Wednesday, April 18, 2018

Habeas Corpus

“Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self.”- Cyril Connolly (1903 - 1974)

 

Habeas Corpus

 


By de Andréa

Opinion Editorialist for    
‘THE BOTTOM LINE’

Posted April 18, 2018




We have all heard the term Habeas Corpus, or ‘Writ’ of same. But do you know what it is, and what it does for you? I promise to try not to make this as boring as posable.

It’s one of your constitutional rights. It’s contained in Article I, Section 9, Clause 2, of the U.S Constitution. The clause reads as follows, "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

Literally in Latin it translates to, You have the body”. Oh’!!!!  But it doesn’t quite mean that in a literal legal sense. A writ (court order) of Habeas Corpus, commands an individual or a government official who has restrained another to produce the prisoner at a designated time and place so that the court can determine the legality of custody and decide whether to order the prisoner's release.

A writ of habeas corpus directs a person, usually a prison warden, to produce the prisoner and justify the prisoner's detention. If the prisoner or his legal representative argues successfully that the incarceration is in violation of a constitutional right, the court or magistrate may order the prisoner's release.

A writ of habeas corpus is authorized by statute in federal courts and in all state courts. An inmate in state or federal prison asks for the writ by filing a petition with the court that sentenced him or her. In most states, and in federal courts, the inmate is given the opportunity to present a short oral argument in a hearing before the court. He or she also may receive an evidentiary hearing to establish evidence for the petition.

The habeas corpus concept has been around for a while, it was first expressed in the British Magna Charta, a constitutional document forced on King John by English landowners at Runnymede England on June 15, 1215. Among the liberties declared in the Magna Charta was that "No free man shall be seized, or imprisoned, or disseised, or outlawed, or exiled, or injured in any way, nor will we enter on him or send against him except by the lawful judgment of his peers, or by the law of the land." This principle evolved to mean that no person should be deprived of freedom without Due Process of Law.

The writ of habeas corpus was first used by the common-law courts in thirteenth- and fourteenth-century England. These courts, composed of legal professionals, were in competition with federal courts, which were controlled by local landowners, or "lords." The federal courts lacked procedural consistency, and on that basis, the common-law courts began to issue writs demanding the release of persons imprisoned by them. From the late fifteenth to the seventeenth centuries, the common-law courts used the writ to order the release of persons held by royal courts, such as the Chancery, Admiralty Courts, and the Star Chamber.

Through much of human history, and in many countries still today, a person may be imprisoned on the orders of someone in the government and kept behind bars for years without ever getting a chance to defend himself, or even knowing what he's done wrong. In England, the right to be brought before a judge to hear the charges and answer them was written into law over 300 years ago, and the Framers adopted the British practice in our Constitution

The Stickity Wicket here is that even though the Constitution says: "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, it also says unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

President Abraham Lincoln for example, temporarily suspended the writ in 1861, when he authorized his Civil War generals to arrest anyone they thought to be dangerous. In addition, Congress again suspended it in 1863 to allow the Union army to hold accused persons temporarily until trial in the civilian courts. Some in the Union Army reportedly ignored the Congress and conducted trials under Martial Law.

So why am I telling you all this boring legal stuff? Although you wouldn’t find it so boring if someday you needed it. Moreover, and especially, if no one advised you of it, or worse, it just wasn’t a right anymore!

Well my friend…hate to say it, (no I don’t), but I warned you this was coming and you ignored it. So here is the bad news: IT IS NO LONGER A RIGHT!!!  Did you get that? I’ll Say it again because I know you didn’t get it back in 2001 when you lost it THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IS NO LONGER A RIGHT!  Yes it’s still in the Constitution, and no, it hasn’t been amended or legally abolished. The government is pulling a Lincoln or a Roosevelt, who also temporarily suspended it at the beginning of the Second World War. But now the Federal Government has unlawfully suspended it. Congress has not declared war, there is no Rebellion, not yet anyway.  We do have a foreign invasion, but the Federal Government denies it and has actually been promoting it.
So here is the ‘Dirty Little Secret’ my friend.

