Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Holder on Banning Home Schooling


  • Please log in to reply
169 replies to this topic

#136    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 22 February 2013 - 08:18 PM

George Washington set a wonderful example of hypocrisy as our first President. Thank the Gods for John Adams.

http://www.ttb.gov/p...rebellion.shtml


#137    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 22 February 2013 - 08:28 PM

View PostTiggs, on 22 February 2013 - 08:12 PM, said:

Other than they're totally legally unrelated and, historically, one has not required the other?



So - you want to ban all future immigrants to the United States and presumably revoke anyone's permanent residency or citizenship granted during the last decade and deport us?

All 24 million of us (including myself)? That's your plan, is it?

Newsflash. Terrorists are not limited by their nationality, regardless of how much that might impact on your convenience to identify them.



The NDAA doesn't grant the power to torture or kill anyone.

Again - the Obama administration has never asked Congress for the necessary power to torture American citizens, nor has it been granted it.




Last time I checked, freedom of the press was still guaranteed, regardless of whether or not something was deemed by the Government to be a national security issue.

So. Do you have any instances, or not?




The President is impeachable. However, you'll need to find an actual legitimate reason to do so. Enforcing a no-fly zone which the US Senate had previously and unanimously passed a resolution asking the UN to create - probably not so much.




Article 1, Section 8, clause 18. That, and over two hundred years of legal case history, starting with George Washington.

Sir, the Obama administration has clearly demonstrated that it embraces completely the notion of The Unitary Executive, as defined and exemplified by the Bush Administration.  Within the powers usurped by that specious notion is what John Yoo and his liked to call Enhanced Interrogation Techniques.

Thus, Bush did not ask Congress IF it could practice such techniques, it just did as it pleased, in accordance with the Unitary Executive.

So, if Obama through NDAA can hold somebody in violation of Habeas, they can damn well practice such techniques.  That is part of the UE mantra.  The Executive branch don't need no stinkin' congressional OR judicial oversight.  We live in the era of the enlightened and beneficent Unitary Executive. :yes:


#138    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 10,170 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 22 February 2013 - 08:34 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 22 February 2013 - 08:28 PM, said:

Sir,

At which point - I lost all interest in reading the rest of your post.


#139    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 23 February 2013 - 03:48 PM

Yes, I see.


#140    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 23 February 2013 - 04:38 PM

Sorry Tiggs but I gotta call you out on that one. Thats a bit closed minded for a discussion forum. Like has been brought up to myself even by other mods we are here to discuss which includes listening. If you had nothing to say regarding a post I imagine nothing could have been said.

But thank you Im going to consider the modicum of decorum when it comes to responding to posters we may not agree with or dislike and use that to carry forward with.


#141    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 10,170 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 23 February 2013 - 05:14 PM

View PostAsteroidX, on 23 February 2013 - 04:38 PM, said:

Sorry Tiggs but I gotta call you out on that one. Thats a bit closed minded for a discussion forum. Like has been brought up to myself even by other mods we are here to discuss which includes listening.

I think that the usage of "sir" as a honorific in this day and age - and in particular - in this place - is obviously mocking.

I'm rather tired of being constantly flamebaited by those who disagree with me, and I completely reserve the right to end discussion with anyone not willing to hold a civil conversation.


Quote

If you had nothing to say regarding a post I imagine nothing could have been said.

In a civil discussion, I'd have pointed to Obama's second executive order - the one that specifically gave instructions to override any prior authorization of enhanced interrogation techniques issued by the Bush Administration.

It should be blindingly obvious to everyone that just because another president authorized those techniques in the past is no indication that every president following after him will do the same.


#142    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 23 February 2013 - 05:18 PM

Quote

I'm rather tired of being constantly flamebaited by those who disagree with me, and I completely reserve the right to end discussion with anyone not willing to hold a civil conversation.

I absolutely agree and have done so myself for the sake of remaining civil.


#143    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Ntwadumela- He who greets with fire

  • Member
  • 12,644 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:in the depths of my mind

Posted 23 February 2013 - 05:37 PM

View PostTiggs, on 22 February 2013 - 08:12 PM, said:

Other than they're totally legally unrelated and, historically, one has not required the other?

Since you took my comment out of context, I would have to ask just how the US could declare martial law without the millitary?


Quote


So - you want to ban all future immigrants to the United States and presumably revoke anyone's permanent residency or citizenship granted during the last decade and deport us?

