Call For Immediate Arrest Of 5 Supreme Court Justices For Treason

page: 2
87
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Wow this one is really out there. This ruling IMHO just brings the rest of the people into the fold, instead of just the unions and the main stream media. Now Corporations of all stripes can buy ads instead of the cherry picked political favorites. Now "big pharma" can defend itself when castigated or "big oil" can explain that it cost ALOT of money to search and drill for new oil wells. Blue Cross can explain that their "obscene" profit was only 4% last year on Health Insurance. I think this was a good ruling and as a Veteran I am not too thrilled with this article. There are laws on the books covering donations from other countries. (Slick Willy ignored these but they do exist) I think this is strictly a freedom of speech issue and I am behind it!




posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:16 AM
link   
If you dig deeper than a headline you will find the reasoning behind the decision. A corporation was banned from putting out advertising that endorsed a candidate or challenged and questioned a candidate by law. The corporation could not endorse or decry a candidate. the Supreme Court was ok with that. However, the argument made by the government ,to defend the law, in a recent challenge said that any endorsement by a corporation or subsidiary of it could be banned. The Supremem Court questioned if that was the argument, then a publishing corporation or a news corporation, if it endorsed or challenged a candidate, it could be banned, and its reports, articles, and books could be banned. The US Government said YES, it could.
That made the Supreme Court stand up and at attention. They asked , then, if a 500 page book sated in one sentence that it endorsed a candidate, then that book could be banned? Yes said the US Government.
The Supreme Court in defending the 1st ammendment to the US Constitution said "No,.. you can't" and we have the decision that they made.
How easy would it have been for Mr.Obama to have run with that ruling if said yes, and summarily start shutting down the opposition press.
God Bless The US Supreme Court and the US Costitution.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by AlreadyGone
 


Yeah good luck with that. Personaly , looking at this objectively , seems to me that any corperate interferance with democratic process is going to mess your nation up something awful . I think you are all boned. I hope Im wrong!



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by neo5842


I have posted this mainly because I dont understand how a judge can override a decision made by government. Does this happen in the states a lot? and is it legal? and is it really treason committed by these judges, and can they really get put away for what i see as being a crime? Not being in the US, i do find some some things that go on in the legal system there very confusing, i guess i should study up on it more, but would that make any difference, especially as they seem to change it all the time, and a lot of it by judges, I mean are they elected or appointed?

Sorry if this is in the wrong place, i didn't want people to miss it in case it has significance to it. and i did look for it on ATS but couldn't find any reference to it anywhere. thanks.

www.veteranstoday.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


The whole job of the supreme court is to over-ride decisions made by other branches of the government when those decisions conflict with the constitution.

The supreme court justices deserve a trophy as far as I'm concerned for upholding a very correct decision. If one person has the freedom of speech, then yes a group of people also have a freedom of speech.

I don't know how so many people have been brainwashed into opposing the freedom of speech. If people don't like fascists rising to power, then don't vote for them. Both Republicans and Democrats get boatloads of big corporate donations. Nobody I know who votes lets that stop them from voting for the fascists. Yet here they are complaining the same decision they've been making for decades that its okay for politicians to sell out when they go to the polls and vote for the sell-outs... here they are complaining that the supreme court has made the exact same decision they've been making for decades.

Its laughable to me. If someone can really explain to me why the freedom of speech should not be taken into account please do. I'll gladly change my mind. But then also explain to me why people like you have been voting for fascism all this time and how you are forced to vote for it. Why can't people like you, the complainers, simply vote for someone who isn't getting big corporate donations? Its mostly public information where these people are getting their money!

Again, the 5 who voted against restricting the freedom of speech deserve a trophy and the other four who didn't could more legitimately be held up on treason charges for siding against the constitution which doesn't bar any candidates at all from holding office for any reason except things like having to be 35 years old to be president. It doesn't say anything about campaign contributions that I can see and therefore there are no such restrictions.

The same hating on judges who allow fascist politicians of today could have been used to bar communist politicians a couple decades back... but we are America and we don't do it that way. Nor do we want it that way. What the system is supposed to do is put all the power in the vote. If you don't like corporate contributions, don't vote for those who are getting them. Easy.

[edit on 23-1-2010 by truthquest]



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:41 AM
link   
I have always hated the "Supreme" Court as much as I hate Congress and the Executive.

They are all fascists who think they know better how I should RUN MY LIFE than I do!!!

I will not shed a tear when push comes to shove.

In fact, I will dance a jig.

The day of reckoning is coming, all I have to do is sit here and watch events unfold. The snowball is going down the hill already, its too big to stop now! Either move out of the way or get crushed.

So I am just gonna move out of the way, and watch the Snowball plow over the fascists and their inept schemes.


Talk about some really great TV programming coming up soon, this country is about to tear itself apart from the inside.

I am just going to watch it and stay outta the way.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Had this decision happened in 2008, his vileness obamassiah would not have lied his way into power. Its ok for seiu to give his vileness 60 million?

If any supremes should go in trial how about "roe v wade". The murder of millions.......



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by AlreadyGone
 


I can't believe my eyes over what you wrote on the above post! Are you even human, let alone an american????!!!

The issue debated is more than just 'free speech'. If you chosed to read between the lines, anyone can see that the SC agrees to freedom of speech. However, the whole issue and debate is not on freedom of speech per se, but on a 63-year-old law limiting political spending for elections!

Anyone is free to talk or challenge on the political stage, even foriegn powers as it had happened for centuries. This had not been denied, but equally anyone else too is free to counter whatever was said in a debate on issues.

The problem of such freedom comes when political election arrives. It is a fact that whomever gives a better mickey mouse dance and song routine, or result to pork barrel electioneering, the candidate stands a better chance, based on the UNLIMITED FUNDS he can use to gain media and public time to create awareness.

It is not wrong if the masses directly funded the candidate, but it becomes nothing more than bribery when self interest groups, with unlimited resources and funds 'buys' over the candidate and makes him/her their mouthpiece to legislate or veto against majority wishes!

And who are these immensely rich and powerful people? None other than your NWO corporations that has no allegience to anyone, any country or any morals saved their own wallets.

Instead of handing trophies to the SC, they should either be lynched or sent back to kindergartens to comprehend the far reaching consequences of their decision.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Once again I am amazed at the lack of understanding on this site. In 08, Government basically limited the amount of money that was allowed to use to promote a movie that was anti-Hillary Clinton. But was allowing any other movie about other Political figures (Bush, McCain, etc) to have unlimited funding. So what the Supreme Court did was take away the ability of the federal government to dictate and control the information that comes out during a campaign just because they are trying to push a certain candidate or party for their agenda. You know, the agenda everyone on this site says they are against.

The other thing they did was allow business to have a say in who gets elected instead of having to sit back and be attacked and put out of business like our current leader is doing to them. You do want the country to bounce back from this economic situation don't you? You do want jobs don't you. If this ruling had not happened. Government would have been the only ones dictating who gets in office and people such as our current administration could continue to purposely collapse our economy. It's freedom, and the Supreme Court actually did a good thing this time folks.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:48 AM
link   
I have learned the hard way that what I consider moral, ethical and decent does not apply in the same way to a corporation. The standard of decency and fairness gets thrown under the train when it comes face to face with profitability and what matters to a corporation.

As such, profits over people is where the corporation will do anything in order to make money and will eagerly lie to you about any side affects even it has to hire or bribe scientist or doctors to produce false studies to convince you and to get you to trust their professional presentation and hip marketing plan. It's all show because most corporations only care about the money and the power that money can buy. Add corruption and you have a cancer in a target rich environment that will grow until it kills everything it touches.

This is what we see everywhere in our society. Our school systems, political systems, medical, science, and corporate systems are driven by more and more need for money. Enough is never enough to a corporation and as a result we see everywhere in the world those that would rather be a corporation because only humans have to be accountable. Corporations hide behind the veil of legalities that they purchase from corrupt politicians.

Corporations are for themselves. Humans are for humans and I don't think a corporation is ever going to understand that small difference. Might as well be talking to a shark about what's for dinner and noting that smirk and look in the shark's eyes.