The Patriot Act is an Act of Congress that was signed into law by New World Order President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001 just 45 days after, and as a result of the 9/11 attack.  The entire act was written, passed both houses of Congress and signed into law in just 45 days…If you believe that, I have a golden bridge for sale, cheap. The obvious truth is it was all ready to go my friend just waiting for the ‘Reichstag Attack’.

The definition of a patriot has also changed. It used to mean - anyone who loves his/her country and supports its Constitution. But that’s all gone now, it now means - one who obeys and subjects him /herself to the federal government.

If you recall I wrote several articles on Obamas Martial law, which is also still just waiting for an excuse to be used. Remember“The U.S. Military Is Preparing For Martial Law.” And Note when I published that…Yeah Obamas first year in office.

So what does this have to do with Habeas Corpus? The Patriot Act completely wiped out the right of Habeas Corpus.  I know’ - they told you it was just for TERRORISTS right? But’ my friend, without the right’, you can be treated just the same as a terrorists. As a matter of fact, if you remember the term terrorist was also given a new definition, such as, “returning combat soldiers,” and Christians, those that are against abortion, and people with guns, etc    …the truth is, it can mean anything the government wants it to mean.   

THE BOTTOM LINE:    Just thought you ought to know!

Thanks for listening my friend. Now go do the right thing, pray and fight for truth and freedom.  If you would like to write me direct with a question or a comment you can contact me at writedeandrea@hotmail.com
- de Andréa
Please pass on this article to everyone on your email list.  It may be the only chance for your family and friends to hear the truth.
The Fine Print
Copyright © 2005 by Bottom Line Publishing, All Rights Reserved -  Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
Disclaimer - The writer of this blog is not responsible for the language or advertisements used in links to referenced articles as source materials.

Saturday, April 14, 2018

America In Denial

"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie-- deliberate, contrived and dishonest-- but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
-John F. Kennedy

America In Denial




By de Andréa

Opinion Editorialist for    
‘THE BOTTOM LINE’

Posted April 14, 2018



Post (9-11),  Americans were horrified at what they saw and heard from the media.  Some in search of the truth even read the report by the 911 commission.  Most were content to believe the explanation of what they saw on TV. It was touted as another Pearl Harbor attack, and American was in shock. But a few said, despite the explanative propaganda something smells here.

Denial is a natural response if the truth is just too ugly a thing to face.  Moreover Americans, myself included, want to believe that the people in our government are protecting us and are only interested in doing the right thing, and I still believe that there are those in our government that are true patriotic Americans, if I didn’t I would move to northern Alaska and build an off the grid igloo.  But if you have been following my articles lately you will have discovered that there is, and has been, an underlying force in America for some time now that is capable of being involved in a plot to turn the United States into an Autocracy.

So if there was U.S. involvement in the 9/11 attack, what would be the motive?  What would the DeepState or a shadow government have to gain by manipulating the minds of American citizens to believe that America was attacked by terrorists on 9/11, and the three towers were brought down to the ground by two planes.

One only needs to look at what followed the attack.  On March 22 I published an article titled Was 9/11 The DeepState’s Reichstag, in it, I not only explained what a Reichstag has come to mean but, I referenced the passing of the Patriot Act which overwhelmingly passed both houses and was signed by President Bush.  But because the Patriot Act violated a large part of the U.S. Constitution, it is doubtful that it would have passed if 9/11 hadn’t happened. BUT THIS WAS WAR RIGHT!
Let’s look at what the Patriot Act did for the DeepState because of (9/11) 
The DeepState’s Military Industrial Complex and the Federal Reserve Bank gained the principle and interest on loans of nearly 6 trillion dollars so far to fight the war on terrorism.
The Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA) is a massive legislative assault on fundamental rights, including the right to habeas corpus – the right to challenge one’s detention in a court of law. Signed into law on October 17, 2006, the MCA contains sweeping provisions that serve to shelter the Bush Administration from the legal consequences of their actions, while stripping away the fundamental rights of those held in U.S. custody.
One area of interest regarding the HSA is the question of its origins. The American people were told that the Act was a direct result of September 11. However, it's widely known that the Hart-Rudman Commission, (officially the "US Commission on National Security for the 21st Century"), created under Clinton in 1998, actually authored the blueprint for what became the HSA, and published it in a report called the "Road Map for National Security: Imperative For Change." But alas they knew it wouldn’t pass Congress…that is not until 9/11.  

