Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cincinatus' Wife; tpaine; Hank Kerchief; All
Excellent article!!

The Founding Fathers intent was for The People to be the final say on persons' actions. For certain, they never intended for the Supreme Court to have the power to mandate whether a law was just. Their intent was that the Supreme Court was a legal opinion. They were leery of the judicial branch  usurping The People's  power.

When the Supreme Court has the power to mandate laws one way or the other the judicial branch holds power over The People -- government subjects.

Yet, in the final analysis...

"The oppressor has nothing more than the power you confer upon him to destroy you. Where has he acquired enough eyes to spy upon you if you do not provide them yourselves? How can he have so many arms to beat you with if he does not borrow them from you? The feet that trample down your cities, where does he get them if they are not your own? How does he have any power over you except through you? How would he dare assault you if he had not the cooperation from you." -- Voluntary Servitude by Entienne de la Boetie:

Bottom line, probability that politicians and bureaucrats will chose to relinquish their fraudulent concepts, strategies and tactics is several magnitudes more improbable than Dan Rather coming total clean on Memogate.

The real power of the Internet lies in the nature of consciousness.

* * *

More powerful than the main steam media.

More powerful than any government.

More powerful than the court of public opinion.

There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come. -- Victor Hugo (1802-1885)  

The court of public honesty.

If when someone using circa 1972 technology can produce a document that matches the document in question and having the process of creating that document take an acceptable time span and cost that would be roughly equivalent to that warranted at the time the original document was created, then and only then will the court of public honesty accept that the document(s) in question that were aired on 60 Minutes II, hosted by Dan Rather at CBS as being authentic.

Otherwise, as it now stands and until such time as prescribed above the court of public honesty rules that the document(s) in question are forged documents. And, that Dan Rather and CBS are held accountable for foisting deception and fraud on the millions of viewers that watched 60 Minutes II on September 8, 2004..

The pendulum has swung the other direction, toward honest. Honesty outlives the lies, deceptions and irrationalities. It always has and always will. The main stream media, Democrat, the left and liberal politicians are but the first in its path on its way to bowl over Republicans, the right and conservative politicians. Then all politics and religions will succumb to honesty -- conscious nature.

21 posted on 09/11/2004 5:18:04 PM PDT by Zon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Zon

Bump


24 posted on 09/12/2004 9:14:54 AM PDT by JustAnotherSavage (If you don't like my peaches, don't shake my tree!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson