Adam Kokesh Body Slammed for Dancing at Jefferson Memorial

reply to post by Annee


This is evidence that you can't reason with everyone even with court cases and legal precedence or constitutional law, they would rather give up those inalienable rights and become enslaved by over 60 million statutes and codes that have been put into place fraudulently over the last 50-75 years as opposed to claiming and taking responsibility for their own lives.

As I recently heard one freeman on the land say "Get of the breast"

Originally posted by DragonSpirit2
reply to post by Annee

 

This is evidence that you can't reason with everyone even with court cases and legal precedence or constitutional law, they would rather give up those inalienable rights and become enslaved by over 60 million statutes and codes that have been put into place fraudulently over the last 50-75 years as opposed to claiming and taking responsibility for their own lives.

As I recently heard one freeman on the land say "Get of the breast"

NO - - I want to live in a peaceful society - - with my rights protected.

What I see is the rights of those who want a peaceful memorial being protected.

Sorry - - if some spoiled brats can't respect other people's rights.

reply to post by DragonSpirit2


I will prove to everyone that I am right, if you can offer proof to the contrary, anywhere it says somewhere where anyone, anywhere, and at anytime may ignore the principles of the Constitution for the purposed benefit of "law and order" then I will desist however if there is nothing but law after law and article after article which states that the constitution is the law of the land not statutory law then I hate to tell you but you may have an opinion but in this matter YOU ARE WRONG!!! Not being judgmental just presenting the facts as they are supposed to be being followed in this country, in this system of government.

"Where rights as secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which will abrogate them." Miranda v. Ariz., 384 U.S. 436 at 491 (1966)

The Constitution

Article VI: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States... shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby; anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding... All executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution."

There is also a Common Law principle which states that for there to be a crime, there has to be a victim (corpus delecti). In the absence of a victim there can be no crime.

There is also no mention in the Constitution of the phantoms some judges use as justifications for "interpreting" the Constitition: "Public Safety," "Public Interest," or "Public Policy." In 1968, in Columbia University's Charpentier Lectures, Justice Hugo Black said:

"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges' views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice. I have no fear of constitutional amendments properly adopted, but I do fear the rewriting of the Constitution by judges under the guise of interpretation."

"What spurs men on to achievement is the deep urge to be rid of the commands once laid on them." - from "Wake Up America! - Obedience, Punishment, and Power'

THE WEAKEST ARGUMENT FOR GOVERNMENT

If we don't have government there will be chaos, disorder, crime, poverty, illiteracy, homelessness, drug abuse, pollution, etc, etc.

Answer 1: How do you know? Answer 2: Such a list almost always consists of problems we already suffer from - in other words, if we have government there will be chaos, disorder, crime, poverty, illiteracy, homelessness, drug abuse, pollution, etc, etc.

The people who call themselves "government" need such problems in order to justify their jobs. It is in their interest to create such problems and make them worse. The worse the problems, the bigger the bureaucratic empires they create, the more money they get, the more power they obtain, the more people they control.

The bigger the government, the greater the problems. A politician like Bush may say that he will reduce government and lower taxes because he thinks it will help him get re-elected. In practice Bush has greatly increased his own bureaucratic empire. His administration has expanded government regulation with abandon. He promised, "Read my lips, no new taxes," and then raised taxes. Under Bush, deficit spending has ballooned out of control.

PROBLEMS ARE SOLVED BY PEOPLE, NOT BY GOVERNMENTS.

Once you realize that governments consist of people, and that whatever is being done is done by individual human beings - even though they may use machines and equipment - then it becomes embarrassingly obvious that only people can solve problems. The entire notion that government can or should do anything becomes quite absurd.

In their book Breakthrough Thinking, Gerald Nadler and Shozo Hibino write that "an organization, as a collective body, can't approach a problem." They have a section on "political and governmental horrors." They indicate that politics and government "are the graveyards of misbegotten problem solving." Politicians and bureaucrats have three basic types of "solutions":

Pass a law.
Throw money at the problem.
Appoint a committee to study the problem.
In terms of problem-solving methodology, all three types are at best inefficient.

