What? The Supreme Court could render the Constitution VOID?

What the hell? This is probably the most important Supreme Court decision EVER..

United States Supreme Court Will Soon Issue a Landmark Decision on the Validity of the Constitution

The United States Supreme Court will soon issue a landmark decision on the validity of the Constitution. The Supreme Court will consider three petitions filed by William M. Windsor, a retired Atlanta, Georgia grandfather. The decision should be rendered by the end of the year. Unless The Supreme Court acts, federal judges will be free to void the Constitution.

The Questions Presented to The Supreme Court by Grandfather Windsor are:

1. Will The Supreme Court declare that the Constitution and its amendments may be voided by federal judges?
2. Should federal judges be stopped from committing illegal and corrupt acts to obstruct justice and inflict bias on litigants?
3. Will The Supreme Court be afraid to disclose the corruption in the federal courts?

These questions are presented in three separate Petitions for Writ of Mandamus filed with The United States Supreme Court the first week of November 2010 (appeal numbers to-be-assigned).

But there's more.

Windsor believes that the federal courts and nine federal judges violated the Constitution, the Due Process Clause, and the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution.

Windsor says: "I have discovered that, at least in Atlanta, Georgia, the federal courts operate like a police state in which the judges are all-powerful, committing criminal acts from their benches and violating the Constitutional rights of parties who have the misfortune of appearing in their courts."

Windsor has now tossed the hot potato right square in the laps of the justices of the Supreme Court. By filing mandamus petitions rather than an appeal, The Supreme Court is forced to deal with Windsor's allegations of corruption in the federal courts.

This guy is right, corruption is at a high level and HE'S CALLING THEM ON THEIR BS.

And the article is saying that the Supreme Court would void the constitution because ruling that those federal judges did not violate his rights means that they can void any constitutional right when they see fit.

Grandfather Windsor hopes for the best but fears for the worst: "I hope The Supreme Court is decent, honest, and cares about the Constitution and the citizens of the United States. However, I am sorry to say that at this point, I suspect the corruption goes all the way to the top. My charges have been totally ignored by the United States Attorney's Office, the FBI, and Congress. I have said to The Supreme Court that the issues can all be boiled down to one question: Is The United States Supreme Court prepared to stop the federal judges in Atlanta, Georgia from functioning like common criminals?"

Windsor says: "If The Supreme Court fails to act against these federal judges, the citizens of the United States need to know that there is not a shred of decency, honesty, or Constitutional rights in our federal courts. Corruption has consumed the federal court system, and we now live in a police state. Judges are free to do absolutely anything they want. Our laws are meaningless. Your life savings can be stolen by a federal judge, and they have no risk in violating every law in the books."

Indeed. If the Supreme Court sides with those bastards, which they probably will, the US is officially OVER, written with black on white letters by the third branch which is supposed to keep in the check the others two.

EDIT: If you want to ask any question/contact ``Grandfather Windsor`` here is his email adress.

[email protected]

He's looking for a former US federal judge as an expert witness.

This shouldn't even be considered.

Yet, alas, it is being considered.

I can't say I am surprised though. It's all about POWER, not just money.

And I'll bet most media outlets won't even mention it.

and if they do, it will be a fleeting idea, not actual news, I mean come on it doesn't have to do with Britney Spears so why would it be news the people care about.

Originally posted by thewholepicture
And I'll bet most media outlets won't even mention it.

and if they do, it will be a fleeting idea, not actual news, I mean come on it doesn't have to do with Britney Spears so why would it be news the people care about.

edit on 21-11-2010 by thewholepicture because: (no reason given)

This IS a news media outlet! You think all these threads are written by honest truth searching people? I'm willing to bet that 90% of the stuff on here is all planted information.

After reading that? I have never in my life wished and prayed something was a hoax as much as I am doing right at this moment. If it isn't a hoax, then God (or whatever higher power you believe in) help us all. I already feared for our Nation and our people, but this would be beyong stunning. Not only for America, but I would think for a lot of the world.

Given the Supreme Court derives it's power from the Constitution and is charged with comparing laws to it-I am curious about this: I did not see an actual case referenced. Do you have more details on this from an official perspective?

When I go to that lawless america site the link to read more does not work for me. I am only seeing hyperbole though from all the sources...

This article may or may not be true, either way, you would have to be completely blind not to see that the constitution is already becoming obsolete.

Sure, the powers that be do have the power to void anything, even the sacred Constitutions written with founding fathers blood.

The only thing is - there will be hell to pay when such an act is passed.

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
Sure, the powers that be do have the power to void anything, even the sacred Constitutions written with founding fathers blood.

The only thing is - there will be hell to pay when such an act is passed.

I hope your right.

I hope Americans aren't so blind as to miss when our constitution becomes obsolete, which IMO has already happened in a lot of ways.

Atlanta-based Alcatraz Media and businessman William M. Windsor are jointly attempting to obtain the billion dollar contract for boat rides under Niagara Falls. The boat rides began in 1846, and there has never been an opportunity for anyone to bid to offer the service until Windsor took legal action against the Province of Ontario and the State of New York. This case is currently being handled by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice under case number DC 09-105JR.

Source

And a link to an actual explanation of all this can be found here.

What is really going on is simply a clever way for Mr Windsor to manipulate the appellate process. From the above link...

Windsor has been involved in legal action in the federal courts in Atlanta since 2006. Windsor was named a defendant in a lawsuit (1:06-CV-0714-ODE) in which Christopher Glynn of Maid of the Mist in Niagara Falls, swore under oath that Windsor did a variety of things including the crimes of theft and bribery. Windsor stated under oath that Christopher Glynn made it all up and lied about absolutely everything that he swore...

Windsor then obtained deposition testimony from Glynn and the other managers of the Maid of the Mist boat ride in Niagara Falls, and they admitted, under oath, that charges against Windsor were not true

By filing mandamus petitions rather than an appeal, The Supreme Court is forced to deal with Windsor's allegations of corruption in the federal courts. Grandfather Windsor hopes for the best but fears for the worst: "I hope The Supreme Court is decent, honest, and cares about the Constitution and the citizens of the United States. However, I am sorry to say that at this point, I suspect the corruption goes all the way to the top. My charges have been totally ignored by the United States Attorney's Office, the FBI, and Congress. I have said to The Supreme Court that the issues can all be boiled down to one question: Is The United States Supreme Court prepared to stop the federal judges in Atlanta, Georgia from functioning like common criminals?"

Windsor says: "If The Supreme Court fails to act against these federal judges, the citizens of the United States need to know that there is not a shred of decency, honesty, or Constitutional rights in our federal courts. Corruption has consumed the federal court system, and we now live in a police state. Judges are free to do absolutely anything they want. Our laws are meaningless. Your life savings can be stolen by a federal judge, and they have no risk in violating every law in the books."

So, basically, what we have here is a guy saying that unless he gets a billion dollar contract awarded to him, to run the Maid of the Mists attraction at Niagra Falls, then, surely, the Constitution is void. In my opinion it's just hyperbole and trying to manipulate the system for results.

Guess Mr Windsor didn't bribe the right people... or didn't bribe them enough to grease all the right wheels... Now he's trying to put the whole system on trial rather than just bucking up and trying again. It is a great political climate, though, right now for a rich person to scream that the sky is falling... it's all the rage these days.

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide


Way too much fear mongering and manipulation of generated fear anymore-I am kind of surprised anyone can get out of bed let alone go to work...

Seems like it's time for those who try this crab be drug through the streets or at least publically shamed instead of forgotten about the next day.

Be careful what Breitbart's spin tries to tell you.