The Hart-Rudman report called for the inception of a new, independent "National Homeland Security Agency," which would integrate various US Government agencies, including FEMA, the Coast Guard, the Customs Service, and Border Patrol just to name a few. Of the 14 members of the Hart-Rudman Commission, nine were members of the Council on Foreign Relations (a leading organization of the DeepState). The CFR roster has included, over the years, almost every CIA director since Allen Dulles, as well as most of the "neo-conservatives" who populate the Bush Administration, including Dick Cheney,
This department is under the Department of Homeland Security. Interestingly enough Nazi Germany also had a Homeland Security called Schutzstaffel. And East Germany under Russian rule the GDR German Democratic Republic had a Homeland Security agency called “The Stasi.”

The Transportation Security Administration was also coincidentally created a few months after some events of September eleventh two thousand one. To me it is inherently obvious that those events were a false flag inside job, therefore there is no necessity for any further security departments.  I for one resent being treated like a terrorist every time I board public transportation. We woundn’t need the TSA if the government hadn’t encouraged Muslim Jihadists to migrate to the U.S.  Just another Reichstag, create a problem – then create a solution to  the problem that puts more and more controls an restrictions on the citizens.

The NDAA is detention without trial: Section 1021

The detention sections of the NDAA begin by "affirm[ing]" that the authority of the President under the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF), a joint resolution passed in the immediate aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks, includes the power to detain, via the Armed Forces, any person, including a U.S. citizen, "who is accused of being part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners", and anyone who commits a "belligerent act" against the United States or its coalition allies in aid of such enemy forces, under the law of war, "without trial, until the end of the hostilities authorized by the [AUMF]".

So my friend you could be imprisoned indefinitely without trial, without charge because the FBI simply accused you of being a terrorist. All in the name of “The War On Terror.”  Plus they could obtain or plant evidence and search and seize that evidence without a warrant or probable cause.

That my friend is the motive – the resulting power that could only have been obtained by the Reichstag of (9/11).

Then there is the little matter of the missing 28 pages of the 9/11 report, conveniently hid in the dungeons of the Capital building by President Bush.

In the 28 pages it indicated that Presidents Bush’s close friends the Saudi Royal Family were involved in financing the 9/11 attack. How do I know that? I did the research and you can too!
Even if you do believe in coincidence there comes a time when theory is just too coincidental to be theory.

But what about the facts…the independent scientific facts, that can’t just be coincidence.  How would you like to hear what 11500 technician’s, engineers, and prominent scientists have to say about what caused the three buildings, tower one, tower two and building seven to actually came down, and maybe what is just as important…what didn’t cause them to come down.

Some American patriots believe that the United States could never be involved in an international conspiracy that would lead to the death of thousands of Americans or the destruction of American property and then fabricating a lie to cover it up.

Either we don’t know our history or we are ‘IN DENIAL’. Here are just two historical cases that I was somewhat involved in, these are two of the half dozen that I researched - the most recent false flags waved by the DeepState of America to fabricate and cause a Reichstag, or an excuse to invade/attack/or enter into a war.

Having been in Northern Laos in 1961 a CIA covert operation meant to derail the Vietnam War called White Star, this came to mind.  Classified documents and tapes released in the past several years, combined with previously uncovered facts, make clear that high government officials distorted facts and deceived the American public about events that led to full U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. The Gulf of Tonkin incidents a Reichstag that has persisted for more than 40 years.

Or the Bay of Pigs in Cuba, which I was also indecently involved in.  Operation Northwood’s initiated by Eisenhower and given to the Joint Chiefs of Staff and carried on by the Kennedy administration for an excuse to attack Cuba, involved the killing of Americans and blaming it on Castro for an excuse to invade Cuba. But as you know Kennedy called it off.

What I am saying here is that the Shadow Government some of which are unknowingly elected by the people that operate behind the legitimate government that are also elected by the people have been involved in clandestine operations for years.

Just so you understand that this has been going on for at least more than a hundred years I will include an earlier bit of history, and no I wasn’t involved in this one, but my Grandfather was:

During The Mexican-American war, in July of 1845, President Polk ordered then General Zachary Taylor to cross the Nueces River with his command of 4,000 troops. Upon learning of Slidell's rejection, Polk sent word that Taylor should advance his troops to the Rio Grande River. From the standpoint of Mexico, the United States had invaded their territory. Polk hoped to defend the disputed area with armed force. He also knew that any attack on American troops might provide the impetus Congress was lacking - to declare war.

Sure enough, in May of 1846, Polk received word that the Mexican army had indeed fired on Taylor's soldiers. Polk appeared before Congress on May 11 and declared that Mexico had invaded the United States and had "shed American blood on American soil!" Anti-expansionist Whigs had been hoping to avoid conflict, but news of the "attack" was too much to overlook. Congress passed a war declaration by an overwhelming majority and just as with Hitler’s Reichstag, President Polk with a fabricated story had his war.

THE BOTTOM LINE: I strongly recommend, if you dare to find out at least some of the truth about 9/11, by either purchasing - or if you have Amazon Prime you can watch this documentary for free.  These professionals are trying to get an independent government sanctioned investigation into the scientific facts relating to the 9/11 attacks.  After watching this documentary 911 Experts Speak Out you will be convinced that the 911 Commission Report is nothing but a fraud and cover up and that the DeepState (those communist criminals that actually run the government) is up to its swampy ears in the blood of nearly 3000 innocent Americans. 

Thanks for listening my friend. Now go do the right thing, pray and fight for truth and freedom.  If you would like to write me direct with a question or a comment you can contact me at writedeandrea@hotmail.com
- de Andréa

Please pass on this article to everyone on your email list.  It may be the only chance for your family and friends to hear the truth.
The Fine Print
Copyright © 2005 by Bottom Line Publishing, All Rights Reserved -  Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
Disclaimer - The writer of this blog is not responsible for the language or advertisements used in links to referenced articles as source materials.



Tuesday, April 10, 2018

Vermont Governor to Sign Three Gun Control Bills

“Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self.”- Cyril Connolly (1903 - 1974)

 

Vermont Governor to Sign Three Gun Control Bills  

 


By de Andréa

Opinion Editorialist for    
‘THE BOTTOM LINE’

Posted April 10, 2018



Lawmakers in the Green Mountain State are passing three gun confiscation measures Thursday, sending them to a so-called Republican governor who is prepared to sign them. Not since the late 1700’s has the state of Vermont ever had a law regarding guns. This will be the first unconstitutional anti-Second Amendment laws in the green state of Vermont.  Vermont, who has always been a bit of a maverick was not even part of the original 13 colonies or States. It claimed itself as an independent State, until it became the 14th State in 1791.       Since then it has enjoyed among the lowest gun crime rates in the country, but now with illegal laws to be broken, watch it increase right along with all the other anti-American Communist States in the country.  

Two of the bills, S.221 and H.422, would remove guns from those the state decides to be “at risk” and from those accused of domestic assault charges. Both proposals passed unanimously in the legislature this week and join a third, S.55, already on Gov. Phil Scott’s desk.

Governor Phil Scott talks with forked tongue

“As I’ve said, I strongly support the second amendment and all Constitutional rights,” bla, bla, bla, said Scott in a statement about the illegal legislation. And then he continues to say: “I support S.55, S.221, and H.422 because I believe these bills uphold these rights while taking reasonable steps to reduce the risk of violence.”

 As I said “with Forked Tongur Mine Fuhrer.”

Governor Scott! Ach Tung… I’ve got news for you from headquarters’ Mine Fuhrer.  No gun law has ever stopped a criminal from committing a crime with a gun. Isn’t that why they call them criminals? Oh well, what can you expect from a scared little Fuhrer, after all he has the only state without gun-laws, he’s got to keep up, he feels left out

S.55, which would restrict magazine capacity to 15 rounds on handguns and 10 rounds on rifles, ban bump stocks and raise the age to buy guns in the Vermont to 21, slid past the Vermont state Senate last week by one vote and triggered a magazine giveaway from gun rights groups who rallied to oppose the measure.

