Obama Abolishes Private Property
This article very graphically outlines exactly what we've lost in the United States. The federal government, under the pretext of protecting us from terrorism, ourselves and and salient circumstances they determine are detrimental, have nullified most of the ten amendments to the Constitution that we know as the Bill of Rights. And they are working hard to give all discretion for interpretation of those "inalienable rights" to the executive branch. The current occupier of the oval orifice is doing his best to find a way to extend his tenure so he can exercise the power that the death of those rights will give him. This usurper has signed more executive orders to bypass the Constitutional protections for the citizens - and transfer that power to the executive branch - than all of his predecessors combined.
After you've read this chilling compilation of government outrages and moral criminality, watch the Russian flick in the link below this paragraph that deals with the first days of the Soviet Empire after the communist take-over. It's gruesome and it's sickening, but it is ultimately prophetic for America. That is exactly what will happen here when it is no longer possible to challenge our elected "officials." They will have the same power of life or death over us all - if we dare criticize government or even if we choose to remain quiet when they think we should have ratted someone out or simply neglected to voice the expected party line. Life is cheap for those in power, when their lives aren't in jeopardy, and if those elite have total power in the social structure, their future is assured and they can be careless with other peoples' lives and fortunes.
It won't be very long before criticizing the government of the United States is punishable by death - just as it is in this film...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RQVSHfuPCQ
Cashu
============================
Obama Abolishes Private Property
Monday, December 9, 2013 20:45
Private Property
"No power on earth has a right to take our property from us without our consent."-John Jay, first Chief Justice of the United States
"How `secure' do our homes remain if police, armed with no warrant, can pound on doors at will and . forcibly enter?"-Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the lone dissenter in Kentucky v. King
If the government can tell you what you can and cannot do within the privacy of your home, whether it relates to what you eat, what you smoke or whom you love, you no longer have any rights whatsoever within your home.
If government officials can fine and arrest you for growing vegetables in your front yard, praying with friends in your living room, installing solar panels on your roof, and raising chickens in your backyard, you're no longer the owner of your property. If school officials can punish your children for what they do or say while at home or in your care, your children are not your own-they are the property of the state.
If government agents can invade your home, break down your doors, kill your dog, damage your furnishings and terrorize your family, your property is no longer private and secure-it belongs to the government. Likewise, if police can forcefully draw your blood, strip search you, and probe you intimately, your body is no longer your own, either.
This is what a world without the Fourth Amendment looks like, where the lines between private and public property have been so blurred that private property is reduced to little more than something the government can use to control, manipulate and harass you to suit its own purposes, and you the homeowner and citizen have been reduced to little more than a tenant or serf in bondage to an inflexible landlord.
Examples of this disregard for the sanctity of private property-whether in the form of one's home, one's possessions, or one's person-abound. Here are just a few.
In San Rafael, California, it is now illegal to smoke a cigarette or other tobacco product inside "apartments, condos, duplexes, and multi-family houses." Although lawmakers hope the ordinance will be "self-enforcing," they're encouraging landlords to threaten tenants with eviction should they run afoul of the law.
In Ohio, it's illegal to alter one's car with a hidden compartment if the "intent" is to conceal illegal drugs. Although Norman Gurley had no drugs on his person, nor in his car, nor could it be proven that he intended to conceal drugs, he was still arrested for the "crime" of having a hidden compartment in the trunk of his car.
In Florida and elsewhere throughout the country, home vegetable gardens are being targeted as illegal. For 17 years, Hermine Ricketts and Tom Carroll have tended the vegetable garden in their front yard, relying on it for 80 percent of their food intake, only to be told by city officials that they must get rid of it or face $50 a day in fines. The reason? The vegetable garden is "inconsistent with the city's aesthetic character."
In Iowa, a war veteran attempting to wean his family off expensive corporate farm products, GMOs and pesticides has been charged with violating a city ordinance and now faces up to 30 days in jail and a $600 fine for daring to raise chickens in his backyard for his personal use, despite statements of support from his neighbors.
In Virginia, school officials suspended two boys for the remainder of the school year and charged them with possession of a firearm after they were reported to the police for playing with toy airsoft guns in their front yard, while waiting for the morning school bus. At no time did the boys attempt to take the toy guns on the bus or to school.
The most obvious disrespect for property rights comes in the form of the tens of thousands of SWAT team raids that occur across the country on a yearly basis. Usually undertaken under the pretense of serving a drug warrant, these raids involve police arriving at a private residence in SWAT gear, armed to the hilt, kicking down doors, apprehending all persons inside the home, then determining if a crime has been committed. That was Judy Sanchez's experience when FBI agents investigating gang activity used a chainsaw to cut through her door, then forced Sanchez and her child to the ground. It was only after invading Sanchez's home and terrorizing her family that agents realized they had targeted the wrong address.
