http://www.liveleak.com/browse?q=thereof Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:26:26 -0400 Liveleak http://edge.liveleak.com/80281E/u/u/ll2/logo.gif http://www.liveleak.com/browse?q=thereof Sun, 16 Jun 2013 20:49:09 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=97c_1371429566 thecleaner001 from the Dudley Pictures Corporation ' This World of Ours ' series presents "London - the largest city on earth......." http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=97c_1371429566 thecleaner001 London - 1951 Landan 1951 and the sights thereof...,'ere geezer - love a duck,tourist stuff,tongue-in-cheek, Tue, 18 Jun 2013 06:11:58 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=629_1371550115 HumanRightsAlert The executive, legislative, and judicial branch keep silent regarding conduct of "Chief Clerk" Sarah Lifschitz of the Israeli Supreme court. The evidence shows that since 2002 Ms Lifschitz has occupied the office of the Chief Clerk of the Israeli Supreme Court with no lawful appointment record. In a matter of the highest public policy significance for all residents of the State of Israel, which casts a doubt regarding integrity of the entire court system over the past decade, Presiding Justice Asher Grunis refuses to respond so far. Presiding Justice Asher Grunis; "Chief Clerk" Sarah Lifschitz of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel Occupy Tel Aviv Encampment, June 18 - Joseph Zernik, PhD, of Human Rights Alert (NGO) has forwarded today to Presiding Justice Asher Grunis of the Israeli Supreme Court a repeat request for the appointment record of "Chief Clerk" Sarah Lifschitz. Previous attempts to ascertain that Ms Lifschitz hold a lawful appointment as "Chief Clerk" of the Supreme Court through requests for her appointment record from Ms Lifschitz herself, through a request addressed to the Knesset's Chair of the Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee, through the a request to the Administration of Courts, and through an Israel Police complaint have all remained unanswered. Ms Lifschitz has occupied the office of Chief Clerk of the Israeli Supreme Court since 2002, but the evidence shows that she was never lawfully appointed to such position. The office of Chief Clerk is critical for the safeguard of the integrity of court records, and integrity, or lack thereof, of the office of Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court affects the integrity of the entire court system. The office of Presiding Justice Asher Grunis expediently responded on previous correspondence. However, to this date, the office refuses to respond on a request for the appointment record of Ms Lifschitz. The Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission was incorporated in the Periodic Review Report (2013) of the Human Rights Council of the United Nations (2013) with a note "lack of integrity in the electronic records of the Supreme Court.... in Israel". The Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission documented the forgery of numerous decision records of the Israeli Supreme Court following the occupation of the office of Chief Clerk by Ms Lifschitz, and undermining of the integrity of the records of the Israeli Supreme Court in general. Unprecedented corruption of the Israeli courts over the past decade, under the tenure of Aharon Barak and Dorit Beinisch as Presiding Justice is central to the socio-economic crisis in Israel today. Joseph Zernik, PhD Human Rights Alert (NGO) LINKS: 13-06-18 Letter No 4 to Presiding Justice Asher Grunis of Israel Supreme Court - repeat request for the appointment record of "Chief Clerk" Sarah Lifschitz http://www.scribd.com/doc/148497236/ 13-06-09 Correspondence with Chair of Knesset's Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee: Lawful Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court, or lack thereof. http://www.scribd.com/doc/146705778/ 12-04-16 Criminal fraud complaint (158921/2012) against SARAH LIFSCHITZ of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel, filed with Israel Police, with certificate of complaint by the Fraud Division of the Jerusalem Police. http://www.scribd.com/doc/89517688/ http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=629_1371550115 HumanRightsAlert Presiding Justice Asher Grunis of Israel Supreme Court is again asked for the appointment record of "Chief Clerk" Sarah Lifschitz Corruption, Israel, Supreme Court, Presiding Justice Asher Grunis, "Chief Clerk" Sarah Lifschitz, Occupy Tue, 11 Jun 2013 08:55:55 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7a6_1370953310 SayWhaaat "Yesterday, after a long day conversing with my fellow LiveLeakers in the comment sections of video's, a gentleman pointed out and explained to me (as a Britt) "The Second Amendment" which then lead to another member advising me to "PRINT THEM OUT" Well, being british I didn't take much notice of what was said to me as we don't follow or have implemented America's bill of rights over here, or even have our own bill of rights at that! Well, this was the impression I was under. After a little research I was shocked to find out we do indeed have our own bill of rights! Shocked because I was and always have being completely unaware of this, I have never being taught this or even heard it in conversation in my whole entire life, what was even more shocking is neither has my elderly parents, relatives or friends. Anyway, I would much appreciate anyones thoughts regarding this particular bill of right's, preferably how it compares to america's and your general understanding or opinion. Thanks Guys" Bill of Rights 1688 CHAPTER 2 1 Will and Mar Sess 2An Act declareing the Rights and Liberties of the Subject and Setleing the Succession of the Crowne. X1 Whereas the Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Comons assembled at Westminster lawfully fully and freely representing all the Estates of the People of this Realme did upon the thirteenth day of February in the yeare of our Lord one thousand six hundred eighty eight present unto their Majesties then called and known by the Names and Stile of William and Mary Prince and Princesse of Orange being present in their proper Persons a certaine Declaration in Writeing made by the said Lords and Comons in the Words following viz The Heads of Declaration of Lords and Commons, recited. Whereas the late King James the Second by the Assistance of diverse evill Councellors Judges and Ministers imployed by him did endeavour to subvert and extirpate the Protestant Religion and the Lawes and Liberties of this Kingdome. Dispensing and Suspending Power. By Assumeing and Exerciseing a Power of Dispensing with and Suspending of Lawes and the Execution of Lawes without Consent of Parlyament. Committing Prelates . By Committing and Prosecuting diverse Worthy Prelates for humbly Petitioning to be excused from Concurring to the said Assumed Power. Ecclesiastical Commission. By issueing and causeing to be executed a Commission under the Great Seale for Erecting a Court called The Court of Commissioners for Ecclesiasticall Causes. Levying Money. By Levying Money for and to the Use of the Crowne by pretence of Prerogative for other time and in other manner then the same was granted by Parlyament. Standing Army. By raising and keeping a Standing Army within this Kingdome in time of Peace without Consent of Parlyament and Quartering Soldiers contrary to Law. Disarming Protestants, &c. By causing severall good Subjects being Protestants to be disarmed at the same time when Papists were both Armed and Imployed contrary to Law. Violating Elections. By Violating the Freedome of Election of Members to serve in Parlyament. Illegal Prosecutions. By Prosecutions in the Court of Kings Bench for Matters and Causes cognizable onely in Parlyament and by diverse other Arbitrary and Illegall Courses. Juries. And whereas of late yeares Partiall Corrupt and Unqualifyed Persons have beene returned and served on Juryes in Tryalls and particularly diverse Jurors in Tryalls for High Treason which were not Freeholders, Excessive Bail. And excessive Baile hath beene required of Persons committed in Criminall Cases to elude the Benefitt of the Lawes made for the Liberty of the Subjects. Fines. And excessive Fines have beene imposed. Punishments. And illegall and cruell Punishments inflicted. Grants of Fines, &c. before Conviction, &c. And severall Grants and Promises made of Fines and Forfeitures before any Conviction or Judgement against the Persons upon whome the same were to be levyed. All which are utterly directly contrary to the knowne Lawes and Statutes and Freedome of this Realme. Recital that the late King James II. had abdicated the Government, and that the Throne was vacant, and that the Prince of Orange had written Letters to the Lords and Commons for the choosing Representatives in Parliament. And whereas the said late King James the Second haveing Abdicated the Government and the Throne being thereby Vacant His X2 Hignesse] the Prince of Orange (whome it hath pleased Almighty God to make the glorious Instrument of Delivering this Kingdome from Popery and Arbitrary Power) did (by the Advice of the Lords Spirituall and Temporall and diverse principall Persons of the Commons) cause Letters to be written to the Lords Spirituall and Temporall being Protestants and other Letters to the severall Countyes Cityes Universities Burroughs and Cinque Ports for the Choosing of such Persons to represent them as were of right to be sent to Parlyament to meete and sitt at Westminster upon the two and twentyeth day of January in this Yeare one thousand six hundred eighty and eight in order to such an Establishment as that their Religion Lawes and Liberties might not againe be in danger of being Subverted, Upon which Letters Elections haveing beene accordingly made. The Subject's Rights . And thereupon the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons pursuant to their respective Letters and Elections being now assembled in a full and free Representative of this Nation takeing into their most serious Consideration the best meanes for attaining the Ends aforesaid Doe in the first place (as their Auncestors in like Case have usually done) for the Vindicating and Asserting their auntient Rights and Liberties, Declare Dispensing Power. That the pretended Power of Suspending of Laws or the Execution of Laws by Regall Authority without Consent of Parlyament is illegall. Late dispensing Power. That the pretended Power of Dispensing with Laws or the Execution of Laws by Regall Authoritie as it hath beene assumed and exercised of late is illegall. Ecclesiastical Courts illegal. That the Commission for erecting the late Court of Commissioners for Ecclesiasticall Causes and all other Commissions and Courts of like nature are Illegall and Pernicious. Levying Money. That levying Money for or to the Use of the Crowne by pretence of Prerogative without Grant of Parlyament for longer time or in other manner then the same is or shall be granted is Illegall. Right to petition. That it is the Right of the Subjects to petition the King and all Commitments and Prosecutions for such Petitioning are Illegall. Standing Army. That the raising or keeping a standing Army within the Kingdome in time of Peace unlesse it be with Consent of Parlyament is against Law. Subjects' Arms. That the Subjects which are Protestants may have Arms for their Defence suitable to their Conditions and as allowed by Law. Freedom of Election. That Election of Members of Parlyament ought to be free. Freedom of Speech. That the Freedome of Speech and Debates or Proceedings in Parlyament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any Court or Place out of Parlyament. Excessive Bail. That excessive Baile ought not to be required nor excessive Fines imposed nor cruell and unusuall Punishments inflicted. Juries. That Jurors ought to be duely impannelled and returned . . . F1 Grants of Forfeitures . That all Grants and Promises of Fines and Forfeitures of particular persons before Conviction are illegall and void. Frequent Parliaments. And that for Redresse of all Grievances and for the amending strengthening and preserveing of the Lawes Parlyaments ought to be held frequently. The said Rights claimed. Tender of the Crown. Regal Power exercised. Limitation of the Crown. And they doe Claime Demand and Insist upon all and singular the Premises as their undoubted Rights and Liberties and that noe Declarations Judgements Doeings or Proceedings to the Prejudice of the People in any of the said Premisses ought in any wise to be drawne hereafter into Consequence or Example. To which Demand of their Rights they are particularly encouraged by the Declaration of this Highnesse the Prince of Orange as being the onely meanes for obtaining a full Redresse and Remedy therein. Haveing therefore an intire Confidence That his said Highnesse the Prince of Orange will perfect the Deliverance soe farr advanced by him and will still preserve them from the Violation of their Rights which they have here asserted and from all other Attempts upon their Religion Rights and Liberties. The said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons assembled at Westminster doe Resolve That William and Mary Prince and Princesse of Orange be and be declared King and Queene of England France and Ireland and the Dominions thereunto belonging to hold the Crowne and Royall Dignity of the said Kingdomes and Dominions to them the said Prince and Princesse dureing their Lives and the Life of the Survivour of them And that the sole and full Exercise of the Regall Power be onely in and executed by the said Prince of Orange in the Names of the said Prince and Princesse dureing their joynt Lives And after their Deceases the said Crowne and Royall Dignitie of the said Kingdoms and Dominions to be to the Heires of the Body of the said Princesse And for default of such Issue to the Princesse Anne of Denmarke and the Heires of her Body And for default of such Issue to the Heires of the Body of the said Prince of Orange. And the Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons doe pray the said Prince and (X3) Princesse to accept the same accordingly. New Oaths of Allegiance, &c. And that the Oathes hereafter mentioned be taken by all Persons of whome the Oathes of Allegiance and Supremacy might be required by Law instead of them And that the said Oathes of Allegiance and Supremacy be abrogated. Allegiance. I A B doe sincerely promise and sweare That I will be faithfull and beare true Allegiance to their Majestyes King William and Queene Mary Soe helpe me God. Supremacy. I A B doe sweare That I doe from my Heart Abhorr, Detest and Abjure as Impious and Hereticall this damnable Doctrine and Position That Princes Excommunicated or Deprived by the Pope or any Authority of the See of Rome may be deposed or murdered by their Subjects or any other whatsoever. And I doe declare That noe Forreigne Prince Person Prelate, State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authoritie Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall within this Realme Soe helpe me God. Acceptance of the Crown. The Two Houses to sit. Subjects' Liberties to be allowed, and Ministers hereafter to serve according to the same. William and Mary declared King and Queen. Limitation of the Crown. Papists debarred the Crown. Every King, &c. shall make the Declaration of 30 Car. II. If under 12 Years old, to be done after Attainment thereof. King's and Queen's Assent Upon which their said Majestyes did accept the Crowne and Royall Dignitie of the Kingdoms of England France and Ireland and the Dominions thereunto belonging according to the Resolution and Desire of the said Lords and Commons contained in the said Declaration. And thereupon their Majestyes were pleased That the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons being the two Houses of Parlyament should continue to sitt and with their Majesties Royall Concurrence make effectuall Provision for the Setlement of the Religion Lawes and Liberties of this Kingdome soe that the same for the future might not be in danger againe of being subverted, To which the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons did agree and proceede to act accordingly. Now in pursuance of the Premisses the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons in Parlyament assembled for the ratifying confirming and establishing the said Declaration and the Articles Clauses Matters and Things therein contained by the Force of a Law made in due Forme by Authority of Parlyament doe pray that it may be declared and enacted That all and singular the Rights and Liberties asserted and claimed in the said Declaration are the true auntient and indubitable Rights and Liberties of the People of this Kingdome and soe shall be esteemed allowed adjudged deemed and taken to be and that all and every the particulars aforesaid shall be firmly and strictly holden and observed as they are expressed in the said Declaration And all Officers and Ministers whatsoever shall serve their Majestyes and their Successors according to the same in all times to come. And the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons seriously considering how it hath pleased Almighty God in his marvellous Providence and mercifull Goodness to this Nation to provide and preserve their said Majestyes Royall Persons most happily