All 24 million of us (including myself)? That's your plan, is it?

Newsflash. Terrorists are not limited by their nationality, regardless of how much that might impact on your convenience to identify them.

If we are going to do things your way where immigrants become more important then constitutional rights, then yes without hesitation.


Quote


The NDAA doesn't grant the power to torture or kill anyone.

Again - the Obama administration has never asked Congress for the necessary power to torture American citizens, nor has it been granted it.



They never asked permition to torcher or kill anyone, yet they still do it. Even to Americans



Quote


Last time I checked, freedom of the press was still guaranteed, regardless of whether or not something was deemed by the Government to be a national security issue.

So. Do you have any instances, or not?
What good is freedom of the press, when no one bothers to inform them? You really think 0bama is going to run to the press every time he illegaly detains someone?

Quote



The President is impeachable. However, you'll need to find an actual legitimate reason to do so. Enforcing a no-fly zone which the US Senate had previously and unanimously passed a resolution asking the UN to create - probably not so much.

How about aiding known terrorist? Oh since you brought it up, when did bombing Lybia into oblivion equal "Enforcing a no-fly zone"?



Quote


Article 1, Section 8, clause 18. That, and over two hundred years of legal case history, starting with George Washington.

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Again, show me where in the constitution that this government can ban homeschooling? This only says laws can be created with in the constitutions confines.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#144    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 10,170 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 23 February 2013 - 07:05 PM

View Postpreacherman76, on 23 February 2013 - 05:37 PM, said:

Since you took my comment out of context, I would have to ask just how the US could declare martial law without the millitary?
We're apparently having two completely different conversations. I have no idea what position you're trying to reach, but the initial starting point of the discussion was the suspension of Habeas Corpus, which doesn't require Martial Law to implement. Quite why you think that this a conversation about Martial law, I have no idea.


Quote

If we are going to do things your way where immigrants become more important then constitutional rights, then yes without hesitation.

Again. Terrorists are not restricted by Nationality. Anwar al-Awlaki, for example, was a natural-born US citizen.

Given that, perhaps you can tell us exactly how far back and over how many generations those deportations of immigrants should go. Because, personally, I think if you're going to deport immigrants to the United States, then going back to the 15th Century should roughly cover it.


Quote

They never asked permition to torcher or kill anyone, yet they still do it. Even to Americans

Then evidence, please, that Americans are being currently tortured under the Obama administration.


Quote

What good is freedom of the press, when no one bothers to inform them? You really think 0bama is going to run to the press every time he illegaly detains someone?

The press isn't just drip fed information directly from the Government. It has many investigative journalists, all of whom would love to land a story such as this.

Also - spelling the President's name with a zero is deliberately flame baiting. Please desist.


Quote

How about aiding known terrorist?

Libya's current Prime Minister is Ali Zeidan, who was formerly a human rights lawyer from Geneva.

Obviously, feel free to provide evidence of the acts of terrorism that he's been accused of.


Quote

Oh since you brought it up, when did bombing Lybia into oblivion equal "Enforcing a no-fly zone"?

When those bombs are aimed at their air defenses.


Quote

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Again, show me where in the constitution that this government can ban homeschooling? This only says laws can be created with in the constitutions confines.

The answer is still that clause.

If, after reading it, you're still unable to understand that that clause allows the government to make all necessary and proper laws that allows them to execute their Powers - the basis for the majority of legislation that's passed through Congress, ever - then I really don't know what else to tell you.


#145    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 23 February 2013 - 09:33 PM

Tiggs

If I may, have you ever considered the possibility that on certain constitutional or governmental questions you might be wrong?  Like any other man?

For example, perhaps suggesting that Executive Orders are something akin to the Word Of God?  Or that Executive Orders supercede Public Laws in authority?  Or that the notion of Unitary or Supreme Executive is bogus?

It seems to me your position on this is remarkably close to Nixon's notorious statement that when the President does it, it's legal.


#146    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 10,170 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 23 February 2013 - 10:23 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 23 February 2013 - 09:33 PM, said:

If I may, have you ever considered the possibility that on certain constitutional or governmental questions you might be wrong?  Like any other man?
Sure. All the time and twice on Tuesdays.