S.221 would add a mechanism to Vermont law to allow for so-called “extreme risk protection orders.” Similar measures have been adopted in the Communist state of California, Washington and Florida and have been characterized as “red flag” laws by supporters and “turn in your neighbor” bills by Constitutionalists, pointing to the constitutional due process concerns.

H.422 provides confiscation of firearms from those charged or cited in the state over some domestic violence or abuse accusations not convictions just accusations.  It would allow officers responding to a report to seize guns in plain sight. With the pressure on in the Statehouse by other states to pass gun restrictions, Vermonters have understandably for the first time been reaching for their wallets to stock up on firearms, ammunition, and accessories in recent weeks. March proved to be the busiest month ever for background checks on gun transfers in the state.

But the usually constitutional state of Vermont is just the beginning of the anti-Constitutional un-American hysteria over guns in the U.S.

Not surprisingly, the village of Deerfield, Illinois passed an anti-gun ordinance Monday, and by the end of the week was already facing legal challenges.

Deerfield’s Village Board went all-in on a local law to fine those with “assault weapons” and detachable magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds inside the city’s limits as much as $1,000 a day. This sparked the promise of a lawsuit from two gun rights groups Wednesday and the materialization of separate litigation filed Thursday by a Deerfield resident backed by another pair of Second Amendment organizations. With the ban set to take effect in 60 days, advocates felt time was of the essence.

“We moved swiftly to challenge this gun ban because it flies in the face of state law,” said Alan Gottlieb, executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation. Gottlieb’s group, along with the Illinois State Rifle Association, is supporting a lawsuit by Deerfield resident and gun owner Daniel Easterday against the Chicago suburb’s pending new regulations.  I can only guess that Deerfield what’s to have a bloody shootout just like its big brother Chicago.

“While the village is trying to disguise this as an amendment to an existing ordinance, it is, in fact, a new law that entirely bans possession of legally-owned semi-auto firearms, with no exception for guns previously owned, or any provision for self-defense,” said Gottlieb. I guess they hadn’t heard of the Supreme Court Heller vs Washington DC decision.  I guess the governments no longer care what law they violate.

In addition to the suit from Easterday, ‘The National Rifle Association’ and ‘Guns Save Life’ have also announced plans to file legal action against the town of Deerfield.

As for the village, it posted a statement Thursday saying the board “believes it has acted within its statutory authority and will be evaluating the suit in order to respond appropriately.”

THE BOTTOM LINE:  Yeah! Just what part of “…shall not be infringed” don’t you understand? No gun law is in anyone’s statutory authority.

Again my friend I am warning you because it’s my job.  If we lose the Second Amendment and American Citizens are disarmed, we will lose all…that’s ALL OUR RIGHTS my friend.  Some ignorant and brain washed people say the U.S. Constitutional law is old fashion. That just shows how little they know about the architects who wrote it.  When they wrote the Second Amendment they included “shall not be infringed” because they knew the future my friend as well as the past , they knew that governments would try to take away the ability of the people to defend the “security of a free state,” they knew that government officials would become tyrants.  

Governments should fear the people not the people fear the government.
                                             
“If you want good security, go to prison, you will have everything you could want except freedom– Dwight D. Eisenhower

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania (1759)

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." Thomas Jefferson

As I said, if we give that right away we will have given away our freedom!    The Framers knew their history and the future…do you?

Thanks for listening my friend. Now go do the right thing, pray and fight for truth and freedom.  If you would like to write me direct with a question or a comment you can contact me at writedeandrea@hotmail.com
- de Andréa
Please pass on this article to everyone on your email list.  It may be the only chance for your family and friends to hear the truth.
The Fine Print
Copyright © 2005 by Bottom Line Publishing, All Rights Reserved -  Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
Disclaimer - The writer of this blog is not responsible for the language or advertisements used in links to referenced articles as source materials.