textfiles-politics/regexConspTest/supreme.xml

<xml><p>&lt;
"Supreme Court Dictatorship in America"
( by Don Bell, _The CDL Report_, Issue 129, June 1990 )</p>

<p> The conditioning of the people by the brainwashers has been beyond
comparison. The Socialist Nations of Western Europe and the Communist
Nations of Eastern Europe are merging, as planned, into one great Regional
World Government. The comparatively free and wealth United States of America
and the basketcase Union of Soviet Socialist Republics are converging
economically and otherwise through most favored trade, aid, educational,
social and financial alliances. And while the captive peoples of the
Communist countries are given the semblance of freedom and conditional
independence, the people of the United States are losing their freedom
and independence, their standard of living, their republican form of
government and their right to worship as their fathers worshipped. Most
recent example of the latter is less than a month old. But the moguls
that manage the media have kept the news off their satellites and out
of their daily and weekly columns to such an extent that few have heard
of the Judicial Tyranny committed by five un-elected rulers we call
Supreme Court Justices.</p>

<p> On Wednesday, April 18, 1990, the Supreme Court killed our United States
Constitution. The coup de grace was a simple but fatal action whose reaction
is yet to be felt. The Court decreed that federal judges have the authority
to order state and municipal elected officials to raise taxes, and to issue
injunctions preventing laws and State Constitutions from being used to do
anything about it. A Constitutional expert tells us that by this decree
the Supreme Court has abolished the representative form of government at
the state and local level and along with it nullified the US and State
Constitutions, "California's Proposition 13, supply-side economics,
federalism, the separation of powers and the national tax-limitation and
balanced-budget amendment movement." Quoted remark was by Paul Craig Roberts,
professor of political economy at the Center for Strategic &amp; International
Studies in Washington. He explains: "Elected legislators and the people
to whom they are accountable no longer have control over the power of the
purse, or the quantity and quality of public expenditures. The Court's
ruling ... transfers all meaningful governmental power to the federal
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
judiciary. It will take some time for judicial tyranny to become fully
^^^^^^^^^
manifest, but the process for establishing judicial rule is now in place.
Unless we revolt, we have lost our freedom." (Emphasis was added).</p>

<p> In common Americanese, this is what happened. A federal judge believed
that racial desegregation in the Kansas City, Mo. public school system was
not up to the standard set by federal judges. On that pretext he gave
orders for an extravagant school improvement plan that would cost an
estimated $260 million, to include high schools with air-conditioned
classrooms, an alarm system and 15 microcomputers, a 2000-square-foot
planetarium, greenhouses and vivariums, a 25-acre farm with an air-conditioned
meeting room accommodating 104 persons, a model United Nations wired for
language translations, broadcast-capable radio and television studios with
an editing and animation lab, a temperature-controlled art galley, movie
editing and screening rooms, dust free diesel mechanics rooms, 1875-square-foot elementary animals rooms for a zoo project, and swimming pools. Not
only that, but the federal judge ordered that magnet schools be built
throughout the school district at the additional estimated price of $200
million. This nearly half a billion dollars was not to be spent to
better educate students, just to make them more comfortable while
enjoying extra-curricular activities.</p>

<p> The school board, the State Legislature and the people who would have to
pay for the improvements, were shocked. They didn't have that kind of money
for such a purpose, and the federal judge had no right or authority to issue
such an order. They pointed out that the power of taxation is a power that
the federal judiciary does not possess. Only elected legislative bodies
have such power. So affirms the US Constitution, State Constitutions, and
common sense derived from "taxation without representation" cries that
helped start a revolutionary war. So, the federal judge demanding and the
state and local elected authorities refusing, the case went to the US
Supreme Court.</p>

