|
Supreme Corruption plays Pontus Pilate ... Nine un-elected Supreme Corruption Justices have now played their part in the latest effort to circumvent the Constitution. Our Founding Fathers must be rolling over in their graves. Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore filed an emergency stay, Wednesday with Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who oversees cases from Alabama. Kennedy referred it to the full court, which said in a one-sentence order that it was rejected. Apparently the nine Supreme Corruption Justices did not choke on the hypocrisy of a Ten Commandments Display in the Supreme Court building. At least they did not choke publicly. But the hypocrisy is there for the public to see. Perhaps some of you are puzzled at why the various federal federal judges and the Supreme Corruption Justices would make such such a ruling. To file such a law suit you have to have a plaintiff that has suffered damages and will continue to suffer damages unless the court takes action. And there has to be a Constitutional conflict. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals rulings are a matter of public record and the following excerpts provide a brief synopsis of both the horrendous damages suffered by the plaintiffs and the federal court's statement of the Constitutional basis for this and other recent questionable rulings by the Supreme Corruption. We hope that you find our summary of interest. It is in layman terms as we are not attorneys. First: The Horrendous damages suffered by the three plaintiffs that warrant such drastic action, including the arresting of Christians.
Wow, zippy due dah! There you have the horrendous damages these poor little Morris Dees's flunky attorneys have suffered. It is absolutely amazing that these three attorneys haven't slashed their wrists in an overwhelming fit of despair over being the recipient of such horrific damages. In today's world with political correctness run amok, this is becoming standard fare. The provisions of the Alabama Constitution do not matter and the vote of 70% of the qualified electors of Alabama electing Judge Moore do not count - only the three Morris Dees's flunky attorneys being "offended" counts. Now one might ask, why would the politically correct be "offended" by the Ten Commandments? Well if the politically correct were forced to follow God's Commandments (note: they are not Suggestions) then they would not be able to lie! That would be the end of political correctness! I am sure that some reading at this point will be doubting Thomases (oops, I used a phrase with Biblical origins, Morris Dees and his flunkies may wind up on life support) and all I can say is read page 23 yourself! So folks, there are the damages these poor attorneys have suffered. Second. Violation of Constitution. If anyone thought that the alleged damages presented a weak case and is nothing but political correctness run amok, this section will be even worse. Every one has of course heard the argument about "separation of church and state." In fact this is presented as the Constitutional basis for many of the Supreme Corruption (and lower court) rulings. But is is just propaganda. That's right, it does not exist in the Constitution and was derived in 1947 by a previous Supreme Corruption Ruling. The politically correct state that Our Founding Fathers established a "wall of separation of church and state." This is categorically a lie! First lets read the only section of this ruling that quotes the Constitution:
"Congress shall make no law" is the only part of the Constitution quoted in the ruling and you do not have to be a rocket scientist to figure out Judge Moore is not Congress! The First Ten Amendments (Bill of Rights) were added by Our Founding Fathers to prevent the federal government from doing the type stuff that this court is doing in this case! From the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist papers, the debate in Congress and States ratifying the Bill of Rights and court decisions of that time period - all indicate that the First Amendment was added to restrict only the federal government. So now lets look at the "Due Process Clause." In the box below is the "Due Process Clause (part of the 14th Amendment)" referenced by the court:
In 1947, the Supreme Corruption decided that these words meant that they could now reverse the intent and purpose of the Bill of Rights. It is really a stretch to find how these words give a federal court the power to invade a State Judicial Building to prevent someone from being offended. In fact if you read the next sentence (equal protection) it would imply that if you protect one citizen from being offended you would have to protect every citizen from being offended. Geeze, the idol of the Greek goddess Venus that the feds put at their judicial building would offend me and probably more than two others. I have never liked Greek statues. But back to the case at hand. I believe that a vast majority of Americans after reading the First and Fourteenth Amendments will be very puzzled at how they justify the current court ruling. These attorneys have not been denied life, liberty or property. Nor have they been denied equal protection of the laws. And Judge Moore is not Congress. So there does not seem to be any direct connection, does there? Well hang on to your seats. federal courts do not have to use the Constitution any more to determine if something violates the Constitution. In 1947, a revolutionary addition to the Constitution was created. You add the First Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment together and you generate a "wall of separation of church and state" where none existed. Then future federal judges can just include the standard phrases and treat the wall as if it actually existed in the Constitution. Quoting from this case:
Each new Supreme Corruption ruling then becomes the basis of the next, further removing the Constitution from consideration. Then later rulings establish legal tests to apply the new found and revolutionary generated Constitutional add-ons. In this case it was the "Lemon" test, which establishes three criteria for federal judges to use when they need to issue a politically correct ruling. In this Ten Commandments Ruling, there is one partial sentence and one vague reference to actual existing parts of the Constitution. There are 24 pages of discussion, quotes, references and conclusions from Supreme Corruption rulings all derived and based upon the "wall" generated in 1947! With resounding relish, the federal Judge concludes that Judge Moore has violated the "Lemon" test! So what the three Morris Dees's flunkies could not win at the ballot box is handed to them because Judge Moore flunked the "Lemon" test which was made up by un-elected Supreme Corruption Justices. Rule of Law There is no law that prohibits the Display of The Ten Commandments in the Alabama Judicial Building! There is no separation of church and State in the Constitution, other than the federal government can not pass any law prohibiting the free expression of religion. There is only page after page of Supreme Corruption rulings that are being forced upon the public. So as the principles established by Our Founding Fathers are trampled right in front of your eyes, the Supreme Corruption plays Pontus Pilate and just wash their hands ... Seven of the nine Justices were appointed by Republican Presidents, not one of whom has spoke out against this case. The other two were appointed by Democratic Presidents, not one of which has spoken out about this issue. So as the principles established by Our Founding Fathers are trampled right in front of your eyes, the other eight Alabama Supreme Court Justices play Pontus Pilate and just grovel before their federal masters ... Seven of the other eight Alabama Justices are Republicans. The other one is a Democrat. Neither the Republican nor Democratic Parties are going to defend the Constitution. Judge Moore is doing what he can! Are you? If not what are you doing to your grandchildren?
|
Note: this is an announcement only list, not a discussion list. It averages less than three messages a day.