Corporation are Sharks. Humans are food to Sharks. Get it? The Shark does. That's what we better get straight before you start hearing crunch, crunch and or end up missing something you value.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by neo5842

CALL FOR IMMEDIATE ARREST OF 5 SUPREME COURT JUSTICES FOR TREASON


www.veteranstoday.com

Five members of the Supreme Court declared that a “corporation” is a person, not a “regular person” but one above all natural laws, subject to no God, no moral code but one with unlimited power over our lives, a power awarded by judges who seem themselves as grand inquisitors in an meant to hunt down all hertics who fail to serve their god, the god of money.
(visit the link for the full news article)




Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 23 Jan 2010 by Hellmutt]


Why?

Liberals have their panties in a wad because now more conservative/independent candidates can be funded at levels they have enjoyed for many years..

UNIONS ANYONE???

I had to laugh at olbermann last night becasue he was freaking out too - he was scared that "the two party system could be destroyed" by well funded third and fourth parties!

If anything this just opened the door to wrecking the two party system. Could you imagine if all the major gun manufactures backed a tea party candidate? This is why they are scared.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by MaxBlack
 


wow carl marx 101, im impressed with you lack of education other than the communist manifesto........

So all the great media "coprorations" like NY Times, CNN, ABC, NBC (GE), CBS should all be closed?

Evil corporation put food on YOUR table everyday, put clothes on YOUR back, there is not an aspect of your life that was not put there without evil corporations...........



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by wiredamerican
 


Heros?

According to Oxford dictionary...

he-ro (n., pl., -roes).

1. In mythology and legend, a man, often of divine ancestry, who is endowed with great courage and strength, celebrated for his bold exploits, and favored by the gods.

2. A person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose, especially one who has risked or sacrificed his or her life: soldiers and nurses who were heroes in an unpopular war.

3. A person noted for special achievement in a particular field: the heroes of medicine.

(I left out the reference to a NY sandwich)


I'm sorry, I don't say this very often out of respect for an individual's right to their own opinions, but you are wrong friend.

How is it 'power to the people' when a company decides to lay off all of it's employess and move to China or India? I live in an area where there were alot of call centers. In order to stimulate the economy the government offered tax breaks to entice these companies (AOL, EXXON, FEDEX...the list goes on) to setup here. As the contracts/grants/tax breaks end these companies are one by one pulling up stakes and moving.

Why? They now have to pay tax just like everyone else. It doesn't matter to them what the consequences are, just the bottom line.

It's funny because I was talking to a friend not two hours ago about the announcement that another center is closing down; their assistence ran out in December, their building lease expires at the end of January.

Coincidence?

This was tried in the 80's. It was called M.A.D. and at the time Corporations were trying to have themselves declared equal to Nations in the eyes of the law. It was shot down then because people realised that it gave corporations the ability to operate however they wanted regardless of national laws.

I don't remember what the acronym stands for, I only remember it because it's the same as the Soviet-American plan to prevent nuclear war...Mutually Assured Destruction...something I thought funny in a perverted sense of the term.

Do you honestly think this does anything but solidly cement the US elections as a pure bidding war?

Corporations want this because it means they have to be less accountable while possessing more power than ever before. To allow this is to give corporations the entire US giftwrapped and on a silver platter.

Sellouts? Absolutely.

Hero's?

No.



EDIT:

Here's a simple and easy experiment to try...

Next time you're at work and see your boss, walk up and tell them what you think about the company's worst practices and demand they be changed. What do you think the outcome will be?

Will the company change, or your employment status?




[edit on 23-1-2010 by {davinci}]



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by MaxBlack
 


Hear! Hear!

I couldn't have said it any better. Create jobs for the masses, or an absolute sell out to China? $1 an hour minimum wage anyone? or Corporations will flee to slave states of 3rd world nations to fatten wallets. So they are allowed to finance their puppets to force americans agree to slavery? I thought US had banned slavery, or had I been living a lie?



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by neo5842
 


why stop with just buying Repub/Dem politicians? Corporations now have the door open to start their own party. This will be a radical change in American democracy.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by wiredamerican



and is it really treason committed by these judges, and can they really get put away for what i see as being a crime?


This is not treason. They are heroes.
Why?
Because they just stripped election funding from government control.
They gave more power to Corporations and Unions.
Corporations and Unions are made out of people.

