Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    2,457

    JUDICIAL TYRANNY

    UDICIAL TYRANNY

    http://www.newswithviews.com/Pratt/larry74.htm

    By Larry Pratt
    March 5, 2007
    NewsWithViews.com

    Judges increasingly act as if the rule of law means people must obey whatever drools down the lips of any social engineer who is cloaked in a black robe. Judges believe that whatever they say is the rule of law, which is a notion they probably picked up during their law school instruction.

    There is an open secret that an oath to uphold the Constitution does not mean upholding the non-smudge letters stored at the National Archives. Rather, the oath that judges (and all other politicians) take means, they think, upholding whatever they say the Constitution means.

    This prerogative, of course, is not something to be accorded to mere mortals, aka taxpayers and voters. The rest of the population cannot be trusted, they seem to believe, with this sacred process of daily modifying the Constitution.

    More and more Americans are seeing behind the curtain, much as in the Wizard of Oz. The Delphic voice of the gods behind the judicial curtain is actually a bunch of guys and gals who have fooled us. Once we look behind the curtain we find out that their wisdom is really a crock of politically correct rubbish which almost always assaults the Constitution rather than upholds it.

    What is surprising is that a judge would tell us this. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has been rather candid about the usurpations of his colleagues. Even more surprising is that a sitting state judge * Robert H. Dierker, Jr. of the 22nd Judicial District of Missouri * has written a book laying out exactly how extensive is the coup d'etat being carried out by the nation’s judicial class.

    Dierker's book is entitled The Tyranny of Tolerance: A Sitting Judge Breaks the Code of Silence to Expose the Liberal Judicial Assault. If you think that my language is blunt, please read the Judge’s book. You should, even if you don’t think my language is blunt.

    One of the more lucid statements of what the Second Amendment means is found in Dierker’s book (page 80): "Until the advent of the liberal judicial imperium, the meaning of the Second Amendment admitted of no doubt. The right to keep and bear arms was seen as a natural right, and the reference to the "militia" was no more than a recognition that every able-bodied male citizen of the age of sixteen constituted the reserve armed force of every state."

    The Tyranny of Tolerance is a wide-ranging look at the many perversions of the law that have been perpetrated by the judiciary in our day. It is a wake-up call for voters to ask politicians what kind of judges they are going to place in state and federal judiciaries. If We the People don’t make an issue of it, the problem will only get worse.

    This is the book that should be Constitutional Law 101 in every law school. More than likely, however, students caught with a copy will face immediate expulsion. They will be treated at least as harshly as a student caught with a * gasp * gun while on campus. Of course, it would be imprudent to be caught in a jury box with this tome.

    As a closing aside, Judge Dierker has penned this volume on his own time while not in any judicial building. When I interviewed him for my Live Fire radio show, we both got an early start for the day so the Judge could do the show from home. His PC "colleagues" are not happy with his book, and already some are trying to bring him up on ethics charges. Indeed. A judge telling the truth! What is the world coming to?

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,663
    The problem with the court arises under Article III, Sec. 2 of the Constitution, which grants the federal high court multiple jurisdictions, including admiralty and maritime. Admiralty and maritime are international commercial jurisdictions that have nothing to do with the Constitution or so-called "constitutional law." So all the government had to do was to move most laws into admiralty to invoke the lex mercatorum and skirt the limitations of the Constitution. Federal regulations (any code that begins with "CFR") are rooted in administrative law and admiralty, not in constitutional law. Only those federal codes that are specifically annotated as being positive law fall under what we call "constitutional" jurisdiction and limitation. So the trick is to personally keep yourself out of admiralty by not claiming any status that would place you in that jurisdiction.

    I know how John the Baptist felt when he said, "I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness." I keep trying to explain that it is less that someone has stolen your rights than that you were duped into giving them away and entering into a strange jurisdiction. I can't figure out whether it's that people don't believe me or that (more likely) it sounds like too much effort to learn the truth and to make straight one's own way. At any rate, my Salome has not yet appeared and so I'll keep crying in the wilderness until someone makes use of this truth. Besides, I am no John the Baptist, so I probably don't have the fortitude or forebearance to let anyone take my head.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Neese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sanctuary City
    Posts
    2,231
    I keep trying to explain that it is less that someone has stolen your rights than that you were duped into giving them away and entering into a strange jurisdiction. I can't figure out whether it's that people don't believe me or that (more likely) it sounds like too much effort to learn the truth and to make straight one's own way.
    I don't think that it is a matter of not being believed, I think people truly don't know how to get out of it. There is a comfort in the social norm, so as long as everyone else is getting screwed too, I guess it isn't so bad. Our society also has little respect for the elderly, and since they hold the secrets, there are few who want to listen. America only likes the young, and they are dumb as rocks...so there is your true answer.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,663
    Quote Originally Posted by Neese
    I keep trying to explain that it is less that someone has stolen your rights than that you were duped into giving them away and entering into a strange jurisdiction. I can't figure out whether it's that people don't believe me or that (more likely) it sounds like too much effort to learn the truth and to make straight one's own way.
    I don't think that it is a matter of not being believed, I think people truly don't know how to get out of it. There is a comfort in the social norm, so as long as everyone else is getting screwed too, I guess it isn't so bad. Our society also has little respect for the elderly, and since they hold the secrets, there are few who want to listen. America only likes the young, and they are dumb as rocks...so there is your true answer.
    That's scary.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •