A natural-person - An individual; A private person, as distinguished from an artificial person "a corporation. [Ballentine law dictionary 1930 - pg 850]

The government was created to protect and maintain "individual's" rights
There are 3 human "inalienable" rights. Life Liberty Property.
These "inalienable" rights are supposed to held sacrosanct by the government and never taken away except by your own free will.

Your "unalienable" right is "freewill" and the capacity for decision.

Artificial Person; A person created by law or by authority of law such as a corporation as distinguished from a "Natural Person", that is a Human Being. [Ballentine law dictionary 1930 - pg 109]

Person; Persons are divided by law into "persons natural" and "persons artificial" and "person" prima facie at common law and apart from any statutory enactment included both natural and artificial persons and therfore as a general rule includes corporations [body politic] [Ballentine law dictionary 1930 - pg 958]

An "Alien" is a "Person" within the meaning of due process.
A person has rights
An individual has "inalienable rights"
An individual and person have "unalienable rights"
A person has rights given by "statute"
An individual has "natural rights"

A Citizen is a "Person". One of those who compose the community and who in their associated capacity, have established or submitted themselves to the dominion of a government for the promotion of their general welfare and protection of their individual rights as well as collective rights. [Ballentine law dictionary 1930 - pg 217]

How do you become a citizen?
Sign up for a birth certificate.
you were John Doe a natural person but now out of your own free will you sign up for the benefits of a birth certificate you are now JOHN DOE - Your rights are diminished and revealed by Capitis Diminutio minima, and media and maxima.

When you forget who you are, or don't know that you are a natural person under common law and sign for more government benefits getting deeper into the body politic, [drivers licence/social insurance number/school registration/bank account/...etc] the governement has their control on you and can track you from now on.

....and basically "they" will do "in law" whatever they want to us....

....until we start to learn who we are and know our inalienable rights and capacity.

"they" = government.

[edit on 6-1-2008 by Paul E. Lake]

[edit on 6-1-2008 by Paul E. Lake]

so the take over of America has begun... i didn't think it would start this soon, first it starts with this, then eventually total control,

enjoy what little liberties you have while you can, there is nothing you will be able to do about it,

those who go against these types of bills and against the government will most likely be taken out quickly and said to be terrorists

I think this vaguely written editorial is being blown way out of proportion. It may be a scare tactic but nothing will come of it. There are millions who have what could be termed "radical" beliefs, and no one is going to jail for it. Even the sheeple would revolt against such a bill.

IMO, while I support gun control, our rights to stand as a militia are still very much there. The day before they remove our right to own guns is the day I buy one. That's a pretty radical statement. Guess its just a matter of time before the MIB's come for me.




[edit on 1/6/08 by SantaClaus]

Hey, am I the only one who thinks this is a good thing? Folk might actually pull their fingers and do something about it. That said, there might not be much you can do. The human race can't think for themselves. They need idiots telling them what to do, so they can feel safe and wallow in their ignorance.

Just remember this people: The individual is weak against the collective.

God, I hope they bring back the Gulags!

[edit on 6/1/08 by MacDonagh]

Originally posted by Xtrozero
This is a Bipartisan bill with an almost 98% yea by the house on it...

Prohibits the Department of Homeland Security's efforts to prevent ideologically-based violence and homegrown terrorism from violating the constitutional and civil rights, and civil liberties, of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents.

It looks like the bill has built-in safeguards against its possible abuse.

The most destructive act of domestic terrorism was in the 90's, when Timothy McVeigh blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City. I believe it killed more people than any other single terrorist act by an American in the U.S. It's too bad there wasn't a commission to study that at the time it happened.

Interesting bill.

It could very well be a benign piece of legislation that will sink tons of money into a think tank that never acheives anything. However, I've grown very skeptical of this government over the last few years and I don't trust it.

I think the thing that concerns me most is that when people support something that uses subjective terms such as "radical", they are often assuming that those who will be enforcing that term have adopted the same defination and standards for the term as they themselves have -- therefore, the legislation does not impact them. In fact they often think the legislation is a good thing. After all, why wouldn't I want what I consider to be radical thinking stamped out?

The problem with the way these bills are written is that subjective terms are NEVER clearly defined. When it becomes law, it also becomes an open door that can be walked through at any time and completely at the will and interpretation of those upholding the law.