This is more power to the people. And that is a good thing.

I find it confusing that people would rather have government control on election funding. I say let the people, fund it. And it is the people who make up the corporations and unions.

This is one step ahead toward a more perfect Union.


Whether people agree or disagree, it was the constitutionally correct interpretation of the law (amendment) governing free speech.

BTW, some of this howling mob might be interested (or not) in what the word "corporation" really means.

definition


cor·po·ra·tion (kôrp-rshn)
n.
1. A body that is granted a charter recognizing it as a separate legal entity having its own rights, privileges, and liabilities distinct from those of its members.
2. Such a body created for purposes of government. Also called body corporate.
3. A group of people combined into or acting as one body.


The word used over and over again is "body" - as in a thing (business) being given the rights of a creature with a body (human being).


[edit on 1/23/2010 by centurion1211]



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   
This call to immediately arrest the Supreme Court justices for ruling in favor of freedom of speech is exactly what is wrong with a lot of America who feel the rights granted in the U.S. Constitution are only for a select few that back their political agendas, and not for all.

Why is it OK for unions and some corporations, General Electric through their media arms is a prime example, but not all corporations? Doesn't this show favoritism to some? Shouldn't all have the same rights?



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by mopusvindictus
 


Supreme Court Justices can be impeached as they are approved by the US Senate. Treason is a charge made against any government official. The Supreme Court is not immune from charges of Treason.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:36 AM
link   
I would like to state that none on the supreme court have comitted treason. My understanding of the US Supreme court is that they are 1/3 of the federal government, there to interpert the laws, in suits that are brought before them. However, there is one other part of the Supreme Court that many do not consider, that unlike any other branch of the federal government, not the Legislative, or the Executive Branch, the justices on the Supreme Court, all of them, no matter how they decide on a court case, must justify their conclusions and how they rule. They have to write such down, each giving his or her opinion on what they believe. If there is a branch of the government that is more transparent, it would be them. The primary reason why they are not voted into office, and are appointed, is that they need to not be beholding to any one at any time, and are suppose to be above reproach.



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:43 AM
link   
In truth, I have nothing against Corporations. Infact, I admire their founders, the drive, and the scrimping to build up Corporate America and created jobs for millions.

However, somewhere along the line, they had lost their bearings, a natural trait being that they had been AUTHORITATIVE for years in order to stay alive in the cut throat environments of the biz world.

Bouyed by their successes, they always believe that what they do will ALWAYS be right, a delusion that leads to corruption of their morals for the sake of the pedestal at the top.

And such powers left unchecked are a danger to mankind, for there is more to life than just making money and HOARDING IT ALL UP! Look at their obscene amounts and what did they really spend on? I dont deny them their right to rewards for their efforts ( hardwork???), but what about the millions sleeping out in the streets? The excuse that they are lazy is just a hurtful generalization of them, who lacked the opportunity or made mistakes and never given a chance to excel again.

Even worse are those foriegn rich - China will one of them, the middle east in the midst of suffering and bloodshed, monumental white elephants are created in the deserts and seas not many can afford. Look around at the obscene wealth created and then look at the sufferings of the common masses.

I am no commie, for i believe in regulated capitalism, but such obscene excesses and selfish all out greed must stop or mankind will be doomed. Worse now with the SC decision to legitimize such AUTHORITARIANISM onto the amercian masses!!!



posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by wiredamerican



and is it really treason committed by these judges, and can they really get put away for what i see as being a crime?


This is not treason. They are heroes.
Why?
Because they just stripped election funding from government control.
They gave more power to Corporations and Unions.
Corporations and Unions are made out of people.

This is more power to the people. And that is a good thing.

I find it confusing that people would rather have government control on election funding. I say let the people, fund it. And it is the people who make up the corporations and unions.

This is one step ahead toward a more perfect Union.


Government control of anything electoral is subject to FOIA and other reviews under our current laws and the Constitution. Corporations and unions are not subject to these reviews and detecting election fraud will be more difficult, so will finding the truth.

I don't know why you feel you can trust corporations and labor unions. But in a corporation not everyone makes decisions. Especially not about what candidate to support. That is reserved for the guys at the top-same goes for the unions





top topics
 
87
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join