to Raigne over us upon the Throne of their Auncestors for which they render unto him from the bottome of their Hearts their humblest Thanks and Praises doe truely firmely assuredly and in the Sincerity of their Hearts thinke and doe hereby recognize acknowledge and declare That King James the Second haveing abdicated the Government and their Majestyes haveing accepted the Crowne and Royall Dignity X4 as] aforesaid Their said Majestyes did become were are and of right ought to be by the Lawes of this Realme our Soveraigne Liege Lord and Lady King and Queene of England France and Ireland and the Dominions thereunto belonging in and to whose Princely Persons the Royall State Crowne and Dignity of the said Realmes with all Honours Stiles Titles Regalities Prerogatives Powers Jurisdictions and Authorities to the same belonging and appertaining are most fully rightfully and intirely invested and incorporated united and annexed And for preventing all Questions and Divisions in this Realme by reason of any pretended Titles to the Crowne and for preserveing a Certainty in the Succession thereof in and upon which the Unity Peace Tranquillity and Safety of this Nation doth under God wholly consist and depend The said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons doe beseech their Majestyes That it may be enacted established and declared That the Crowne and Regall Government of the said Kingdoms and Dominions with all and singular the Premisses thereunto belonging and appertaining shall bee and continue to their said Majestyes and the Survivour of them dureing their Lives and the Life of the Survivour of them And that the entire perfect and full Exercise of the Regall Power and Government be onely in and executed by his Majestie in the Names of both their Majestyes dureing their joynt Lives And after their deceases the said Crowne and Premisses shall be and remaine to the Heires of the Body of her Majestie and for default of such Issue to her Royall Highnesse the Princess Anne of Denmarke and the Heires of her Body and for default of such Issue to the Heires of the Body of his said Majestie And thereunto the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons doe in the Name of all the People aforesaid most humbly and faithfully submitt themselves their Heires and Posterities for ever and doe faithfully promise That they will stand to maintaine and defend their said Majesties and alsoe the Limitation and Succession of the Crowne herein specified and contained to the utmost of their Powers with their Lives and Estates against all Persons whatsoever that shall attempt any thing to the contrary. And whereas it hath beene found by Experience that it is inconsistent with the Safety and Welfaire of this Protestant Kingdome to be governed by a Popish Prince or by any King or Queene marrying a Papist the said Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons doe further pray that it may be enacted That all and every person and persons that is are or shall be reconciled to or shall hold Communion with the See or Church of Rome or shall professe the Popish Religion or shall marry a Papist shall be excluded and be for ever uncapeable to inherit possesse or enjoy the Crowne and Government of this Realme and Ireland and the Dominions thereunto belonging or any part of the same or to have use or exercise any Regall Power Authoritie or Jurisdiction within the same And in all and every such Case or Cases the People of these Realmes shall be and are hereby absolved of their Allegiance ] And the said Crowne and Government shall from time to time descend to and be enjoyed by such person or persons being Protestants as should have inherited and enjoyed the same in case the said person or persons soe reconciled holding Communion or Professing or Marrying as aforesaid were naturally dead All which Their Majestyes are contented and pleased shall be declared enacted and established by authoritie of this present Parliament and shall stand remaine and be the Law of this Realme for ever And the same are by their said Majesties by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spirituall and Temporall and Commons in Parlyament assembled and by the authoritie of the same declared enacted and established accordingly Annotations: Editorial Information X1 The Bill of Rights is assigned to the year 1688 on legislation.gov.uk (as it was previously in successive official editions of the revised statutes from which the online version is derived) although the Act received Royal Assent on 16th December 1689. This follows the practice adopted in The Statutes of the Realm, Vol. VI (1819), in the Chronological Table in that volume and all subsequent Chronological Tables of the Statutes, which attach all the Acts in 1 Will and Mar sess 2 to the year 1688. The first Parliament of William and Mary (the Convention Parliament) convened on 13th February 1689 (1688 in the old style calendar - until 1st Jan 1752 the calendar year began on March 25th). It appears that all the Acts of that Parliament (both sessions) were treated as being Acts of 1688 using the old method of reckoning, according to which, until 1793, all Acts passed in a session of Parliament with no specified commencement date were deemed to be passed in the year in which that session began (see Acts of Parliament (Commencement) Act 1793 (c 13)). The Short Titles Act 1896 (c. 14) gave to chapter 2 of 1 Will and Mar sess 2 the title "The Bill of Rights", without attributing it to any calendar year. In the Republic of Ireland, the Short Titles Act 1896 (c 14) has been amended to add "1688" to the short title of The Bill of Rights as it continues to have effect there (see Statute Law Revision Act 2007, Act of the Oireachtas No 28 of 2007, s 5(a)). X2 Variant reading of the text noted in The Statutes of the Realm as follows: Highnesse O. X3 Variant reading of the text noted in The Statutes of the Realm as follows: and O. X4 interlined on the Roll. X5 annexed to the Original Act in a separate Schedule. X6 annexed to the Original Act in a separate Schedule. Amendments (Textual) F1 Words repealed by (E.W.) Juries Act 1825 (c. 50), s. 62 and (N.I.) Statute Law Revision Act 1950 (c. 6), Sch. 1 Modifications etc. (not altering text) C1 Short title "The Bill of Rights" given by Short Titles Act 1896 (c. 14), Sch. 1 C2 Act declared to be a Statute by Crown and Parliament Recognition Act 1689 (c. 1) C3 S. 1 amended by Accession Declaration Act 1910 (c. 29), s. 1 IINon obstantes made void.Noe Dispensation by Non obstante of or to any Statute or any part thereof shall be allowed but the same shall be held void and of noe effect Except a Dispensation be allowed of in such Statute . . . F2 Annotations: Amendments (Textual) F2 Words repealed by Statute Law Revision Act 1948 (c. 62), Sch. 1 III. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F3 Annotations: Amendments (Textual) F3 S. 3 repealed by Statute Law Revision Act 1867 (c. 59) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/WillandMarSess2/1/2 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7a6_1370953310 SayWhaaat BRITAIN HAS A BILL OF RIGHTS?!? British, Bill, Of, Rights, Sun, 09 Jun 2013 15:08:39 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fcb_1370804718 HumanRightsAlert 13-06-09 Knesset's Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee is asked to ascertain whether "Chief Clerk" of the Israeli Supreme Court holds a lawful appointment record Chair of the Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee, MK David Rotem was initially asked to establish a Parliamentary Investigation Committee regarding allegations of corruption in the Office of the Clerk of the Supreme Court, following events surrounding the death of former Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court in 2002 under suspicious circumstances. Chair Rotem responded that he was confident that the Israel Police would perform it duties "on the best side" on complaints, which had been filed in the same matter. In a follow up request, Chair Rotem is asked to at least establish, whether "Chief Clerk" Sarah Lifschitz, who occupies the office of "Chief Clerk" of the Supreme Court for over a decade, holds a lawful appointment record. The follow up request notes that the Israel Police failed to respond on a complaint on this particular aspect, which had been filed over a year ago. MK David Rotem; "Chief Clerk" of the Israel Supreme Court Sarah Lifschitz Occupy Tel Aviv Encampment, June 9 - request has been forwarded today with Chair of the Israeli Knesset Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee, MK David Rotem to ascertain whether "Chief Clerk" of the Supreme Court, Ms Sarah Lifschitz holds a lawful appointment