Unfortunately, we in America get so focused on the Fourth Amendment's requirement of a warrant before government agents can invade our property (a requirement that means little in an age of kangaroo courts and rubberstamped warrant requests) that we fail to properly appreciate the first part of the statement declaring that we have a right to be secure in our "persons, houses, papers, and effects." What this means is that the Fourth Amendment's protections were intended to not only follow us wherever we go but also apply to all that is ours-whether you're talking about our physical bodies, our biometric data, our possessions, our families, or our way of life. However, in an 8-1 ruling in Kentucky v. King (2011), the U.S. Supreme Court sanctioned SWAT teams smashing down doors of homes or apartments without a warrant if they happen to "suspect" you might be doing something illegal in your home.
At a time when the government routinely cites national security as the justification for its endless violations of the Constitution, the idea that a citizen can actually be "secure" or protected against such government overreach seems increasingly implausible, while suggesting that a person take steps to secure his person and property against the government could have one accused of fomenting anti-government sentiment.
Nevertheless, the reality of our age is this: if the government chooses to crash through our doors, listen to our phone calls, read our emails and text messages, fine us for growing vegetables in our front yard, jail us for raising chickens in our backyard, forcibly take our blood and saliva, and probe our kootchies and rectums, there's little we can do to stop them. At least, not at that particular moment. When you're face to face with a government agent who is not only armed to the hilt and inclined to shoot first and ask questions later but also woefully ignorant of the fact that he works for you, if you value your life, you don't talk back.
This sad reality came about as a result of our being asleep at the wheel. We failed to ask questions and hold our representatives accountable to abiding by the Constitution, while the government amassed an amazing amount of power over us, and backed up that power-grab with a terrifying amount of military might and weaponry, and got the courts to sanction their actions every step of the way.
However, once the dust settles and you've had a chance to catch your breath, I hope you'll remember that the Constitution begins with those three beautiful words, "We the people." In other words, there is no government without us-our sheer numbers, our muscle, our economy, our physical presence in this land.
There can also be no police state-no tyranny-no routine violations of our rights without our complicity and collusion-without our turning a blind eye, shrugging our shoulders, allowing ourselves to be distracted and our civic awareness diluted.
So where do we begin? How do we go about wresting back control over our freedoms and our lives in the face of such seemingly insurmountable odds?
There's an old adage, albeit not a very palatable one, that says "when eating an elephant take one bite at a time." The point is this: when facing a monumental task, take it one step at a time. In other words, we're going to have to wage these battles house by house, car by car, and body by body. Most importantly, as I point out in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, we're going to have to stop the partisan bickering-you can leave that to the yokels in Congress-and recognize that the suffering brought about by a police state will be the great equalizer, applying to all Americans, regardless of their political leanings (the fact that we are all now being targeted for government surveillance is but a foretaste of things to come).
As John Adams rightly noted, "The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people. This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments and affections of the people was the real American Revolution."
It's time for a second American Revolution. Not a revolution designed to kill people or tear down and physically destroy society, but a revolution of the minds and souls of human beings-a revolution promulgated to restore the freedoms for which our founders sacrificed their fortunes and their lives.
Learn more about John W. Whitehead at www.rutherford.org.
After you've read this chilling compilation of government outrages and moral criminality, watch the Russian flick in the link below this paragraph that deals with the first days of the Soviet Empire after the communist take-over. It's gruesome and it's sickening, but it is ultimately prophetic for America. That is exactly what will happen here when it is no longer possible to challenge our elected "officials." They will have the same power of life or death over us all - if we dare criticize government or even if we choose to remain quiet when they think we should have ratted someone out or simply neglected to voice the expected party line. Life is cheap for those in power, when their lives aren't in jeopardy, and if those elite have total power in the social structure, their future is assured and they can be careless with other peoples' lives and fortunes.
It won't be very long before criticizing the government of the United States is punishable by death - just as it is in this film...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RQVSHfuPCQCashu
============================
Obama Abolishes Private Property
Monday, December 9, 2013 20:45
Private Property
"No power on earth has a right to take our property from us without our consent."-John Jay, first Chief Justice of the United States
"How `secure' do our homes remain if police, armed with no warrant, can pound on doors at will and . forcibly enter?"-Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the lone dissenter in Kentucky v. King
If the government can tell you what you can and cannot do within the privacy of your home, whether it relates to what you eat, what you smoke or whom you love, you no longer have any rights whatsoever within your home.