I would go further and suggest that as soon as people call themselves "government," there is a considerable probability that they acquire some kind of "magical power in reverse" - they somehow become less able to solve problems. Nadler and Hibino say that, "Government is operated mainly by bureaucrats, and bureaucrats' classic criterion in decision making is not fulfillment of project purposes but protection of their jobs."

Some people say government is a fecal alchemist - everything they touch turns into feces. ----- Also from "Wake Up America!"

Amendment I
FREEDOM OF RELIGION, SPEECH, AND THE PRESS; RIGHT OF ASSEMBLY AND PETITION

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peacefully to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment XIV
GUARANTEE OF PROTECTION TO ALL CITIZENS (1868)

... No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws...

Not a huge fan of 14th because it says privileges and not rights but you get the point!

"It [The U.S. Constitution] must be interpreted in the light of Common Law, the principles and history of which were familiarly known to the framers of the Constitution. The language of the Constitution could not be understood without reference to the Common Law." U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 18 S. Ct. 456.

"Law of the Land" means "The Common Law." Taylor v. Porter, 4 Hill. 140, 146 (1843) - Justice Bronson; and State v. Simon, 2 Spears 761, 767 (1884) - Justice O'Neal.

The U.S. adopted the Common Laws of England with the Constitution. Coldwell v. Hill, 176 S.E. 383 (1934).

In contrast, legislated or statutory law - like the laws of Congress - are written mostly by attorneys to further their own self-interest or to favor special-interest groups with big bucks - exactly as Thomas Jefferson predicted in 1821.

It is also mentioned in the Constitution already that no one may exercise their rights and trample on yours at the same time. I understand your wanting your rights protected but they already are without getting statutes involved and mandating NO DANCE, NO DEMONSTRATION etc......if they were there with say boom boxes and an unsavory element was present that was disturbing your peace or your happiness at enjoying the monument then the police would then have every right to do what they did. But as it sits how it was done and then how the police responded to it and the creation of a statute to regulate this is unnecessary and in my humble opinion WRONG, but it's wrong for me, not for everyone.

I certainly respect your position because it is your RIGHT to have it even if I don't agree.

Right and Wrong are only a matter of perspective and I can see yours however I can also that it seems to stem from a desire to be protected and wish for security etc.....and I don't need that, I have already been exposed to an unsavory element and robbed and held at gunpoint for a half an hour and I still don't need it, I will protect myself and keep my rights at the same time not peddle them away for a false sense of security which is just a blanket hiding slavery underneath.

reply to post by Annee


Btw Annee this is just a discussion to me, mind you one I am passionate about, but it's just a discussion. I mean no harm or foul, I respect your right to have your views and to defend them as you have. Was just letting you know I wasn't really getting angry or seriously emotionally entangled in this to the point of something becoming personal.

Have a good day.

reply to post by Annee


Hey Annee

Without law and all, what is your personal feeling about silent dancing?

I just have a few comments/questions/concerns to address:

First off, to those who claim that "dancing" or moving about in a unusual fashion is grounds for arrest because it distracts those who are visiting for other reasons...

- Why aren't people who choose to use their obnoxious gadgets 24/7, no matter where they are, or who they are disturbing, be arrested??? I don't go to public places to hear loud, ridiculous conversations about whether Lady Gaga's new duct tape underpants are available online, or if Snooky forgot to tan before she did her laundry, or any other stupid thing that I'm subjected to no matter where I go anymore, or A-holes who bump into me while they're texting, and can't be bothered to look up and apologize...But yet, they are allowed to ruin my experiences, as long as they are too busy to cause a commotion! With all the worry about America being the "fattest country", you would think dancing would be encouraged!!! I would much rather see people having fun, then see them so absorbed in their own pathetic lives that they don't even appreciate the world around them.