record. Ms Lifschitz has occupied the office of the Chief Clerk of the Israeli Supreme Court for over a decade, since the death in office in 2002, under suspicious circumstances, of Chief Clerk Shmaryahu Cohen. The death of Shmaryahu Cohen was subject of Police Complaint by a friend/relative already in 2002. However, at that time, the complainants could not provide a reasonable motive for a wrongful death. More recently, Joseph Zernik, PhD, of Human Rights Alert (NGO), filed additional data with the Israel Police, alleging that the motive for Chief Clerk Cohen's death was unlawful takeover of the servers and electronic records of the Israeli Supreme Court, for which Mr Cohen was the lawful custodian. In parallel to filing the data with Israel Police, the same data were filed with MK Rotem, as a request for the establishment of a parliamentary investigation committee, pertaining to allegations of corruption in the Office of the Clerk of the Israeli Supreme Court, following the wrongful death of Mr Cohen in 2002, and wrongful occupation of his office by Ms Lifschitz. The request for a parliamentary investigation committee notes that events in the Supreme Court in 2002 should be seen as second in significance only to the murder of Prime Minister Yitzhaq Rabin in 1995, relative to the nature of the regime in the State of Israel today. In his June 9, 2013 response, MK Rotem dismissed the request to establish a parliamentary investigation committee in this matter, claiming that he was "convinced that the appropriate authorities would perform their duties on the best side." In his follow-up request today, Dr Zernik points out that the Israel Police complaint, pertaining to the conduct of Ms Lifschitz, was filed over a year ago, and yet, no response was received from the Israel Police on this matter. Therefore, MK Roten and the Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee is asked to at least ascertain, whether "Chief Clerk" of the Supreme Court, Ms Sarah Lifschitz holds a lawful appointment record. Today's follow up request adds that such matter clearly falls within the purview of the Committee, moreover, is a matter that should be easy for the Committee to ascertain. MK Rotem's response within 14 days on this matter was requested. Evidence of corruption of the Israeli Supreme Court electronic records was central to the Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission to the UN Human Rights Council (HRC), which was incorporated in the 2013 HRC Professional Staff Report on Human Rights in Israel (paragraph 25), with a note referring to "Lack of integrity in the electronic records of the Supreme Court... in Israel". Parts of the Human Rights Alert submission were also presented and published in international computer science conferences, subject to anonymous peer-review. Another Human Rights Alert submission was incorporated into the HRC 2010 Report on Human Rights in the United States with a note referring to "Corruption of the courts and the legal profession... in California". LINKS: 13-06-09 Request for establishing by the Knesset Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee, whether "Chief Clerk" of the Israeli Supreme Court holds a lawful appointment record http://www.scribd.com/doc/146705778/ 13-06-03 Request for establishing a Parliamentary Investigative Committee filed with members of the Knesset Law, Constitution and Justice Committee http://www.scribd.com/doc/145378268/ 12-06-04 Human Right Alert, Submission; 2013 UPR of the State of Israel - "Integrity, or lack thereof, of the electronic record systems of the courts of the State of Israel" http://www.scribd.com/doc/92826212/ 10-10-01 United Nations Human Rights Council Records for 2010 Review (UPR) of Human Rights in the United States, where Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission was incorporated with a note referring to "corruption of the courts and the legal profession and discrimination by law enforcement in California." http://www.scribd.com/doc/38566837/ http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fcb_1370804718 HumanRightsAlert 13-06-09 Top Secret: Is there a lawful "Chief Clerk" of the Israeli Supreme Court? Corruption, Israel, Supreme Court, Chief Clerk, Sarah Lifschitz Mon, 03 Jun 2013 06:36:54 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=95a_1370255560 HumanRightsAlert 13-06-03 Additional evidence filed with Israel Police and the Knesset regarding death of Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court in 2002 In 2002, Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court Shmaryahu Cohen died under suspicious circumstances. Already then a family member/friend filed a complaint with the Israel Police. However, in 2002 family and friends could not provide a plausible motive for the conduct. Additional evidence, filed with the Israel Police and the Knesset Law, Constitution and Justice Committee by Joseph Zernik, PhD, of Human Rights Alert (NGO), indicates that the death of Shmaryahu Cohen was linked to unlawful takeover of the servers and electronic records of the Supreme Court. In the years following Cohen's death, numerous decision records were forged and integrity of the records as a whole was deliberately undermined. Under such circumstances Ms Sarah Lifschitz has appeared since 2002 as "Chief Clerk" with no lawful appointment record. Police complaint, filed in 2012 also documented the issuance of fraudulent certification of Supreme Court decisions by Ms Lifschitz. In 2002, a simulated Office of the Clerk was effectively established in the Supreme Court. Events that took place in the Supreme Court in 2002 should be deemed second only to Rabin's assassination in 1995 relative to the essence of the regime in the State of Israel. The additional evidence, filed with the Israel Police and the Knesset's Law, Constitution and Justice Committee did not name suspects. However, it does name those, who would be able to assist in the investigation: a. Mr Aharon Barak - Presiding Justice of the Supreme Court in 2002; b. Mr Boaz Okon - Magistrate Judge in the Supreme Court in 2002, and c. Ms Sarah Lifschtiz - who occupies the office of Chief Clerk since 2002 with no lawful appointment record. View as PDF: http://www.scribd.com/doc/145413519/ Occupy Tel Aviv, June 3 - Joseph Zernik, PhD, of Human Rights Alert (NGO) has filed with Israel Police and the Knesset's Law, Constitution and Justice Committee additional evidence pertaining to two complaints, previously filed with the Israel Police: a. The March 27, 2002 complaint, filed by Ms Oholivah Perez Izescu, related to the death of Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court Shmaryahu Cohen in 2002, and b. The April 16, 2012 complain 158921/2012, filed by Joseph Zernik, PhD, against today's "Chief Clerk" Ms Sarah Lifschitz. In parallel, request was filed with the Knesset for the immediate establishment of a Parliamentary Investigative Committee. The new evidence offers a motive for the death of Chief Clerk Shmaryahu Cohen and conduct of "Chief Clerk" Sarah Lifschitz since 2002 and to this day - unlawful takeover of the servers and records of the Supreme Court, which were under the custody of the Chief Clerk until the death of Shmaryahu Cohen in 2002, and are now under the custody of one of the corporations involved (apparently IBM or EDS). The new evidence is based on crossing data from various sources: a. March 27, 2002 Complaint filed in Yarkon District by Oholivah Peretz Izescu, relative to the death of Supreme Court Chief Clerk Shmaryahu Cohen b. The 2010 State Ombudsman Report, regarding computerization of the courts of the State of Israel. c. April 16, 2012 Complain No 158921/2012 filed by Joseph Zernik against today's "Chief Clerk" Ms Sarah Lifschitz. d. The 2013 Human Rights Alert submission to the Human Rights Council of the United Nations, which was incorporated into the Council's official report with a note referring to "Lack of integrity of the electronic records of the Supreme Court... of Israel". e. Recent (2013) complaints filed by the Complainant with Presiding Justice of the Supreme Court Asher Grunis, pertaining to false and deliberately misleading registrations by the Office of the Clerk of the Supreme Court. In view of the new evidence, the Israel Police was asked to reopen the investigation of the two complaints, previously filed, and the Knesset was asked to immediately establish a Parliamentary Investigative Committee. The new evidence does not name suspects, but it names those who are likely to be able to assist in the investigation: a. Mr Aharon Barak - Presiding Justice of the Supreme Court in 2002; b. Mr Boaz Okon - Magistrate Judge in the Supreme Court in 2002, and