If government officials can fine and arrest you for growing vegetables in your front yard, praying with friends in your living room, installing solar panels on your roof, and raising chickens in your backyard, you're no longer the owner of your property. If school officials can punish your children for what they do or say while at home or in your care, your children are not your own-they are the property of the state.
If government agents can invade your home, break down your doors, kill your dog, damage your furnishings and terrorize your family, your property is no longer private and secure-it belongs to the government. Likewise, if police can forcefully draw your blood, strip search you, and probe you intimately, your body is no longer your own, either.
This is what a world without the Fourth Amendment looks like, where the lines between private and public property have been so blurred that private property is reduced to little more than something the government can use to control, manipulate and harass you to suit its own purposes, and you the homeowner and citizen have been reduced to little more than a tenant or serf in bondage to an inflexible landlord.
Examples of this disregard for the sanctity of private property-whether in the form of one's home, one's possessions, or one's person-abound. Here are just a few.
In San Rafael, California, it is now illegal to smoke a cigarette or other tobacco product inside "apartments, condos, duplexes, and multi-family houses." Although lawmakers hope the ordinance will be "self-enforcing," they're encouraging landlords to threaten tenants with eviction should they run afoul of the law.
In Ohio, it's illegal to alter one's car with a hidden compartment if the "intent" is to conceal illegal drugs. Although Norman Gurley had no drugs on his person, nor in his car, nor could it be proven that he intended to conceal drugs, he was still arrested for the "crime" of having a hidden compartment in the trunk of his car.
In Florida and elsewhere throughout the country, home vegetable gardens are being targeted as illegal. For 17 years, Hermine Ricketts and Tom Carroll have tended the vegetable garden in their front yard, relying on it for 80 percent of their food intake, only to be told by city officials that they must get rid of it or face $50 a day in fines. The reason? The vegetable garden is "inconsistent with the city's aesthetic character."
In Iowa, a war veteran attempting to wean his family off expensive corporate farm products, GMOs and pesticides has been charged with violating a city ordinance and now faces up to 30 days in jail and a $600 fine for daring to raise chickens in his backyard for his personal use, despite statements of support from his neighbors.
In Virginia, school officials suspended two boys for the remainder of the school year and charged them with possession of a firearm after they were reported to the police for playing with toy airsoft guns in their front yard, while waiting for the morning school bus. At no time did the boys attempt to take the toy guns on the bus or to school.
The most obvious disrespect for property rights comes in the form of the tens of thousands of SWAT team raids that occur across the country on a yearly basis. Usually undertaken under the pretense of serving a drug warrant, these raids involve police arriving at a private residence in SWAT gear, armed to the hilt, kicking down doors, apprehending all persons inside the home, then determining if a crime has been committed. That was Judy Sanchez's experience when FBI agents investigating gang activity used a chainsaw to cut through her door, then forced Sanchez and her child to the ground. It was only after invading Sanchez's home and terrorizing her family that agents realized they had targeted the wrong address.
Unfortunately, we in America get so focused on the Fourth Amendment's requirement of a warrant before government agents can invade our property (a requirement that means little in an age of kangaroo courts and rubberstamped warrant requests) that we fail to properly appreciate the first part of the statement declaring that we have a right to be secure in our "persons, houses, papers, and effects." What this means is that the Fourth Amendment's protections were intended to not only follow us wherever we go but also apply to all that is ours-whether you're talking about our physical bodies, our biometric data, our possessions, our families, or our way of life. However, in an 8-1 ruling in Kentucky v. King (2011), the U.S. Supreme Court sanctioned SWAT teams smashing down doors of homes or apartments without a warrant if they happen to "suspect" you might be doing something illegal in your home.
At a time when the government routinely cites national security as the justification for its endless violations of the Constitution, the idea that a citizen can actually be "secure" or protected against such government overreach seems increasingly implausible, while suggesting that a person take steps to secure his person and property against the government could have one accused of fomenting anti-government sentiment.
Nevertheless, the reality of our age is this: if the government chooses to crash through our doors, listen to our phone calls, read our emails and text messages, fine us for growing vegetables in our front yard, jail us for raising chickens in our backyard, forcibly take our blood and saliva, and probe our kootchies and rectums, there's little we can do to stop them. At least, not at that particular moment. When you're face to face with a government agent who is not only armed to the hilt and inclined to shoot first and ask questions later but also woefully ignorant of the fact that he works for you, if you value your life, you don't talk back.
This sad reality came about as a result of our being asleep at the wheel. We failed to ask questions and hold our representatives accountable to abiding by the Constitution, while the government amassed an amazing amount of power over us, and backed up that power-grab with a terrifying amount of military might and weaponry, and got the courts to sanction their actions every step of the way.
