Tag Archives: first amendment

Which is worse, bulldozing a graveyard, or building a cultural center?

News or Absurdity; quick, which is it?

Item One: Authorities in Jerusalem bulldozed an Arabic graveyard to make way for a Museum of Tolerance.

Item Two: There is national consternation in the USA that a New York City muslim group wants to build a mosque and cultural center two blocks from ground zero, which some are calling sacred ground.

Item Three: Six hundred retired NFL football players are suing a video game outfit because their football game players resemble them.

Item Four: Nick Merrill, and New York city ISP operator finally broke his silence after being “gagged” by an FBI gag order since 2005. In 2005 he was served with a “National Security Letter” which required him to provide FBI agents with the searches and data on his subscribers, yet with no warrant from a judge provided. What is wrong with that? you say.

It is a violation of the first, fourth and fifth amendments of the Bill of Rights, I say.

The constitution and the Bill of Right is on this site. Can you state, not with names but in simple constitutional language what rights of Nick Merrill were violated? (This is described as the practice of citizenship; and practice makes pretty good.)

I have not been able to comment on the above absurdity…… which is actual news, for the last two days. I cannot find a clown suit loud enough, or a mouth pucker round enough. Please comment and help me out of my dumbfound.

______David

A subtext to this entire site is that for a constitutional country whose document begins with We the People, the People (you) must know the law. It is my lament that The King was replaced by The People, and the People have deferred to the Lawyers. You can state your rights to anyone: lawyer, policeman or judge, and that person must obey. The constitution has replaced the king with You, citizen. The President presides over the Congress (which means ‘to walk upright together’) He presides, he is not king. He took an Oath to preserve and protect the constitution. Only if he forsakes his oath and congress does not obey the ‘king clause’ (Article I, section 8, clause 11) is he then king. I ask: where are we, relative to the king, when the president has assassination powers anywhere on the globe with drones, jackals, and a black budget?

We now have a President who is also a Constitutional scholar. Can we as a People hold him to his scholarship?