RSS

Category Archives: Unalienable Rights

FBI & State Police Attempt a HIT on Jeff Weinhaus


Both of the following videos are extraordinary and appalling.  They record an A.D. 2010 shooting of Jeff Weinhaus by FBI and police officers.

First, the video is appalling in that law enforcement lured Weinhaus to a meeting and then tried to murder him for no apparent reason other than willful failure to kiss ass.

Second, it’s appalling that if government shoots a black man, all hell breaks loose, but when government shoots a white man, nobody seems to care.

Third, it’s appalling that this video was posted on February 14th, A.D. 2016, and, so far (after nearly two months on YouTube), it’s reportedly received only 36,063 views.  Maybe that’s because the shooting took place almost six years ago.  Still, this video should go viral.  Public indifference to this shooting is scarier than the shooting itself.

One of the best things you can do to prevent future murders or attempted murders by government thugs is to send a link to this video to everyone on your email list.  If we can make the video go viral, we can slow the government down.  If we ignore the video and don’t “push it” to others, our indifference will encourage government to shoot even more Americans.

If you don’t care enough to protest when others get shot, don’t expect others to protest when you get shot.

video  00:04:07

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn54XGqYN8Y&feature=youtu.be

Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements
 

Tags: , , ,

Adask on Sovereignty II


"Prof. Adask" [courtesy Google Images]

“Prof. Adask”
[courtesy Google Images]

In my recent video presentation “Adask on Sovereignty,” I argued that the Founding Fathers created a nation where each of the people were deemed to be an individual “sovereign”.  That individual sovereignty was achieved by virtue of having received our “unalienable Rights” from God—as declared in “Declaration of Independence”. 

I supported this argument, with text from the A.D. 1793 Supreme Court case of Chisholm vs. Georgia which declared in part that after the American Revolution, the American people became “sovereigns [plural] without subjects”.

If my argument is right, We the People are individual sovereigns and the government is our public servant. If my argument is wrong, We the People are subjects and the government is our master.  The argument is important.

In the aftermath of the first article (“Adask on Sovereignty”) a number of readers disputed my argument based on the fact that the Supreme Court also described the people are “joint tenants in the sovereignty”.  According to these readers the definition(s) of “joint tenants” prove that the Supreme Court did not declare the people to be individual “sovereigns” (plural) but instead confided all sovereignty to a single “collective” of which we are each a member, but only as subjects—never as sovereigns.

Read the rest of this entry »

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Judge Andrew Napolitano: Reflections on the Loss of Liberty


This is a brilliant speech.  Not merely entertaining, but educational.  Absolutely worth your time.  Worth your study. At one point in the Q&A, Napolitano admits that the States have become “administrative districts” of the federal government.

video     00:51:52

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Mini-Seminar by Adask


Adask at Hells Canyon

Adask at the “gates” of Hell’s Canyon, Idaho

I was recently interviewed by Stephen Roberts on “Cancel the Cabal”.  During that video interview, I explored the concepts of sovereignty and the “sovereignty movement,” as well as potential applications of the 1st, 2nd and 9th Amendments, and “MOOA” (“man or other animals”) in relation to drug laws, the war on drugs, police state, big pharma, and American medicine.

The interview lasts almost two hours.  It’s too long to be an “interview,” but it might reasonably be described as a “mini-seminar”.  Most won’t have the time to listen to the entire presentation.  But it’s actually a pretty good general introduction to a number of concepts, so, if you’re inclined to listen, here’s the link:

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Air-Effing-Born!


Summer's End. Lexington Green, 11 September 20...

Minute Man National Historical Park. Sculpture : “Minuteman” by sculptor Henry Hudson Kitson (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The father of child who survived the Sandy Hook school attack speaks to state legislators on the right to keep and bear arms.

This father speaks on behalf of his right to protect his daughter from criminals entering his home.  He’s determined, articulate, witty, knowledgeable and courageous.

He doesn’t exactly have the heroic look of the Minute Man sculpture, but he certainly has the heart.

I’m proud of him.

video  00:02:54

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAYLr6u2FyY&feature=player_embedded

 
4 Comments

Posted by on February 5, 2013 in 2nd Amendment, Unalienable Rights, Video

 

Tags: , , , ,

Is the “Declaration of Independence” a Treaty?


English: This is a high-resolution image of th...

This is a high-resolution image of the United States Declaration of Independence (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I seem to deal with this problem every 6 to 12 months.  Someone reads what we’ve come to call the “Declaration of Independence” and sees that its proper name is “The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America” and leaps to the conclusion the proper name for this country must be the “united States of America”.

Back in the 1990s, when I first saw the proper name for our “Declaration of Independence,” I leaped to the very same conclusion.  I thought, “Damn!  The proper name for this country must be ‘united States of America’!!!  No wonder we’re having so much trouble in court!  We don’t even understand the proper name of our own country!!!

But over time, I realized that my conclusion (the proper name for this country is the “united States of America”) was mistaken.  That conclusion is a “rookie” mistake and I suppose that all of us who study our country’s political and legal foundation have already made it or are destined to make it at some point in the future.

•  For example, here’s a recent comment on my blog:

“I am surprised you did not pick up on or comment on the uncapitalized “u” in the word “united” in the original document and correctly reproduced in the early printings of the Declaration.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Us_declaration_independence.jpg”>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Us_declaration_independence.jpg”

Given that I’ve addressed this issue in the past on radio shows, or in my former magazine (“AntiShyster”), and probably on this blog, I was a little bit surprised that I felt “compelled” to write a reply.

Read the rest of this entry »

 

Tags: , , , , ,

A 9th Amendment Road Back to Unalienable Rights


English: Detail of Preamble to Constitution of...

Detail of Preamble to Constitution of the United States (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

“Don” is one of this blog’s regular most prolific “commentators”.  He recently posted the following comment:

 

“THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION
“ARTICLE 1. BILL OF RIGHTS

“Sec. 1.”FREEDOM  AND SOVEREIGNTY OF STATE. Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the Constitution of the United States. . . .”

“FREEDOM AND SOVEREIGNTY OF STATE>>>>>subject only to the Constitution of the United States. <<<<< This should make a light come on, especially when you consider IF it said: “subject only to the Constitution of the United States as unlawfully amended.”

  Read the rest of this entry »

 
42 Comments

Posted by on November 11, 2012 in 9th Amendment, Unalienable Rights

 

Tags: ,