However, once the dust settles and you've had a chance to catch your breath, I hope you'll remember that the Constitution begins with those three beautiful words, "We the people." In other words, there is no government without us-our sheer numbers, our muscle, our economy, our physical presence in this land.
There can also be no police state-no tyranny-no routine violations of our rights without our complicity and collusion-without our turning a blind eye, shrugging our shoulders, allowing ourselves to be distracted and our civic awareness diluted.
So where do we begin? How do we go about wresting back control over our freedoms and our lives in the face of such seemingly insurmountable odds?
There's an old adage, albeit not a very palatable one, that says "when eating an elephant take one bite at a time." The point is this: when facing a monumental task, take it one step at a time. In other words, we're going to have to wage these battles house by house, car by car, and body by body. Most importantly, as I point out in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, we're going to have to stop the partisan bickering-you can leave that to the yokels in Congress-and recognize that the suffering brought about by a police state will be the great equalizer, applying to all Americans, regardless of their political leanings (the fact that we are all now being targeted for government surveillance is but a foretaste of things to come).
As John Adams rightly noted, "The Revolution was effected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people. This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments and affections of the people was the real American Revolution."
It's time for a second American Revolution. Not a revolution designed to kill people or tear down and physically destroy society, but a revolution of the minds and souls of human beings-a revolution promulgated to restore the freedoms for which our founders sacrificed their fortunes and their lives.
Learn more about John W. Whitehead at www.rutherford.org.
0
-
You were doing fine until the line about "corporate farms, GMO's, and pesticides". 0 -
MONSANTO comes to mind.[:(] 0 -
So Obama did this because he has not asked Eric Holder to stop it?
It looks to me like this is pretty much a list of local government excesses.
By blaming Obama, we are suggesting that these local entities should be either reporting more frequently to, or be controlled more closely by the Federal Government than they are today.
This is not a Federal issue.
These local tyrants should be dealt with by the local population. Either vote them out of office or run them out of town on a rail. I fail to see where these are issues for the Executive Branch. Judicial maybe, but certainly not executive.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
So Obama did this because he has not asked Eric Holder to stop it?
It looks to me like this is pretty much a list of local government excesses.
By blaming Obama, we are suggesting that these local entities should be either reporting more frequently to, or be controlled more closely by the Federal Government than they are today.
This is not a Federal issue.
These local tyrants should be dealt with by the local population. Either vote them out of office or run them out of town on a rail. I fail to see where these are issues for the Executive Branch. Judicial maybe, but certainly not executive.
Couldn't have said it better.
Not to mention this stuff has been going on longer than I can remember and I'm in my 30's. So to blame Obama your just looking for an easy scape goat, well the author is anyway.0 -
I own property on the beautiful Klamath River 35 miles south of Oregon, there is a group trying to make a 60 to 90 mile stretch of the river and all surrounding property a Monument, they want to pay chump dollars for the property, and oh you can live in it for you life time, what the hell good it that for me a 77 year old man, here goes my 4.2 acres of river front I wanted deeded to my grandkids fpr there enjoyment, it goes instead to liberal minorities who never worked a day in their lives If that comes about that is just one for fact that this country is a two party dictatorship 0 -
quote:Originally posted by us55840
Does anyone REALLY have a TITLE or DEED to their property?
Does anyone have a LEGAL survey of their property?
Every survey of real estate I know of has a 'disclaimer' in very fine print on the bottom that states: "This is not a legal survey"
[?][?][?]
I have the title and deed in my safe, complete with an survey that has been catalogued by the county.
That said, if I don't pay my yearly rent (property taxes) said county will assume possession.
So no. I basically have an open-ended lease with the option to sell the lease whenever I so choose.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by us55840
Does anyone REALLY have a TITLE or DEED to their property?
Does anyone have a LEGAL survey of their property?
Every survey of real estate I know of has a 'disclaimer' in very fine print on the bottom that states: "This is not a legal survey"
[?][?][?]
I have the title and deed in my safe, complete with an survey that has been catalogued by the county.
That said, if I don't pay my yearly rent (property taxes) said county will assume possession.
So no. I basically have an open-ended lease with the option to sell the lease whenever I so choose.
BINGO!!!!! We have a winner! Been telling people this for at least 40 years.....but I'm crazy.
[:D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by us55840
Does anyone REALLY have a TITLE or DEED to their property?
Does anyone have a LEGAL survey of their property?
Every survey of real estate I know of has a 'disclaimer' in very fine print on the bottom that states: "This is not a legal survey"
[?][?][?]
