From Age Of Eliyah – the full video of Doctrine and Tradition:
When will they stop trying to force this thing down our throats?? Probably never. Once again we will need to call upon our State governments to put this in an early grave.
Here is Ron Paul with information about how they are trying to sneak this ID card into legislation.
Publius Huldah Explains Why Islamists Don’t Have the Right to Build Mosques, Proselytize Or Institute Sharia Law In America
As Many of you know, the infiltration of Islam into our States is of great concern. Publius explains why and demonstrates how to combat this foreign invasion. Please take the time to watch this video and share it with as many as you can. It is time we, the militia, take a stand and fight the battles our cowardly “public servants” do not have the courage to take on.
Follow her blog: Publius-Huldah’s Blog
U.S. Supreme Court
OWEN v. CITY OF INDEPENDENCE, 445 U.S. 622 (1980)
445 U.S. 622
OWEN v. CITY OF INDEPENDENCE, MISSOURI, ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Argued January 8, 1980.
Decided April 16, 1980.
A municipality has no immunity from liability under 1983 flowing from its constitutional violations and may not assert the good faith of its officers as a defense to such liability. Pp. 635-658.
While reading the above, Owen v. City of Independence, I ran across a footnote that I found particularly interesting.
The footnote indicates that all public servants, elected or appointed, are liable for error when violating a citizens rights under Federal Law. Here, in Footnote 25, we have a unique opinion that makes even LEGISLATORS liable.
[Footnote 25] See, e. g., Globe 305 (remarks of Rep. Arthur) (“But if the Legislature enacts a law, if the Governor enforces it, if the judge upon the bench renders a judgment, if the sheriff levy an execution, execute a writ, serve a summons, or make an arrest, all acting under a solemn, official oath, [445 U.S. 622, 644] though as pure in duty as a saint and as immaculate as a seraph, for a mere error in judgment, they are liable. . .”); id., at 385 (remarks of Rep. Lewis); Globe App. 217 (remarks of Sen. Thurman).
Do you see it? “But if the Legislature enacts a law…” and all that follows… “THEY ARE LIABLE.”
Here is a remedy for every bad law, every encroachment made and liberty stolen. If we hold them liable for what they have done and seek restitution … we may be able to roll back their ever advancing infringement on our rights which are guaranteed by the Supreme Law of the Land: The Constitution.
The public servants that believe they have immunity because they are following some “law” or “regulation” need to be put on notice that there is no such immunity for their error. This can be an important part of our arsenal in the protection of our Liberty. But I believe this process would hinge on specific use of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It would be essential to include all pertinent writings regarding the intent of the founders for the particular right protected in order to establish without doubt that the Federally Protected Right has been violated.
Can State Representatives be held liable for violation of rights protected under Federal Law (the Constitution)? Why not? Could we not hold all responsible and file claim seeking remedy? Could a single case filed against a State Representative result in a recall with a special election? The possibilities are endless.
It is my belief that this could be a greater weapon when used LOCALLY to keep city, town and county public servants in line with the Constitution. As this remedy may be applied much easier locally and as it gains momentum it can then be applied to State officials. But this can be used immediately and effectively in all situations involving Law Enforcement Officers.
Your comments and ideas are appreciated.
As some people like to believe there is a “debate” about gun control, I refuse to accept that point of view. There is no “debate.” There is only the attempt to steal yet another Liberty from the People. The “debate” was settled long ago when the 2nd Amendment was written. It appears there wasn’t much to debate on this particular Liberty as the protection of Liberty is at the heart of the 2nd Amendment.
In my state, Indiana, we have “open carry.” Not many seem to know this fact. If you have a gun permit then you can legally carry your gun on your person.
With the threat of our right to bear arms being stolen by the muddle brained in D.C., my county has taken the necessary steps to insure this Liberty by passing the “2nd Amendment Preservation Act” which says all federal gun control measures should be considered null and void in the County. (Ind. County fights federal gun control)
To add to this, the Indiana Senate has now made it legal to own a “switch blade.” No joke. See it here.
And lastly, here is a picture of Feinstein, who seeks to destroy our Liberty and who has a concealed carry permit, demonstrating her poor understanding of gun safety while holding a gun she would like to see banned for everyone EXCEPT government officials.
Note the placement of her finger ON the trigger. There is no doubt that she needs a course in gun safety.
Yes, I did say that government officials would be EXEMPT from this gun control legislation. This shouldn’t surprise anyone as our government officials are also exempt from Obamacare. It appears that what is good for The People is not good enough for our public servants. (Hmm, it makes you wonder what they really think their status is, doesn’t it?) You can find more information in THIS article.
As many of us can clearly see, there is an attempt by government officials to find that one issue that will cause the people to revolt. Yes, they would like for us to fire the first shot. It is my opinion that will not be the case. They will fire first and then deny it, although unsuccessfully.
In any event, there is a great change coming to this country. It will be divided as the States resume their status as Sovereign entities, leaving the failed union to flounder in its own mess. We may even see a new union formed based upon the old but leaving no doubt about the limits placed upon any “representative” government such as D.C. was initially meant to be.
The question is: would forming a New Union be the best option? And if so, why would the States have to wait to take such action?