Check out # 66 , please.
Thanks, Art in Idaho.
Posted on 11/04/2015 8:10:31 PM PST by Art in Idaho
“Most Muslim countries do not want the Palestinians in their country.”
True. Jordan WAS different because almost 70% of Jordanians are actually Palestinians. IOW, the Palestinians bit the helping hands of their own tribes and families.
After the 1970 attempted takeover by Arafat and his minions, no more Jordanian hospitality extended, same as the rest is f the ME, as you mentioned.
The video of Merkel and the flag issue was filled in 2013. I’m not defending her, but it was not a recent incident. And it looks like she passed it of to someone at the side of the stage— not tossed away. ( just trying to be factual)
Well Jordan was suppose to be the Palestinian ‘state’.....but they did not want many of those from the camps because they were so violent. They’re more than a deranged people.....they are indoctrinated from infancy to hate and kill those who are not Muslim.....and if they aren’t actually doing so they’re supporting those who do.
The depraved indifference that could apply in any criminal case would apply in civil court-especially where discrimination is demonstrated-against the citizens of the area.
You make some very good points. As a basis to file in court it sounds solid to me. I wonder what Mark Levin would think? Also, Jay Sekulow of ACLJ.org might be interested in litigating this. Any other legal beagles here have any further ideas on this?
Mike Vanderbough, helped break the Story of
Fast and Furious.
Runs the sipseystreetirregulars.
Kerodin started this Citadel thing and the two Men were associates earlier and started’III’s’ aka threepercenters.
The two had a falling out and have been quite vocal about it.I suppose you can pick you’re side or embrace the concept that Mike Vanderbough expresses best ,in My opinion.
Dear Mr. Sekulow,
Please see: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3356588/posts?page=1a
and then posts # 58, #59 and #64.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3356588/posts?page=64#64
Is there a possible case to be made based on discrimination, a tort by eradication and infringement of civil rights of the local citizens? Also, could the depraved indifference that could apply in any criminal case be applied in a civil court-especially where discrimination is demonstrated-against the citizens of the area?
I am Art in Idaho at Free Republic and we have had many discussions on this.
We thought it was time to get your thoughts on this.
If there is any way we could legally stem this tide, it is worth considering.
Thank you for you review and consideration in this matter.
Sincerely, etc.
Does anyone have any connections with Mark Levin? Would really be interested to hear his thoughts on this.
I have not heard of any Christians being brought in. Do not think obama wants any Christians or any other REAL refuges in our country.
The other case that came to me was Dred Scott. In diluting American citizenry to less than it was, to the tune of 30-40 illegal aliens in this country, we are being made into 3/5 persons, especially since the prior ‘amnesty.’ In addition, we are paying cash money for that diminishment in support of illegal care and medical provision. I wonder if that diminishment of Personhood in the individual citizen is actionable against this government as a form of penal servitude, due to open borders and the refusal to maintain and defend the value of an individual’s sovereignty, as understood by inalienability.
Check out # 66 , please.
Thanks, Art in Idaho.
There was a group of Christians who tried to come here but were being detained by Obama administration. Don’t have a link, thought it was in southern CA where they were being held.
Video at the link of Dana Rohrabacher, the sponsor of legislation.
H.Res. 459: Christians in the Middle East are victims of genocide.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3354898/posts
http://swordandshieldhawaii.com/2015/10/30/h-res-459-expressing-the-sense-of-the-house-of-representatives-that-christians-in-the-middle-east-are-victims-of-genocide/
I just read his "About" page, with Ayn Rand's letter. Excellent.
What saddens me, unfortunately, is that, in addition to the Left, there are also many Totalitarians on the conservative side of the political spectrum, people who believe that they should be able to define the boundaries of my pursuit of happiness.
True Liberty is not a choice of whose vision or version of Tyranny is most palatable.
Freedom is Freedom, with all of its glory, challenges, and peril, and it should flourish uncompromised. There are no shortcuts through Unalienable Rights, whereby they can be negated by well-meaning "regrettable but necessary" Tyrannical law.
One of my favorites from "We believe":
That the right to the pursuit of happiness means man's freedom to choose what constitutes his own private, personal happiness and to work for its achievement; that such a pursuit is neither evil nor reprehensible, but honorable and good; and that a man's happiness is not to be prescribed to him by any other man nor by any number of other men.
Hat Tip to combat_boots for the ideas.
I hope Mark Levin peruses the threads. Would love to hear his take on this legally. Do we have a leg to stand on?
Also, see #68 by combat_boots:
"The other case that came to me was Dred Scott. In diluting American citizenry to less than it was, to the tune of 30-40 illegal aliens in this country, we are being made into 3/5 persons, especially since the prior 'amnesty'; In addition, we are paying cash money for that diminishment in support of illegal care and medical provision. I wonder if that diminishment of Personhood in the individual citizen is actionable against this government as a form of penal servitude, due to open borders and the refusal to maintain and defend the value of an individual's sovereignty, as understood by inalienability."
Lots of potential ideas to maybe file a suit? Any other thoughts from FReeper attorneys? Is there a FReeper attorney list?
I think this was outside of San Diego...El Cajon? I have not heard about them lately.
Hecky durn, ain’t that something’?
Hey, Jordan is and always has been, Palestine. Are you lost in history?
BTW, I posted nothing about Mike Vanderbough.
Indeed it is!
Many thanks, Art
Is there possible a case that permits US citizens to seek redress against the government, using the American Indian treaties/breach of, and forced immigration/settlement into the various cities and areas of the US that were used against the American Indians? Could it be possible to establish Interior zones governed as a nation, complete with payment by the so-called US government to empower the citizens of the nation?
Might there also be a case made, similar to the restitution of Japanese real estate seized in WWII, for infringement on community cohesion that is destroyed by illegal alien introduction and forced manipulation of real estate values by the McKinney decision (don’t recall the name SCOTUS used, but it’s an AA type housing gambit)?
I would also like to see the judicial eradication of fast-track authority. It’s a Soros thing anyway. The law for that nullifies Congress.
There has to be a case made for the necessary unfunded mandates that places illegal aliens and others in communities. RICO should be brought, along with due process complaints, against the government.
It is also my understanding that TINs are acquired through subterfuge by illegals, who then acquire driver’s licenses. This should be stopped by law or by refusal to recognize provenance.
RICO could be brought against Catholic and other charities and NGOs that engage in dropping in illegal aliens. Conspiracy to undermine federal law.
Sometimes, the ideas roll on.
I also think we have some 9th amendment cases possible against the illegal aliens being brought.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.