In March 2006, plaintiffs Maid of the Mist Corporation and Maid of the
Mist Steamboat Company (“Maid”), which operated boat tours of Niagara Falls,
filed a complaint against Alcatraz Media, LLC, Alcatraz Media, Inc. (“Alcatraz”),
and William M. Windsor, who participated in the management of Alcatraz,
seeking an injunction against Alcatraz for future ticket sales for Maid of the Mist
boat tours. The case was assigned to United States District Judge Orinda Evans,
who granted summary judgment in favor of Maid and entered judgment
accordingly in October 2007.
William M. Windsor appeals the district court’s December 22, 2009, order
denying/dismissing 62 post-judgment motions he filed in 2009, dismissing a
complaint of professional misconduct he filed in 2009, and issuing an injunction
restricting Windsor from filing any further motion, pleading, or other paper in
relation to the instant civil action, and any new lawsuit in any court involving
claims arising from the same factual predicate or nucleus of operative facts as in
the instant case. Specifically, Windsor argues that the district court abused its
discretion by: (1) refusing to recuse from this case; (2) denying Windsor’s Rule 60
motions for relief from judgment; (3) denying Windsor’s motions for sanctions
2
against Maid, its officers, and its attorneys; (4) denying Windsor’s motions for a
hearing or conference; (5) denying Windsor’s motion to waive the requirement
that Alcatraz be represented by counsel; (6) denying Windsor’s motion to lift a
seal from a document and by dismissing his motion to compel discovery; (7)
dismissing Windsor’s complaint of professional misconduct; and (8) permanently
enjoining Windsor and those acting in conjunction with him from filing further
pleadings.

More here. And a tidbit of media here.

tl;dr: Windsor thinks the courts should do what he wants and wants the SCOTUS to agree with him, otherwise they're all 'just criminals.'

He even made a website about it: www.niagarafallsbid.net

Originally posted by thewholepicture
I hope your right.

I hope Americans aren't so blind as to miss when our constitution becomes obsolete, which IMO has already happened in a lot of ways.

The 2010 election had been a test. The Republican party had been voted into a majority position within the House.

Regardless if the votes had been manipulated or was an actual reflection on the People's choice, the nominated are in power now and have to perform, to act upon the wishes of the majority and the direction they seek for. All eyes are watching them.

Should they be found untruthful or unjustified of that seat of power freely given by the American majority, instead act against the wishes of the majority or hoodwinked them, they will be booted out by the masses who trusted, hoping they may change and out of party loyalty voted for them, as well as the minority who had not voted for them and their anger will be upon those who voted such incompetents or lying douche bags into power.

It's an awakening and a bloodbath awaits if the politicians presume the masses are still the sheeps of yesterdays.

reply to post by Vitchilo


Wow. I didnt hear a peep about this. This is the first place I hear about it and I watch the news often from local to Fox, to CNN to even the BBC. Heh, but I get the REAL news off the net. I find news on the net a bit more.... Ummm... BS free? Take my lead and watch all 3 before you look around on the net for your news. You'll see 4 diffrent versions from each and every personal perspective. I thought the news was just supposed to be unbiased facts, not personal rubish used to outwit and outdo another broadcast.

Originally posted by thewholepicture
This article may or may not be true, either way, you would have to be completely blind not to see that the constitution is already becoming obsolete.

I disagree not "obsolete" : just unheeded.The ideas are as powerful as they were 200+ years ago.If the constitution is somehow subverted it is not for the good of the people. If you have any doubts please spend sometime on Liberarian Michael Badnariks' constitution class ( available on youtube and google vid: google has 1 hour blocks) I've posted this link several times already ( probaly get a "talking to" by the mods...)
www.youtube.com...

The US Supreme Court already rendered the constitution void when it installed George W. Bush as president.

I always consider the source of an article when I read an OP. Sorry, I don't find this to be a credible source of information.

Pardon my french, but what a f'in joke. When your so called leaders are elected they swear on a bible and make an oath which states they will uphold the constitution.

Not only is this a legally valid contract when they do so, it is also fraud to not uphold your oath legally speaking.

Now the so called supreme court will decide if the constitution is valid or not?

This is what the united states has turned into in the eyes of not only its citizens but the eyes of every other single country in the world the biggest hypocrite on the planet.

in the whole scheme of things a common citizen is the lowest form of person in a society. if this were medievel europe we'd all be peasants.

asking the supreme court to side with a citizen would be like asking the king's court to go against a fellow noble in favor of a penniless peasant.

the only chance this guy has is getting a celebrity lawyer to handle this issue with him.

one thing cops and judges hate the most is admitting one of their own can be corrupted. so they ignore it.

what they should do is publicly, in front of the whole country, prosecute them 10x more harshly than a common criminal and declare for all who listen, that they are not like us.

that would restore order, faith and justice in the system and be a strong deterent to any judge or cop who even thinks of going corrupt.

reply to post by Vitchilo


Why wouldn't they? I mean, after all, they don't uphold any of the constitutional laws anymore anyway.
2nd line.