Quote

For example, perhaps suggesting that Executive Orders are something akin to the Word Of God? Or that Executive Orders supercede Public Laws in authority?  Or that the notion of Unitary or Supreme Executive is bogus?
I don't recall making any of those claims within this thread. Perhaps you'd like to show me where you think that I have.


Quote

It seems to me your position on this is remarkably close to Nixon's notorious statement that when the President does it, it's legal.
It seems to me that the only time I've mentioned an executive order within this thread is to refute your claim that the Obama administration is currently practicing torture.


#147    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Ntwadumela- He who greets with fire

  • Member
  • 12,644 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:in the depths of my mind

Posted 24 February 2013 - 01:31 PM

View PostTiggs, on 23 February 2013 - 07:05 PM, said:

We're apparently having two completely different conversations. I have no idea what position you're trying to reach, but the initial starting point of the discussion was the suspension of Habeas Corpus, which doesn't require Martial Law to implement. Quite why you think that this a conversation about Martial law, I have no idea.

Sure ya do. Im simply saying the two go hand in hand. Again, how can you have martial law without military intervention?




Quote


Again. Terrorists are not restricted by Nationality. Anwar al-Awlaki, for example, was a natural-born US citizen.

Given that, perhaps you can tell us exactly how far back and over how many generations those deportations of immigrants should go. Because, personally, I think if you're going to deport immigrants to the United States, then going back to the 15th Century should roughly cover it.

Great example. AaA wasnt even accused of anything spacific. The white house refused to bring any evidence against the man at all. And cause he was deprived due process, he lost his life and his sons life and no one seems to know why. The press tryed to ask, but were stonewalled. Even if he was quilty of something, why abandon the court system? I have no problem with immigrants staying. Im just not willing to give up constitutional rights for it. Its sad that you think we cant have both.




Quote


Then evidence, please, that Americans are being currently tortured under the Obama administration.


Do you have evidence AaA deserved to be murdered? Or are you holding me to a different standard?



Quote

The press isn't just drip fed information directly from the Government. It has many investigative journalists, all of whom would love to land a story such as this.

Also - spelling the President's name with a zero is deliberately flame baiting. Please desist.


LOL, yea government could never keep anything hidden from the press. What world are you living in? Heck the NYT just did a article asking if the government was going to start killing reporters with drones. Ive been spelling 0bamas name with a 0 since I first started talking about him. Cause its directly how I feel regarding his administration. Im not saying you have to like it, but it is what it is.



Quote


Libya's current Prime Minister is Ali Zeidan, who was formerly a human rights lawyer from Geneva.

Obviously, feel free to provide evidence of the acts of terrorism that he's been accused of.


Seriously? AlCIAda flies thier flag over libya's buildings, search it. It isnt hard to find. Its been openly admitted the rebels consisted of many from AlCIAda. Who we armed and trained. The same people are in Syria right now.


Quote


When those bombs are aimed at their air defenses.

What about the bombs that leveled entire city blocks? Cause those pics are real easy to find too.




Quote


The answer is still that clause.

If, after reading it, you're still unable to understand that that clause allows the government to make all necessary and proper laws that allows them to execute their Powers - the basis for the majority of legislation that's passed through Congress, ever - then I really don't know what else to tell you.

Just tell me how this claws, which just says laws can be made within the confines of the constitution can be construde to mean they can take away the right to home school? Cause all this claws does it point back at the constitution and says the only laws that can be made are with in its confines. So again, which part of the constitution gives the federal government the power to ban home schooling?

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#148    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 24 February 2013 - 02:57 PM

View PostTiggs, on 23 February 2013 - 10:23 PM, said:

Sure. All the time and twice on Tuesdays.



I don't recall making any of those claims within this thread. Perhaps you'd like to show me where you think that I have.



It seems to me that the only time I've mentioned an executive order within this thread is to refute your claim that the Obama administration is currently practicing torture.

Thank you for making my point.  It is what your posts suggest, what I infer from them (perhaps incorrectly) that I was talking about.

For example, no matter the existence of any given EO that Obama has signed regarding torture, IN FACT his administration practiced torture against Bradley Manning as he was being held in pre trial confinement in violation of UCMJ at Quantico.

So, no matter the existence of the EO, it is the reality of the situation, the actions of the government, that really matter, and in this case the actions of the C-in-C in military matters.  A lofty and noble sounding EO means nothing if it is violated by the same office that wrote it.

And to reiterate, EO is not superior in authority to PL, assuming the PL is valid.