c. Ms Sarah Lifschtiz - who occupies the office of Chief Clerk since 2002 with no lawful appointment record. The new evidence was summarized as follows: "As Chief Clerk, Mr Shmaryahu Cohen was the lawful custodian of the records of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel, including the electronic records. In 2002 he died under suspicious circumstances. Following his death integrity of the Supreme Court records was seriously compromised: many forged records were identified, and all records are published in a patently void form. According to the State Ombudsman's Report, concomitantly, the servers for the electronic records were extracted from the custody of the chief clerks. Since the death of Mr Shmaryahu Cohen, Ms Sarah Lifschitz occupies the same office with no lawful appointment record. A previous complaint, filed with the Israel Police, documented execution of false and deliberately misleading certification of Supreme Court decision records by Ms Lifschitz. Therefore, the Complainant offers that the motive for the killing of Mr Shmaryahu Cohen was unlawful takeover of the the electronic records of the Supreme Court, which were under his custody, and that conduct of Ms Lifschitz today as "Chief Clerk" amounts to the establishment of a simulated Office of the Clerk in the Supreme Court of the State of Israel." Regardless of who is accountable for the death of Chief Clerk Shmaryahu Cohen and conduct of "Chief Clerk" Sarah Lifschtiz, events in the Israeli Supreme Court in 2002 should be deemed second only to the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhaq Rabin in 1995, relative to the nature of the Israeli regime today. ____ Joseph Zernik, PhD Human Rights Alert (NGO) Occupy Tel Aviv Encampment PO Box 31440, Jerusalem 91313 ____ The Human Rights Aler (NGO) subission was incorporated into the UN Human Rights Council Report regarding Human Rights in the United states (2010) with a note referring to "corruption of the courts and the legal profession in California." The Human Rights Aler (NGO) subission was incorporated into the UN Human Rights Council Report regarding Human Rights in the State of Israel (2013) with a note referring to "lack of integrity in the electronic records of the Supreme Court, the district courts and the detainees courts in Israel". LINKS: 13-06-02 Suspected murder of Chief Clerk of the Israeli Supreme Court in 2002 - additional information filed with the Israel Police. http://www.scribd.com/doc/145278374/ 02-03-27 Tel Aviv Police Certificate of Filing a Criminal Complaint in re: Death of Supreme Court Chief Clerk Shmaryahu Cohen http://www.scribd.com/doc/144434775/ 02-03-27 Tel Aviv Police Certificate of Filing a Criminal Complaint in re: Death of Supreme Court Chief Clerk Shmaryahu Cohen http://www.scribd.com/doc/144434775/ 12-04-16 Criminal fraud complaint (158921/2012) against SARAH LIFSCHITZ of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel, filed with Israel Police, with certificate of complaint by the Fraud Division of the Jerusalem Police. http://www.scribd.com/doc/89517688/ 12-06-04 Human Right Alert, Submission; 2013 UPR of the State of Israel - "Integrity, or lack thereof, of the electronic record systems of the courts of the State of Israel" http://www.scribd.com/doc/92826212/ 13-05-14 Zernik v Minister of Justice et al (2689/13) in the Israeli Supreme Court - letter No 4 to Presiding Justice - request for appointment record of the Chief Clerk http://www.scribd.com/doc/141376200/ 13-06-03 Request for establishing a Parliamentary Investigative Committee filed with members of the Knesset Law, Constitution and Justice Committee http://www.scribd.com/doc/145378268/ http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=95a_1370255560 HumanRightsAlert 13-06-03 Additional evidence filed with Israel Police and the Knesset regarding death of Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court in 2002 Corruption, Supreme Court, Israel Fri, 31 May 2013 06:23:16 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=275_1369995307 HumanRightsAlert The system wide fraud, implemented from the top down, is historically unprecedented, and central to the current socio-economic crisis in the United States. The system wid View on blog with links to records: http://inproperinla.blogspot.co.il/2013/05/us-large-scale-fraud-in-electronic.html Occupy Tel Aviv Encampment, May 31 - I have recently brought up the issues of fraud in case management systems of the Israeli courts, imposed over the past decade, starting with the death of Supreme Court Chief Clerk Shmaryahu Cohen in office in 2002. What took effect is the closing of the High Court of Justice ("National Tribunal for Protection of Rights") to petitions by Israeli citizens. In historic terms, that would be equivalent to the imposition of martial law, alternatively - imposition of lawlessness.Credit should be given where credit is due - the state and federal courts in the United States. They are most likely the world's leader (historically) and they are the cutting edge in the trade. Moreover, as patently shown in the State of Israel Ombudsman's Report (2010), the technology was unlawfully imported to Israel through the good services of US-based corporations.. (IBM, EDS) And the bureaucratic model for the scheme was imported intact: establishment of "Administrative Office of the Courts", and appointment of "Executive Officers" for the courts, where lawful clerks used to hold the ministerial authority. The system wide fraud, implemented from the top down in the US courts through PACER and CM/ECF, is historically unprecedented, and central to the current socio-economic crisis in the United States. California in that respect is an oddball. Given its pioneering role in this field, many of its case management systems were developed and implemented on a court by court basis, with the LA Superior Court's fraudulent system, SUSTAIN, becoming the most popular among state courts in the United States. READ MORE: Below are records from my archives, related to the subject of widespread falsification of court and justice system records (particularly in matters related to banking and imprisonment), in order of readership: 1) 10-01-04 Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department: Online Inmate Information Center - Data Survey - Jose Martinez s 2) 11-03-16 The Riddle of Citizens United v Federal Election Commission (08-205) in the Supreme Court of the United States - Review and Compiled Online Records-s 3) 10-08-13 RE: Fine v Baca (09-A827), Fine v Baca (09-1250), and Fine v Baca (10-A24) at the Supreme Court of the United States - October 2009 Term Journal - validity, or lack thereof 4) 10-01-05 Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department: Online Inmate Information Center - Data Survey - John Smith s 5) 10-03-14 Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department: Online Inmate Information Center - Survey of Consecutive Booking Numbers s 6) 10-08-18 Zernik, J: Data Mining of Online Judicial Records of the Networked US Federal Courts, International Journal on Social Media: Monitoring, Measurement, Mining, 1:69-83 (2010) 7) 10-08-18 Zernik, J: Data Mining as a Civic Duty - Online Public Prisoners' Registration Systems, International Journal on Social Media: Monitoring, Measurement, Mining 1: 84-96 (2010) 8) 12-06-08 Courts and Judges as racketeering enterprises under RICO (the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) - key element in the current financial crisis 9) 10-01-16 Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department: VINE vs Online Inmate Information Center - Data Survey - Jose Martinez & Jose Rodriguez s 10) 10-05-05 Countrywide, Bank of America (NYSE:BAC), and its President Brian Moynihan - Compilation of Records - Evidence of Racketeering s 11) 10-07-06 Complaint Filed with US Attorney Office, Los Angeles, Against Brian Moynihan, Bank of America (NYSE:BAC), Bryan Cave LLP, Alleging Racketeering and Large Scale Financial Institution Fraud s 12) 10-03-24 US District Court, Central District of California: Local Rules of Court,Chapters 1-4 s 13) 10-01-14 Harris County, Texas, Sheriff's Office: Online Inmate Public Information - Data Survey - Carol Ann Davis s 14) 10-06-13 Survey of the Prisoners' Booking Log, Marin County, California, Sheriff's Department - Glaring Deficiencies in Validity and Integrity s 15) 11-04-23 Habeas Corpus in the United States - the case of Richard Isaac Fine - Review 16) 11-08-01 Zernik, J: Fraud and corruption in the US courts is tightly linked to failing banking regulation and the financial crisis, 16th World Criminology Congress presentation s 17) 08-01-08 Case of Borrower Hills (01-22574) - in