Second, to those who believe that citizens cannot dance in a "memorial" or other "restricted" area...

- Who's F'ing taxes are paying for those buildings to be open???
- Why is it that a memorial that is supposed to remind us of our "freedom" and "justice" promotes just the opposite???

Last, to those who believe that "causing scenes" is the wrong way to deal with injustice...

- If things weren't so f'd up...there would be no scene to start!
- Even if the dancing was intended to provoke the police, we need to question why the simple act of dancing can produce these results...How long until the time comes when I'm arrested for frowning at a cop, and people will lecture me about "disturbing the peace", and be told that " I should have known better" and "I asked for it, because I knew it was against the law"...are you freaking serious??? Just because a bunch of elitist Ameritards formed a group and decided that they have supreme reign over me, does that mean I should blindly follow them and keep my mouth shut unless spoken to?
-There should be an actual threat to citizens in order for the police to use force against the very people they are supposed to protect...but that's just psychobabble about some crazy fantasy world I wish i lived in...

- and, hey, at least no one took a s*** in the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool, yet...

So I guess Part 2 is happening right now. How soon do you think they'll get youtube video up for it? And is there any live feed? That's what I want. Anyone got some live updates?

reply to post by filosophia


I wish I knew, I been searching for like an hour now, trying to find some. Hopefully they will post videos they get to the facebook page.

Originally posted by TribeOfManyColours
reply to post by Annee

 

Hey Annee

Without law and all, what is your personal feeling about silent dancing?

I am not against the dancing. However - with no restrictions - then what.

If you make restrictions on the type of dancing - - that's a law.

Ask yourself what comes next.

reply to post by Annee


Oh god, the horror! Someone might do the jig, on public property no less! When will this madness end? The insanity! What next?

Eh, we might as well just knock the damn thing down, we are doing a disservice to the man, pretending to honor him, while crapping on everything he stood for.

Most people have been brainwashed to think that they are better off being herded instead of being free. And that mentality is ruining it for the few people left that want freedom.

reply to post by TKDRL


Some people are born boot lickers and butt kissers, never question authority no matter what the law is or how dumb it is...

Glad i can go through life without chapped lips.

wow.

welcome to NAZI amerikkka.
(as if we havent been nazi amerikkka for a long time)

Anyway...
Slightly ashamed to admit I have not heard of this guy until now.
But I have checked out a bit more on him after that video..
and he is a very cool guy!
Man, We need more of him.

Just listened to this of his..
Brilliant..


Thanks OP.

reply to post by Ahmose


That speech is brilliant. I listen to that speech often. Thanks for posting it. It is relevant, I support IVAW, same as I support all my brothers that came home from vietnam. I am a bit young, but I grew up being trained and hanging with nam vets. A lot of them joined hells angels when they got back, kind of hard to get drafted to the jungle, than come home and be normal.

I am sorry that he didn't win his run, he deserved to. There is always next time.

My hope comes from you. Join us.

Well I guess the park police have started a bit of a popular backlash,

Here are some more videos.


'

Solidarity by dancing around the country.
Kansas City


California

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by Annee

 

Oh god, the horror! Someone might do the jig, on public property no less! When will this madness end? The insanity! What next?

Or bring their boom boxes and do street dancing.

Personally I don't care - - - but what someone does in a quiet respectful way - - the next person won't - - it will only escalate.

Then what? The Doo-wah parade?

When self-entitlement infringes on the rights of others - - it is pure selfishness. It has nothing to do with constitutional rights. Just selfishness.

reply to post by Annee


Well, if I could, I would be there right now, showing people how to ninja dance. If I wasn't so far north, I would be there. I disreguard invalid laws.

Pittsburgh


Illinois

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by Annee

 

Well, if I could, I would be there right now, showing people how to ninja dance. If I wasn't so far north, I would be there. I disreguard invalid laws.

As long as they don't affect you.