#149    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 10,170 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 24 February 2013 - 06:23 PM

View Postpreacherman76, on 24 February 2013 - 01:31 PM, said:

Sure ya do. Im simply saying the two go hand in hand.
I'm simply saying that the two don't go hand in hand. Neither legally or historically.  


Quote

Great example. AaA wasnt even accused of anything spacific. The white house refused to bring any evidence against the man at all. And cause he was deprived due process, he lost his life and his sons life and no one seems to know why. The press tryed to ask, but were stonewalled.
From the article I linked:

A senior administration official in Washington said the killing of Mr. Awlaki was important because he had become one of Al Qaeda’s top operational planners as well as its greatest English-language propagandist.


Quote

Even if he was quilty of something, why abandon the court system?
Because it was otherwise impossible to capture him to bring him to trial.


Quote

I have no problem with immigrants staying. Im just not willing to give up constitutional rights for it. Its sad that you think we cant have both.
The suspension of Habeas Corpus has nothing to do with allowing immigrants to live in the United States. It has everything to do with the US being subject to terrorist attacks.


Quote

Do you have evidence AaA deserved to be murdered? Or are you holding me to a different standard?
From his Wikipedia article:


In March 2010, a tape featuring al-Aulaqi was released in which he urged Muslims residing in the U.S. to attack their country of residence. In the video, he stated:
To the Muslims in America, I have this to say: How can your conscience allow you to live in peaceful coexistence with a nation that is responsible for the tyranny and crimes committed against your own brothers and sisters? I eventually came to the conclusion that jihad (holy struggle) against America is binding upon myself just as it is binding upon every other able Muslim.


Not to mention that whole buying plane tickets for the 9/11 hijackers thing, too.


Quote

LOL, yea government could never keep anything hidden from the press. What world are you living in? Heck the NYT just did a article asking if the government was going to start killing reporters with drones.
And yet, the press are in possession of over 500 of the names of the Guantanmo detainees.


Quote

Ive been spelling 0bamas name with a 0 since I first started talking about him. Cause its directly how I feel regarding his administration. Im not saying you have to like it, but it is what it is.
Please read the PM I'll be sending you shortly.


Quote

Seriously? AlCIAda flies thier flag over libya's buildings, search it. It isnt hard to find. Its been openly admitted the rebels consisted of many from AlCIAda. Who we armed and trained. The same people are in Syria right now.

I found a single instance, back in 2011, of a flag with the Shahada over the Benghazi courthouse. Here's Mother Jone's take on it.


Quote

What about the bombs that leveled entire city blocks? Cause those pics are real easy to find too.
Now all you have to prove is that it was caused by an American bomb. As opposed to, say, a bomb from any other member of the UN coalition, such as the French.


Quote

Just tell me how this claws, which just says laws can be made within the confines of the constitution can be construde to mean they can take away the right to home school? Cause all this claws does it point back at the constitution and says the only laws that can be made are with in its confines. So again, which part of the constitution gives the federal government the power to ban home schooling?
As far as the courts are concerned, the answer is, and will continue to be, that clause.

To quote Madison "No axiom is more clearly established in law or in reason than wherever the end is required, the means are authorized; wherever a general power to do a thing is given, every particular power for doing it is included."

Edited by Tiggs, 24 February 2013 - 06:23 PM.


#150    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 10,170 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 24 February 2013 - 06:51 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 24 February 2013 - 02:57 PM, said:

Thank you for making my point.  It is what your posts suggest, what I infer from them (perhaps incorrectly) that I was talking about.

For example, no matter the existence of any given EO that Obama has signed regarding torture, IN FACT his administration practiced torture against Bradley Manning as he was being held in pre trial confinement in violation of UCMJ at Quantico.

Interestingly, I wasn't aware of the Manning allegations prior to your post.


Quote

So, no matter the existence of the EO, it is the reality of the situation, the actions of the government, that really matter, and in this case the actions of the C-in-C in military matters.  A lofty and noble sounding EO means nothing if it is violated by the same office that wrote it.

If it's purposefully violated - if it's legislation with a wink, then sure.

What evidence do you have that that's the case, as opposed to, say, an overzealous military?



Quote

And to reiterate, EO is not superior in authority to PL, assuming the PL is valid.

I've never claimed otherwise. As far as I'm concerned, EO's are constrained by PL.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users