the US Bankruptcy Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh. Countrywide's Three "Recreated Letters" and a Transcript s 18) 10-06-21 Dr Zernik's Complaint Filed with Us Attorney Office Los Angeles against Mr David Pasternak for Public Corruption Deprivation of Rights s 19) 10-07-19 Complaint filed with US Attorney Office against Judge John Segal, Clerk John Clarke, Attorney David Pasternak, Los Angeles Superior Court - in Re: Public Corruption in Galdjie v Darwish (SC052737) - real estate fraud by the court s 20) 10-01-11 Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department: Online Inmate Information Center - Data Survey - Jose Rodriguez s 21) 10-11-11 Table 2: US District Courts PACER and CM/ECF: Public Access to Calendars - Survey of Individual Cases in 5 District Courts s http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=275_1369995307 HumanRightsAlert US: Large-scale fraud in the electronic records of the justice system - giving credit where credit is due... Occupy, US courts, fraud, PACER, CM/ECF Wed, 29 May 2013 11:58:39 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=977_1369842510 HumanRightsAlert On March 7, 2002, then Chief Clerk of the Israeli Supreme Court Shmaryahu Cohen died in the Supreme Court building of "cardiac arrest". The record below shows that although friends and relatives could not provide a reasonable motive, already then, they suspected that it was no natural death. With the death of Shmaryahu Cohen under the tenure of Aharon Barak as Presiding Justice, a "Constitutional Revolution" was completed in Israel, albeit, not the one advertised by Aharon Barak... The late Shmaryahu Cohen, Chief Clerk of the Israeli Supreme Court - last guardian of the Rule of Law in the State of Israel? Certification of Supreme Court papers, before and after the death of former Chief Clerk of the Israeli Supreme Court. ISRAEL POLICE TO: Oholiva Peretz Uzescu Unit: Crimes, Yarkon Complainant Tel: 03-5644254/5 ID: 051852429 Date: March 27, 2002 CERTIFICATE OF FILING A COMPLAINT Notice: Instant Certificate is provided only for inquiries pertaining to the complaint, and is not a substitute for any other certificate (for an insurance company, etc). I, the Undersigned: Personal ID Rank First Name Last Name 106083-9 Cadet Sharon Fishel From Investigative Unit: Crimes, Yarkon Hereby certify that on March 27, 2002, complaint was filed in our unit, pertaining to motive for the death of Supreme Court Chief Clerk. Calendar No: 3 Instant Certificate is provided for inquiries pertaining to the Complaint. If investigation of the Complaint would not yield a suspect - your Complaint will be sealed and no notice will be mailed to you. In case you would like to obtain information, pertaining to the outcome of the investigation of your complaint, or in case you obtain additional details, related to the Complaint, please contact __________ Tel:___________, or Fax:___________, referencing the details above. Respectfully, Cadet Sharon Fishel Rank First, last name Signature. LINKS: 12-06-04 Human Right Alert's Submission; 2013 UPR of the State of Israel: Integrity, or lack thereof, of the electronic record systems of the courts of the State of Israel http://www.scribd.com/doc/92826212/ http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=977_1369842510 HumanRightsAlert 02-03-27 Untimely Death of Israeli Supreme Court Chief Clerk Shmaryahu Cohen Aharon Barak, Shmaryahu Cohen, Israel, Supreme Court Sun, 26 May 2013 08:47:12 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0bc_1369572224 HumanRightsAlert Events, surrounding the death in 2002 of Shmaryahu Cohen, Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel, are worthy of investigation. The late Chief Clerk Shmaryahu Cohen; former Presiding Justice Aharon Barak; former Magistrate of the Supreme Court Boaz Okon. As previously detailed, research, based on techniques that are called data mining (and involve no legal analysis of the adjudication), reveals profound, unprecedented changes in the electronic decision records of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel in March 2002. The changes, which were introduced, should indicate the voiding and nullification, in advance, of any decision record as a valid public legal record. For example, all decisions are today served and published unsigned, unauthenticated, and bearing the disclaimer "subject to editing and phrasing changes". The research also showed the concomitant disappearance of the former Supreme Court Chief Clerk Shmaryahu Cohen from the records (except for many dozens of Supreme Court decisions, which continued to be certified under his name over the next five years...). Google of his name revealed that on March 7, 2002, he died from cardiac arrest in a retirement party of a staff member in the Office of the Clerk of the Supreme Court, after offering a toast. It also revealed that days later, a family member or friend filed with the police a report, suspecting murder, but could not provide a reasonable motive. Data mining reveals instability in the certification patterns of Supreme Court decisions already a few months earlier, which can be interpreted as reflection of ongoing negotiations on changes in the normative certification statement "True Copy of the Original". Later, in 2010, the State Ombudsman Report 60b, which reviewed the new computerized systems, which were introduced in Israeli courts over the past decade, concludes that the system were developed and implemented (by IBM and EDS) in violation of the law of the State of Israel in various ways. One of the violations is that in the process, the servers for all court records in Israel were removed from the courts and the custody of the clerks to the custody of one of the corporations (the Ombudsman does not specify the name of the current corporate custodian of Israeli court records...). The latest Supreme Court decisions from March 2002, certified by Shmaryahu Cohen are the latest evidence that we have of custody of the Supreme Court records by a lawful Chief Clerk. Events in 200 took lace under the tenure of Aharon Bark as Presiding Justice. Data mining also showed profound changes in the activity of Boaz Okon, then Magistrate of the Supreme Court around the same period. The matter above was part of the evidence in the Human Rights Alert (NGO) submission to the UN Human Rights Council (HRC), which was probably the first-ever such submission, which was based on data-mining reseach of government electronic records. The submission was incorporated in the HRC Periodic Review of the State of Israel - Professional Staff Report (2013), with a note referring to "lack of integrity in the electronic records of the Supreme Court, the district courts, and the detainees courts in Israel". The Human Rights Alert submission recommended investigation of events in the Supreme Court around the time of the death of the late Shmaryahu Cohen, former Chief Clerk of the Supreme Court of the State of Israel. LINKS: 13-05-25 On void judgments - from an online discussion group 13-05-26 More on Void Judgments 12-06-04 Human Right Alert, Submission; 2013 UPR of the State of Israel - "Integrity, or lack thereof, of the electronic record systems of the courts of the State of Israel" http://www.scribd.com/doc/92826212/ https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B8Aa2xQGbmk5QWtZcjVQLWVFZ0k http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0bc_1369572224 HumanRightsAlert Israel: Supreme Court conspiracy theory for dessert Israel, Supreme Court, Shmaryahu Cohen, Aharon Barak, Boaz Okon Mon, 20 May 2013 12:26:37 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0a2_1369064493 omniradar Written on May 8th, 2013 by TheFetch Under Threats from Jewish Groups, TalkStreamLive Drops Inside the Eye - Live! from Saturday Line-up Posted in ITEL Updates Under threats from Jewish media censors monitoring TalkStreamLive, TalkStreamLive has removed without any notification the popular political talk show, Inside the Eye - Live! with The Fetch, from TalkStreamLive's Saturday aggregation line-up. Sources note that Jewish groups have been active in monitoring online media sites in an effort to put a total blanket on the information flowing out to the American people and larger global community and that Inside the Eye - Live! was specifically targeted for deletion from TalkStreamLive's aggregation Saturday morning line-up. Unseen and Unaccountable Jewish Censors in the Alternative News Media Market Indeed, there has been a disturbing trend in the alternative streaming news segment. When seen in the light of defacto operating unaccountable Jewish censors, Americans and the world at large are seeing their choices