Sen. Paul Declares Victory for Americans’ Right to Trial by Jury, page 2

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 28 times

reply posted on 30-11-2012 @ 12:29 PM by muzzleflash

And I am talking criminal trials too, not just civil.

They filed corruption of minors part b on me, for home schooling and refusing their paperwork.

The US GOVT said I was CORRUPT!
And then denied me all rights including jury.

So I fled w my family away from the gestapo.

reply posted on 30-11-2012 @ 12:34 PM by muzzleflash

Rights hahaha.

I was denied all due process, told go to jail, let them inject my kids w vaccines I know are not safe, enroll my kids, file for custody, while I am locked up.

Yeah in six months maybe I could finally win my kids back, but only after these CPS pedofiles rape and poisoned my kids.

Hell ya I bought four bus tickets out of there.
They put a warrant for my arrest for evading and not producing my kids for internment.

reply posted on 30-11-2012 @ 12:40 PM by muzzleflash

The only reason I am free now is because I fled.
Staying would be 100% jail and no kids.

Now I am getting the FBI, if they will help, to file over a dozen felony charges agianst half a dozen individuals and their agencies.

They violated all of my rights over what?
Refusing to sign a joint custody enrollment document....

reply posted on 30-11-2012 @ 12:44 PM by muzzleflash

I read the actual state laws to them.

They flipped and said, " Those arent our laws, those are your laws", in reference to the Pennsylvania school code.

Then they proceed to intimidate and threaten to take my kids....

America isnt a free country, we are chattel obviously.

reply posted on 30-11-2012 @ 01:21 PM by DarthMuerte

It is unfortunate that Florida does not allow for the recall of our senators. Marco Rubio has shown himself an enemy of freedom and needs to be removed from office. How can any of our representatives vote against trial by jury for American citizens in America???

reply posted on 30-11-2012 @ 01:47 PM by eLPresidente

Originally posted by VictorVonDoom
I know I'm always looking for the dark cloud attatched to the silver lining, but when we have to depend on Congress to tell us which Constitutional rights we are allowed to have, I don't see that as a victory.

What you say is true but given the situation we're in...UNFORTUNATELY, it is a small victory. =/

And muzzleflash, feel sorry for you, stay strong and keep those disgusting government paws off your kids, get the hell outta here!

reply posted on 30-11-2012 @ 04:48 PM by onecraftydude

Originally posted by Ex_CT2
Thanks. Small victory indeed. The traitors sure don't have any fear of exposing themselves anymore. I guess they feel pretty confident there's nothing we can do to them....

edit on 11/29/2012 by Ex_CT2 because: (no reason given)

So far they have been correct. Why change a good thing?

They think: "Screw this ship, I will just jump on another one when this one sinks".

Useless money sponges.

Time to dry up their contributions with election reform.

Time to pass an amendment to limit types of money an elected official can receive.

We need to remove the incentive for slime-balls to run for political office to serve their corporate interests!

reply posted on 30-11-2012 @ 05:17 PM by six67seven

2 'nays' for texas reps - cornyn and hutchinson

"come on man!"

embarrassing.

reply posted on 30-11-2012 @ 09:12 PM by Camperguy

NAYS

Brown (R-MA

I voted for this piece of $hit!

Bill

reply posted on 30-11-2012 @ 11:17 PM by eLPresidente

Originally posted by Camperguy
NAYS

Brown (R-MA

I voted for this piece of $hit!

Bill

Haha...its ok man, theres so much out there to have to know, we can't know it all. Just make sure you don't fall for it again.

I didn't even vote for Elizabeth Emken over Feinstein's re-election since I knew she would just fall in line with the party and not do jack. Thats the exact principle for Republicans that refused to vote for Romney.

reply posted on 1-12-2012 @ 06:36 AM by damoney

Originally posted by six67seven
2 'nays' for texas reps - cornyn and hutchinson

"come on man!"

embarrassing.

Yeppers... I sent them both a nice little message explaining my disgust in their nay votes. You are right six... it is embarrassing to me and others residing here in Tejas...

reply posted on 1-12-2012 @ 08:26 PM by SymbolicLogic

Can you tell me where this bit is?

Because this amendment is HUGE...

Amendment no 3018

Seems like the video is a gross oversimplification of things, e.g.

"SEC. 561. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVAL OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS FOR PURPOSES OF EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE UNDER LAWS ADMINISTERED BY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AND SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.

(a) Automatic Approval by Secretary of Veterans Affairs of Degree Programs Approved by Secretary of Education.--Clause (i) of section 3672(b)(2)(A) of title 38, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

``(i) A course that is described by section 3675(a) of this title.''.

(b) Approval by Secretary of Veterans Affairs of Non-Degree Programs Approved by Secretary of Education.--

...
....
...... yadda yadda

(D) in the heading for section 3675, by striking ``
accredited courses'' and inserting ``courses approved by Secretary of Education''.
"

Seems like you can only take accredited courses for a degree if the secretary of education approves that degree.

Also, what do you make of this?

"TITLE XI--CIVILIAN PERSONNEL MATTERS

SEC. 1101. AUTHORITY FOR TRANSPORTATION OF FAMILY HOUSEHOLD PETS OF CIVILIAN PERSONNEL DURING EVACUATION OF NON-ESSENTIAL PERSONNEL.

Section 5725 of title 5, United States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(2), by inserting `and family household pets,' after `personal effects,'; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
`(c)(1) Authority under subsection (a) to transport family household pets of an employee includes authority for shipment and the payment of quarantine costs, if any.
`(2) An employee for whom transportation of family household pets is authorized under subsection (a) may be paid reimbursement or a monetary allowance if other commercial transportation means have been used.
`(3) The provision of transportation of family household pets for an employee of the Department of Defense under subsection (a) and the payment of reimbursement under paragraph (2) shall be subject to the same terms and conditions as apply under subsection 406(b)(1)(H)(iii) of title 37 with respect to family household pets of members of the uniformed services, including limitations on the types, size, and number of pets for which transportation may be provided or reimbursement paid.'.

SEC. 1102. EXPANSION OF EXPERIMENTAL PERSONNEL PROGRAM FOR SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL PERSONNEL AT THE DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY.

(a) Expansion- Section 1101(b)(1)(A) of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (5 U.S.C. 3104 note) is amended by striking `40' and inserting `60'.
(b) Construction- The amendment made by subsection (a) shall not be construed as affecting any applicable authorization or delimitation of the numbers of personnel that may be employed at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency."

Experimental personnel for DARPA being added in with household pets?! Lol, now that seems about right.

edit on 1-12-2012 by SymbolicLogic because: Critical reading

reply posted on 2-12-2012 @ 03:52 PM by eLPresidente

reply to post by SymbolicLogic

I think I posted the passage in page 1, check it out.

Pages: << 1 2 >> ^^TOP^^