<p> By a vote of 5-to-4 the Supreme Court ruled that federal judges do have
the power of the public purse; Constitutions, state laws, county and
municipal ordinances to the contrary notwithstanding. The five traitors,
mark them well, were Byron R. White, William J. Brennan, Thurgood Marshall,
Harry A. Blackmun and John Paul Stevens. The other four Justices were
powerfully and vocally opposed to the decree, but they were a minority.
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy was supported by Chief Justice William H. Rhenquist,
Sandra Day O'Connor and Antonin Scalia, in warning that "Today's casual
embrace of taxation imposed by the unelected, life-tenured federal
judiciary disregards fundamental precepts for the democratic control of
public institutions... [The Court's] assertion of judicial power in one of
the most sensitive of policy areas, that of involving taxation, begins a
process that over time could threaten fundamental alterations of the form
of government our Constitution embodies ... The power of taxation is one
that the federal judiciary does not possess." Quoting Judge Robert Bork
(remember him?) to back up his sentiments, Professor Roberts (op.cit.)
warned: "As a result of the court's ruling, anyone who continues to hold
municipal bonds or real property -- including their homes -- would be
foolish, because federal judges can now wreck the tax base of any state
or municipality and destroy real estate values by running up property taxes.
It is possible that the American people won't accept the usurpation of
power by the judiciary, which in effect turns our legislative bodies into
a cloak for judicial tyranny. However, so far they have accepted everything
else -- routine release of dangerous criminals, destruction of neighborhood
schools, busing of their children, racial quotas in university administrations
and work-places. We have become an effete people since the time our
ancestors condemned King George III 'for imposing taxes on us without
consent' and for taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable
Laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our Government."</p>

<p> There is one hope of defeating this judicial tyranny. The April 28th issue
of _Human Events_ which we have just received as we write this Report,
contains the following information:</p>

<p> "In the wake of the Supreme Court's astonishing 5-to-4 decision
that says federal judges may order local governments to increase
taxes... Sen. Gordon Humphrey (R-NH) thinks he can make headway
with S-34, the _Judicial_Taxation_Prohibition_Act_. The measure
which had 10 co-sponsors before the decision, would flatly
prevent judges from compelling state or local authorities to
impose new taxes or raise old ones... Humphrey's bill is now
the only vehicle available to block further judicial tax tyranny."</p>

<p> As serious as was this granting to un-elected federal judges the power to
tax, an equally important decision had previously been handed down by the
Court in regard to the Fourth Amendment's protection against search and
seizure. The Amendment states "The right of the people to be secure in
their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches
and seizures, shall not be violated..." But the present treasonous Supreme
Court disagreed. The excuse for making it easier for police to search and
seize people's private property and papers was probably the so-called drug
war. But the intent also made it easier to seize and confiscate guns.
Anti-gun legislation is not popular; so why not just stage a raid, seize
and confiscate whatever weapons citizens might have with which to defend
themselves? Weakening the Fourth also could nullify the Second Amendment.
So, in a case possibly designed for just such purpose, the Court "gave police
broad new (and unconstitutional) authority to conduct sweeping searches in
private homes," said an article appearing in the _Amarillo Daily News_ of
Marcy 2, 1990. The article said: "The Court decreed that police may search
throughout a house when they have a reasonable suspicion there is a hidden
danger to the arresting officers, even if the arresting authorities are
interested in knowing how this violation of the Fourth Amendment works in
actual practice, then consider the Franklin Sanders case. A small army
of various types of officers, all supposedly raiding in behalf of the IRS,
invaded the Sanders home, arrested and jailed Franklin and his wife,
isolated, tried unsuccessfully to intimidate and harass their children
for hours. Being Christian children they were made of stern stuff. They
confiscated all of Franklin's papers and computer ware. The officers also
arrested the Pastor and Elders of the Presbyterian Church where the Sanders
family worships. Undaunted and praising God for his ability to continue in
his calling, he's out on bail ($100000). This one-out-of-scores of
examples of how totalitarian tactics are being employed in the United States
should awaken everyone to the dangers facing Christian American families in
this "era of merging."</p>