I can understand how people can read this piece of legislation and shrug it away. I can't do that. I see the potential danger to human rights and free expression that this bill contains within it. That doesn't mean the danger will ever come to be, but at the same time, those supporting this bill can not guarantee that the danger introduced will not occur either.

On the subject of thinking:lets stop! It's time to move to >lawful and legal< action.What would be a good starting point ? Let's start out by running the current flag and constitution through a shredder. The next step is we need to look for suitable replacements. For the flag, let's fly a u.s. civil flag instead.Check out its history.Now, for that problematic document called the constitution, let's arm ourselves with some historical knowledge.A good place to start would be a book by Kenneth W Royce(a.k.a.Boston Tea Party), Hologram of Liberty.We were doing quite well under the Articles of Confederation. Yes,they did need some small fixes and we would have had a really nice Republic.We changed the foundation and today you can see the fears of a real patriot,Patrick Henry, realized.

Originally posted by tankthinker
so the take over of America has begun... i didn't think it would start this soon, first it starts with this, then eventually total control,

enjoy what little liberties you have while you can, there is nothing you will be able to do about it,

those who go against these types of bills and against the government will most likely be taken out quickly and said to be terrorists

Oh, the takeover has begun long ago. It's an ongoing and evolving process. People are just becoming aware of it.

so,acording to this bill we are dangerous "domestic terrorists"? Im sure that will keep the nation safe...

im still not so sure why people see stuff like this and start thinking "police state".

though im still not sure why anyone thinks we're EVER going to move to a police state, i actually started a thread about this once.

but ill summarize, theres no money in it. people in power are in power cuz they have money, they want to stay in power they need us tax payers out there making money so they can tax it, spending said money so they can tax it again etc.

IF we moved to a police state, how many plasma tv's and SUV's do you suppose we'd be buying? probably not many. so, what happens to the businesses that sell these items? they close. so, what about all the people taht were working for those companies? they no longer contribute to the economy either. suddenly our economy is REALLY in the crapper and not only are we poorer and more unhappy, but those in power suddenly dont have the money available to them to stay in power.

police state economies dont work. period. how important in the world game is north korea? other than their threat to south korea, not very. how important was the soviet union? other than their massive army and nuke stockpile, not very. sure they were a super power, but people would often call them a super power then snicker under their breaths.

china wasnt all that important until they opened up their economy to a more capitalist one. sure, they supplied the world with cheap crap for years but for the most part they were also considered a joke.

do you REALLY think that anyone in OUR govt wants that for us? hell no, they want us all fat dumb and happy watching our big screens and playing Xbox until its time to drive to mcdonalds in our hummers while they sit back and find more insidious ways to try to control us without rounding people up and putting them in camps.

and just who would be doing the rounding up? surely you dont think that the 4th ID is going to start rounding up their friends neighbors and family members for these camps. blackwater? sure, they'll do anything for money right? uh huh, and what prey tell are these mercs going to spend their money on? what with all the mc donalds closed and the best buys out of business.

in my opinion its in any NWO's best interest to NOT put us all in camps but find a way for us all to make MORE money so we can be taxed more and spend more and keep their money rolling in.

but thats just me. sure, im paranoid im going to have an "accident" because of the project im working on in my brothers garage but i dont think im going to end up in a camp anytime soon.

(oh and if anyone hears of a plane crash between monterey cali adn omaha ne on tuesday, say a prayer for me huh? lol)

I don't know Damocles, the powers that were in germany were living pretty good while the masses were locked up in those concentration camps.

Ya see, labeling groups of people as enemies of the state and taking them out of the mainstream population to a slave camp, while confiscating everything they own is another way to gather wealth. and if jobs are running low, and resources are scarce, it's a way to ensure that the mainstream population have enough to keep them happy.

and right at the moment, I think the powers that be have kind of lost control of the economy and have no idea which way to go. there's talk of food shortages and oil prices are rather high, with the potential of becoming higher. I wouldn't put nothing past the "have the mosts" if they find themselves having not as much. I also wouldn't put anything past the "have nots" if they find themselves having less...
so, well, all in all.....I don't see this as an impossibility.

but, well, as far as this law goes....
ya, in time, it might lead to this. but as it is now, it's just another way to drive yet another nail into our economic coffin! way too much money wasted with little or no return for the dollar.