[BOBT12]

Yet, We the People must resist anyway!

WTP website:

In 1517, Martin Luther nailed his “95 Theses of Contention” to the front door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany.

This single, bold gesture openly challenged the doctrine of the Catholic Church and set off an unforeseen chain of events which came to be known as the “Reformation.” The effects of Luther's action that day would forever alter Western Civilization's perception of the authority of the Church – and in practical terms, call into question the very authority of the state.

Luther was consequently summoned to appear before a tribunal of the church-state hierarchy, and was ordered to recant his damaging assertions.

In response he uttered, “Unless I am convinced by proofs from Scriptures or by plain and clear reasons and arguments, I can and will not retract, for it is neither safe nor wise to do anything against conscience. Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me. Amen.”


Several years later, Luther went on to translate and publish the first non-Greek-Latin version of the New Testament, enabling average Europeans, for the first time, to study and comprehend the “hidden mysteries” of the Church.
It's time to take a page from Luther's book.
It's time to challenge IRS doctrine by posting a message on its front doors

Emphasis added. Of course Martin Luther was tortured to death by the pope. Still we remember his name, and his just cause, hundreds of years after his death.

http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLaws...2005-02-02.htm

GANDHI ON TRUTH

The quest of truth involves self-suffering, sometimes even unto death.

Yes, Gandhi was assassinated before he saw much change take place in his country. However, his work still moves many today, as they inspired Martin Luther King, Jr. a few years later.

We the People still have power of large numbers who don't consciously agree with the current state of affairs. Because they are ignorant thus, they did not sign on to the current program, and may be made aware of what is going on, and decide to join the rebellion.

Let us rebel against tyrants, war-mongers, thieves and all other wrongdoers, who would usurp the power of We the People.

Those who have some understanding of the truth may choose to enlighten others:

Just enlighten one per year, and they do the same, you may have 67 million supporters in 20 plus years;

Just enlighten one per decade, and they do the same, you may have 67 million supporters in 200 plus years. This seems to be the choice the other side has made. Therefore, if we are to succeed we must strive to carry our agenda through the generations.

If you were on a jury, what would you do?

Penn and another Quaker, William Mead, were arrested on a charge of disturbing the King's peace and summoned to stand trial. As the two men entered the courtroom, a bailiff ordered them to place their hats, which they had removed, back on their heads. When they complied, they were called forward and held in contempt of court for being in the courtroom with their hats on.

[...]Three more times the jury went out and returned with the same verdict. Finally, they refused to go out any more. The judge fined each of them forty marks and ordered them imprisoned until the fine was paid.

Emphasis added.

http://www.chrononhotonthologos.com/.../penntrial.htm

The point is that these great individuals stood by their convictions, and conscience, regardless the odds, or the presumed outcome. The jury refused to bow to the tyranny of the court (yes, these, mostly unnamed souls, are heroes too.)! When an individual does this, he or she is a leader, not a follower. At the very least, they lead themselves, don't you think?

Who are you? In the end the question everyone must ask themselves, do I (We the People) want to live free to practice good works, or do we want to be slaves to an evil master?

Jury Nullification

The following words of the Supreme Court need to be read several times by the judges of today's courts.

"The guarantees of jury trial in the Federal and State Constitutions reflect a profound judgment about the way in which law should be enforced and justice administered. A right to jury trial is granted to criminal defendants in order to prevent oppression by the Government. (Footnote 23)
Footnote 23: "The [jury trial] clause was clearly intended to protect the accused from oppression by the Government. * * *." Singer v. United States, 85 S.Ct. 783, 788 (1965), "The first object of any tyrant in Whitehall would be to make Parliament utterly subservient to his will; and the next to overthrow or diminish trial by jury, for no tyrant could afford to leave a subject's freedom in the hands of twelve of his countrymen. So that trial by jury is more than an instrument of justice and more than one wheel of the constitution: it is the lamp that shows that freedom lives." P. Devlin, Trial by Jury 164 (1956). (End of Footnote)

Those who wrote our constitutions knew from history and experience that it was necessary to protect against unfounded criminal charges brought to eliminate enemies and against judges too responsive to the voice of higher authority. The framers of the constitutions strove to create an independent judiciary but insisted upon further protection against arbitrary action. Providing an accused with the right to be tried by a jury of his peers gave him an inestimable safeguard against the corrupt or overzealous prosecutor and against the compliant, biased, or eccentric judge. If the defendant preferred the common-sense judgment of a jury to the more tutored but perhaps less sympathetic reaction of the single judge, he was to have it. Beyond this, the jury trial provisions in the Federal and State Constitutions reflect a fundamental decision about the exercise of official power--a reluctance to entrust plenary powers over the life and liberty of the citizen to one judge or to a group of judges. Fear of unchecked power, so typical of our State and Federal Governments in other respects, found expression in the criminal law in this insistence upon community participation in the determination of guilt or innocence. The deep commitment of the Nation to the right of jury trial in serious criminal cases as a defense against arbitrary law enforcement qualifies for protection under the Dues Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and must therefore be respected by the States."

Duncan v. State of Louisiana, 88 S.Ct. 1444, 1451 (1968).

Originally Posted by www.freemarketnews.com

War on Illegal Immigration Destroys Privacy

Big Government issues a plan to fight illegal immigration. The keystone? The Real ID Act. Here's a plan to make us receive Big Government's "mark" if we want to engage in commerce: get a job, cash a check, open an account, buy cigarettes, alcohol, or a gun. We must also have the Federal Leviathan's mark if we want to board a train, a plane, or drive an automobile. Without "your papers" you will essentially be a stranded, non-person, unable to travel from point A to point B.

Oh, and talk about an invasion of privacy and identity theft . . . These Real ID cards will be used to track your every moment with Radio Frequency Identification technology (RFID). These RFID chips are being inserted in everything. And now we learn that a British man was able to clone an RFID signal from an e-Passport in just five minutes (he thought it would take him an hour). http://tinyurl.com/yduvyo

Of course, the failure of this program only means more money will be needed. Additional privacy measures must be implemented on top of this terrible program. But no thought is given to the obvious: admitting defeat and closing down the Real ID Act.

Emphasis added.

All actions begin with the ability to speak freely, and honestly! First, speak to yourself [FREE YOUR MIND], then to others.

BOBT12