<p> This Supreme Court's decision amending the Fourth's protection against
search and seizure is doubly dangerous because it tends to "legalize" a law
passed by the Oklahoma Legislature and signed by Governor Bellman. An
Oklahoma patriot, Margie M. Martin, of Texhoma, OK, has been fighting this
law, almost single handedly because the media, even the supposedly
conservative media, fail to give her the support she deserves. This is a
law (House Bill 1750) that makes every item owned by every Oklahoma citizen
taxable. It also provides that officers may enter a home and check and
record every item (including guns, of course) in the house. We haven't a
copy of this 96 page bill, but _The Christian World Report_ of May 16, 1989,
gave an excellent report which we copy.</p>

<p> "The citizens must provide a list of all their possessions
to the government. This list must include everything from
watches to farm tractors. Citizens who fail to give the
list are paid a visit by a government agent. If denied
entry to the citizen's residence, the government agent
later returns with a warrant, enters the home and compiles
the list. Is this country the Soviet Union or the Peoples
Republic of China? No, it is Oklahoma in 1991. In the
last legislative session, House Bill 1750 was passed by
the state legislature and signed into law by the governor...
The measure goes into effect January 1, 1991. The law reads:</p>

<p> "On or before January 1st of each year, the Oklahoma
Tax Commission shall prescribe for the use of tax
assessors, suitable bank forms for the listing and
assessing of all property, both real and personal.
These forms will then be furnished to the taxpayer
for listing all personal property. From January 1
through the end of February, the country assessor
must set up a temporary office in each town in the
county for a minimum of one day each to allow the
taxpayer to submit the list. The assessor must
then be present at the county seat from March 1
through March 15 to receive lists not turned in
at the temporary offices. Personal property, for
the purposes of ad valorem taxation, includes:
All goods, chattels and effects: -- All horses,
cattle, mules, asses, sheep, swine, goats and
other livestock; -- All household furniture,
including gold and silver plate, musical instruments,
watches and jewelry; -- All wagons, vehicles, or
carriages and all farm tractors, implements or
machinery; -- Personal, private, or professional
libraries; -- All other property having an actual,
constructive, or taxable status. Taxpayers failing
to provide the list will be visited by the assessor.
Prior to entering the premises of any taxpayer for
purposes of discovering household personal property
located within a commercial place of business, the
county assessor or deputy shall request permission
to enter the premises and shall state the reason for
the inspection. If access to the premises is denied,
the county assessor or deputy shall be required to
obtain a search warrant in order to conduct an
inspection of the interior of the premises. A
search warrant may be obtained upon a showing of
probable cause ... Property not previously listed,
or undervalued, will result in a penalty of up to
20% of the value of the property. At least once
every four years, the assessor must physically
inspect all real property in the county'."</p>

<p> "H.B. 1750 is a cleverly contrived piece of legislation that I believe was
put together by other than Oklahoma Legislators," said Margie Martin. We
agree. Who needs the registration of weapons if the authorities, under the
guise of property evaluation, can enter your home, inspect all of your
personal possessions, having a "reasonable suspicion" that you did not
declare certain items, like firearms? This is the case in Oklahoma, and
similar legislation is being introduced in other state legislatures. A
respected subscriber and correspondent, Dr. Harry Walkup of Worton, MD, wrote:</p>

<p> "We are living in troubled times in which the Keynesian/Fabian,
Socialist, Power-Centralizing Revolutionary Strategy is being
imposed on us, with its financial policies designed to progressively
destroy individual economic, political and cultural independence.
This can only be accompolished if our firearms are confiscated..."</p>

<p>Under firearms registration the complete confiscation of weapons would be
difficult and costly. But with the death of the Constitution and its Bill
of Rights, plus Judicial Tyranny and Totalitarian Legislation, weapons could
be confiscated from law-abiding citizens, making slaves of us all. When
situations change, plans may also change:</p>

<p> "And He said unto them (His disciples), When I sent you without
purse, scrip and shoes, lacked ye anything? And they said, Nothing.
Then He said unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him
take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let
him sell his garment, and buy one." ( Luke 22:3536 ).</p>

<p> -----------------------
from _Don Bell Reports_
-----------------------</p>

<p>|| A publication of the New Christian Crusade Church
|| P.O. Box 426
|| Metairie, LA 70004
|| James K. Warner, Editor</p>

</xml>