of media programming increasing censored, including completely disappeared from the World Wide Web, in an effort by Jews to preclude any mention of Jewish involvement in the theft of trillions of dollars from the United States economy, Jewish involvement in the poisoning of the food supply, Jewish involvement in the phony "War on Terror", Jewish involvement in the attack on the United States known as "9-11'', and Jewish media manipulations, to name but a few. All of the above realities, plus the Jewish involvement in the attempted frame-up of the Syrian government in the use of chemical weapons in the early part of May, 2013, hint at an agenda by global Jewish interests to bring the citizenry of Western civilization powers into another war in the Middle East for the benefit of Jewish geopolitical interests. And it is precisely this effort to keep reality "under the blanket" and out of sight and earshot that has de-facto Jewish censors working tireless to bully and threaten website owners and aggregators. Traditional American and Western values of free speech are being ground down in favor of an Orwellian Jewish Bolshevik construction. As Alexsandr Solzhenitsyn so aptly revealed, "We can not state, that all Jews are Bolsheviks. But: Without Jews there would never have been Bolshevism. For a Jew nothing is more insulting than the truth. The blood-maddened Jewish terrorists had murdered sixty-six million victims in Russia from 1918 to 1957!" The idea of "imposed constructions on language" are not so difficult to comprehend: the manner in which constructions are imposed is through a focused effort to control definitions and word usage. In this area, owing largely to Jewish control of media cultural (film) assets and intelligentsia (higher education), the task of controlling definitions and accepted "word usage" has proven to be markedly easy and effective. When we factor in the absolute disdain Jews have towards non Jews as regards "free speech", and in light of active and overt effort by Jews to impose partial to absolute censorship, we must factor in that success in destroying the free flow of ideas is magnified through what appears to be in many places a Jewish control of the legal system. Threats of legal action are enough to bring down even the most staunch supporter of Western values regarding free speech, and Jews use this threat to an almost exclusive degree. However, the idea of Jews "suing people" to impose public censorship is such an intellectual affront that a healthy court system would laugh Jews who tried such a legal assault straight out of court, with a kick in the behind in the form of massive fines as penalties for the wasting of peoples, and the courts, time. But such is not the case: corruption and rot of Western values seems nearly complete. Nowhere is this more evident than when a PRIVATE UNKNOWN JEWISH ENTITY can IMPOSE LITERAL CENSORSHIP through targeting large cume alternative media outlets. It is as if cowards, hiding in the shadows, unable to effect their agenda, use lies and the threat of legal force to impose their agenda. It is a form soft but very real form of TOTALITARIANISM practiced by Jews. No self respecting Western civilized person would dare to accept the verbal and intellectual assault of some PRIVATE person, Jewish or otherwise, telling the collective what we can and can't say, what we can and can't hear, and whom we can and can't freely associate, for it is through our words that we communicate: we speak, we listen, and we associate based on the actions and ideals that travel and coalesce within communication structures. ALLOWING PRIVATE JEWISH INDIVIDUALS OR ENTITIES to IMPOSE CENSORSHIP is a DIRECT ASSAULT on not just "free speech", but the very Western right to freely associate. Take away the communication, and the right to associate rapidly follows. A Case Study - Orion Talk Radio "Cleans up their act." In this light we can further understand the disturbing trends towards self censorship of those afraid of Jewish tyranny, those who support Jewish tyranny, the very real imposed censorship by Jewish individuals and entities on our collective rights as they seek to bring about tyranny. A case in point is the rather sudden declaration by Orion Talk Radio, a moderate sized streaming political talk radio station, who was forced to "clean up their act" and publicly embarrassed themselves with a treatise that could only be seen as written by Jewish censors seeking to justify their right to censor our collective ability to speak, hear - and thus associate. Said the statement from Orion Talk Radio, " As part of the US Constitutional Bill of Rights, the 1st amendment guarantees (and we quote here)... Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Orion Talk Radio's ghost scribbler pontificated with a plethora of charged Jewish insanities. Consider this bit of opined Talmudic intelligence: "All too often, those who wish to engage in such reckless talk will always attempt to hide their offensive speech behind the Constitutional right to free speech." Here we see a loaded sentence filled with Jewish language constructions. First and foremost, "who" gets to determine what is and is not a "reckless" use of the language? Are we to presume that only Jews know how to use the language and that intelligent mature adults across the political spectrum who are raising awareness of Jewish mismanagement in all phases of their political, economic, and social activities are somehow not quite clear and intent on what they are saying? Further. Who is defining "reckless"? How is it being used? Is it being used in a manner that is purely understood from a Jewish group think strategy, an academic framed absurdity, or...? "Reckless", in this case, is cleary an open ended language construction that has been charged to Jewish social and literary constructions. It means absolutely nothing to a non -Jew unless a non - Jew wishes to make it mean something. In reality, such open ended language constructions are forms of intellectual violence intended to insult and assault the intelligent and unsuspecting alike. To the intelligent, we see the absurdity and intended insult and assault on our intelligence. To the unsuspecting, the real target of Jewish language constructions, the attempt is to create a political mass willing to bend to Jewish political agendas and through "democracy", enforce graduated levels of Jewish constructed tyranny. Further, as regards the phrase, "trying to hide behind freedom of speech": how can anyone INTELLIGENTLY claim that someone is "trying to hide behind free speech"? The truth of the matter here is that this ghost scribbler for Orion Talk Radio was projecting onto their target. It is the "ghost scribbler" here who was and remains seeking to "hide behind free speech", for the real intent of the ghost scribbler is to deny others their right to speak freely. In truth, "Free speech" is simply the palette upon which all communication is caste. It is a utility used for communication. Thus, to those of us who are prodigy of the progenitors of Western Civilization and the ideal of freedom of speech and the resultant freedom of association and assembly, the idea that somehow we need to "hide" behind "freedom of speech" is an intellectual absurdity. Freedom of speech is the palette upon which we create the free flow of ideas, and so long as that palette is open to all, then what is right and good will always prevail for the arguments and logic of Reason will always resonate more strongly in the hearts and minds of humanity that the arguments and logic of the Tyrant. Thus we have nothing to fear and certainly no need to "hide behind freedom of speech". So long as we enable and allow ABSOLUTE FREEDOM OF SPEECH relative to the free flow of ideals, we have nothing to fear. Falsities will sink and drown while the truth will rise and float as an iceberg upon the seas. The use of crafted impositions on the language with the intent to destroy "freedom of speech" is being done precisely to deny enough ice from forming such that the collective truths raise themselves above the Seas. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0a2_1369064493 omniradar Zionist Media Control Zionism Sat, 18 May 2013 10:52:43 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=918_1368887990 krash I'm not racist, hateful, or prejudice towards any religion or a person's decision of lack thereof. I believe everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. However, when one belief begins to disregard the laws of the country and/or city that it's residing within, and making life difficult for the other's living among them, I believe the people in charge of the city's law enforcement needs to take a stand. Unfortunately "political correctness" has run amuck on our generation's watch and everyone is so damn afraid of being outed as some sort of bigot for taking a stand for what is right for everyone, and not just one particular group of people. