All I am is me, and all I want is to live free.

Thank you….

Michael Boldin [send him email] is the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center

Copyright © 2010 by TenthAmendmentCenter.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given

If you enjoyed this post:
Click Here to Get the Free Tenth Amendment Center Newsletter,

http://digg.com/d31KHiN?t

Bookmark It

Hide Sites