I have the title and deed in my safe, complete with an survey that has been catalogued by the county.
That said, if I don't pay my yearly rent (property taxes) said county will assume possession.
So no. I basically have an open-ended lease with the option to sell the lease whenever I so choose.
Exactly, property tax is proof that you own NOTHING, you lease it from the local tax authorities. Thousands of people lose their homes every year because they can no longer pay the taxes. Most are elderly, have paid the mortgage off decades ago yet get the boot because taxes got so high they can't pay them.0 -
Traditionalist, revisionist, and reclamationist have sought to explore parallels between the dispute resolutions process of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo [1848]end of the Spanish American war in Paris 1848, the California land act of 1851, The Gradsen purchase, and the 1993 NAFTA treaty, the law distinguishes between two types of treaties, self-executing treaties, which may be enforced immediately in Federal Court, and non-self executing treaties, which are executory in nature and must be implemented by legislation. Non of these treaties handled the issue of immigration, NAFTA failed to recognize that Mexico's biggest import to the U.S. id/was and still is Mexican labor. The European Union which has 27 Nations and 550.000 million persons provides migration of Nation between the nations
An open border presumably would increase migration by Mexicans and Canadians to the United States, although the magnitude of any flow would be difficult to predict. One would expect continued job segregations of certain jobs. One would also expect migrants to be unskilled this would place a downward pressure on some wages. However opening up Mexico to foreign investors would balance this out.0 -
quote:Originally posted by blogdog37
Traditionalist, revisionist, and reclamationist have sought to explore parallels between the dispute resolutions process of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo [1848]end of the Spanish American war in Paris 1848, the California land act of 1851, The Gradsen purchase, and the 1993 NAFTA treaty, the law distinguishes between two types of treaties, self-executing treaties, which may be enforced immediately in Federal Court, and non-self executing treaties, which are executory in nature and must be implemented by legislation. Non of these treaties handled the issue of immigration, NAFTA failed to recognize that Mexico's biggest import to the U.S. id/was and still is Mexican labor. The European Union which has 27 Nations and 750,000 million persons provides migration of Nation between the nations
An open border presumably would increase migration by Mexicans and Canadians to the United States, although the magnitude of any flow would be difficult to predict. One would expect continued job segregations of certain jobs. One would also expect migrants to be unskilled this would place a downward pressure on some wages. However opening up Mexico to foreign investors would balance this out.0 -
to Blogdog,
from Deerhide (a Canadian)
I don't know where the quote came from and it doesn't really matter....
It mentions NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement.
This is an agreement 'foisted' upon Canadian citizens by the Canadian equivalent of a Republican government, one not 'of the people' but one of the capitalist elite.
It also mentions migration to the U.S. by Mexicans and Canadians. While there are 'attractions' to live in 'the states' IMHO they are far out -weighed by the freedoms we enjoy in(not perfect,yet)Canada. Especially concerning guns, property rights and aborignal rights.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by us55840
Does anyone REALLY have a TITLE or DEED to their property?
Does anyone have a LEGAL survey of their property?
Every survey of real estate I know of has a 'disclaimer' in very fine print on the bottom that states: "This is not a legal survey"
[?][?][?]
I have the title and deed in my safe, complete with an survey that has been catalogued by the county.
That said, if I don't pay my yearly rent (property taxes) said county will assume possession.
So no. I basically have an open-ended lease with the option to sell the lease whenever I so choose.
Property taxes, ever rising as they are, are absolute proof you own no land or the real property you build upon it. After the mortgage is paid to the bank Government makes sure you are kept under their boot by taxing what you own free and clear.0 -
quote:Originally posted by azpowerwagon
MONSANTO comes to mind.[:(]
The old torn down Monsanto plant in San Jose is around 15 or 20 acres, I went right by the plant on a railroad track when I was
a Locomotive Engineer, not a blade of grass, bird or any living breathing plant or animal grew their. Talk about toxic, that is just one plant if you keep talking to railroaders they can tell you about hundreds if not thousands more just like Monsanto.0 -
Deerhide I was under the impression that it was hard to own a handgun in Canada. Could you please explain why things are better in Canada concerning guns, property rights and aboriginal rights?? 0 -
quote:Originally posted by us55840
That said, if I don't pay my yearly rent (property taxes) said county will assume possession.
So no. I basically have an open-ended lease with the option to sell the lease whenever I so choose.
[/quote]
This is not something that has happened in the last 5 - 10 or even 20 years. It was instituted the second Real Estate Taxes were imposed.
[:(]
[/quote]Which goes back some 200 years in this country.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
15 comments