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=918_1368887990 krash Muslims illegal takeover streets of Paris muslim, islam, sharia law, paris, france, political correctness Sat, 18 May 2013 08:22:47 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ce0_1368879531 dfaugust God vs. Gov't: What Does the Constitution Really Say About the Separation of Church and State?What does the U.S. Constitution - specifically the First Amendment - really say about the separation of church and state? This question has been at the center of public debate for decades, as atheist activists, in particular, have advanced the notion that the nation's founders envisioned a particularly fervent imposition of the segregation of God and government. But is this really the case? Dr. John Eastman, a distinguished law professor at Chapman University, told TheBlaze that he believes these non-believers have their story wrong. "They think the phrase separation of church and state is the First Amendment," he said, going on to note that these words don't appear anywhere in the U.S. Constitution. Just in case you need a refresher, the amendment reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The first line creates the most contention, as it involves two separate religious articles - the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses. It is the former that most atheist activists tend to focus on, and according to Eastman, their assessments are generally wrong-headed. Rather than a decry waged against any inclusion of faith in the public square, the professor claims that this portion of the document speaks against a state-imposed faith. "It tells us that you don't want a national religion - a state-coerced national religion, a one-size-fits-all, everybody-has-to-join ," he said of the Establishment Clause, going on to highlight a bit of history. " were concerned that with a strong national government there would be a national religion ... they wanted to allow the states a free hand to collaborate religion in their important work of fostering a citizenry." Eastman called the provision one that was rooted in federalism. Over the past 50 years, he charged the U.S. Supreme Court with misunderstanding the Establishment Clause to mean that religion must be removed entirely from public life. Atheist activists have seized upon this interpretation as well. "We're on the threshold of success," he said, though, of reversing the trend. As far as nativities on courthouse lawns and other similar religious imagery goes, Eastman said that communities should be allowed to express their views so long as citizens are not being coerced by the government to subscribe to specific ideologies. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/05/16/god-vs-govt-what-does-the-constitution-really-say-about-the-separation-of-church-and-state/ http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ce0_1368879531 dfaugust God vs. Gov't: What Does the Constitution Really Say About the Separation of Church and State? America, the Constitution, Religious Freedom, tyranny, democRATs, "liberals", leftists, communists, athiests Thu, 16 May 2013 08:36:21 -0400 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7f3_1368707488 Detroit Iron May 16, 2013 By Matthew May The Obama administration is drowning in the tsunami of its lawlessness. As Barack Obama and his ridiculous crew of spokespersons and sycophants continue to lie and misdirect about the growing scandals of the Benghazi massacre; the Internal Revenue Service targeting organizations that venerate the Constitution or contain the words "Tea Party," "Patriot," or some combination thereof; and Obama's inaptly named Justice Department's snooping on the Associated Press, it is best to recall the words of the brilliant author Mark Helprin. He deftly demolished Obama and his ilk when he said two years ago, "You cannot draw upon the glory of the English language if nearly every utterance is a lie." This administration will cling to its lies as bitterly as we dangerous purveyors of liberty, limited government, and the Constitution cling to our weapons and Bibles. It would perhaps be a sign of the apocalypse if Obama were to, as John F. Kennedy did following the disaster of the Bay of Pigs, stand up and say that, as the "officer of government," he is ultimately at fault for the circumstances that led to the death of U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens and the others, the harassment of perceived political enemies by the thuggish IRS, and the intrusion into the communications of the Associated Press. The responsibility to act against these scandals will, therefore, not be put upon Obama. It is upon us to prevent the death of public liberty. The responsibility to act lies with Republicans in the House, who, as the majority, have the constitutionally mandated responsibility to lead oversight of the executive. House Speaker John Boehner must convene several special investigative committees and bring the responsible people in Obama's government under oath to answer questions on pain of perjury -- questions such as the following: What were Stevens and others in the U.S. diplomatic corps doing at that Temporary Mission Facility in Benghazi in the first place? Was the Obama administration running a Middle Eastern version of Fast and Furious? Were we arming terrorists? Why were particular organizations investigated and harassed by the IRS, and on whose say? For what purposes did you snoop on the communications of the Associated Press? They weren't pliant enough? The responsibility is on Democrats everywhere, who must, once and for all, put aside their maniacal loyalty to a man who is finally being widely exposed as a tyrant. Or is the further entrenchment of power for people such as Obama and Hillary Clinton, who, as we have seen and will be further demonstrated, have no qualms persecuting their enemies and abandoning our representatives to the tender mercies of the jihadists, more important? For those who still incomprehensibly support the Obama administration and creatures such as Hillary Clinton, consider this: if these people, with the firepower and resources of the world's strongest military at their disposal, are willing to let a United States ambassador and U.S. servicemen be murdered without calling in reinforcements, then lie about it to their families, the nation, and world at large over their flag-draped coffins, do you really think they give a damn about you? Ultimately, the burden is on us, the sovereign. Contrary to what Obama, Clinton, and the entirety of the left believe, we, the citizens, rule this country. That ownership carries with it a sacred responsibility in perilous times such as these. We must prove to these charlatans that we recognize that we live in a republic, and not the two-bit banana republic into which Obama and his indecent, corrupt administration is attempting to transform us. Thomas Jefferson asked, "And what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?" Resistance can take many forms. Deluge your representatives with e-mail, phone calls, and letters demanding that they take action against this overbearing government. Express yourself in the 2014 elections by campaigning for and voting for individuals who pledge to uphold the rule of law and who will, regardless of party, bring these miscreants to account. Attend public meetings and protests; talk with your friends and family and make them aware of what is being done to the Constitution and, ultimately, their rights as free citizens. Jefferson's question is again asked of us. Do we yet have that spirit of resistance that once booted out one the mightiest empires the world has known? Can we send the current band of liars and amoral statists out of the halls of government, or have we grown too lethargic and distracted to care? Are we worthy of our forebears? If so, the republic shall endure. If not, the victory will go to this tyrannical regime, our eventual fall will be further accelerated, and we will be judged responsible. The choice is clear, and it is time to act. Matthew May welcomes comments at may.matthew.t@gmail.com . Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/the_burden_is_on_us.html#ixzz2TSUaGAfF Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter AmericanThinker on Facebook http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7f3_1368707488 Detroit Iron The Burden Is on Us Obama administration