[2dogs]

More and more you gotta ask: What Constitution?:rolleyes:



http://www.etherzone.com/2003/devl082503.shtml

JUDICIAL TYRANNY
HAS THE BUREAUCRACY GONE MAD?

By: Paula Devlin

It’s happened again. Another low-impact property owner put in jail by an unconstitutional bureaucracy for tenaciously holding on to his property rights while the government tries to drive him off his land.

Here in the wild West, folks still take private property rights seriously. But it’s hard since vast tracts of land in the West are owned and managed by the Federal Government. Rural residents have been fighting our greedy government for years.




Luther W. Klump is cooling his heels in an Arizona prison for contempt of court (Judge John M. Roll’s in Tucson) for "failing to follow the Court’s order prohibiting the unauthorized grazing of cattle on government allotments". Never mind that his family was grazing cattle there long before the BLM collectivists arrived on the scene. Never mind the cattle have not caused damage to the BLM land. Never mind the taxpayers have never been allowed to vote on these cultic ideologies legitimized through the bureaucracy. Judge Roll ruled on administrative law technicalities and stuck poor Luther Klump in prison for trying to stand up for his Constitutional rights.

Let’s get one thing straight: the Constitution does not allow the Federal Government to own land for anything other than postal and military (forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings) purposes (Article I, vii, 17). There has never been a Constitutional Amendment changing this. Ergo: any land owned and managed by the Federal Government for any purposes other than those stated is unconstitutional.

The Fourth Amendment is another right Judge Roll blew off. It guarantees against unreasonable searches and seizures. If the seizure of Klump’s bank account and cattle for grazing on land that has been utilized by his family for almost a century is not unreasonable, syllogistic reasoning is insanity. Luther’s fines are mounting at $5000 per day and he has been in prison since April 21, 2003. No doubt the Feds will feel compelled take his lands and annex it to the 44.3% of Arizona it already owns since he will never be able to meet the demands of the BLM extortionists.

Our politicians appear to have not read the Constitution they are sworn to uphold. They constantly pass laws inimical to its tenets. The judiciary has been taken over by nitwits. Like their politician cousins, they never read the Constitution or had the truth educated out of them in law school. Our bureaucrats are worse.

And where is the watchdog press? Sucking on blue sapphire martinis in the shadow of the Capitol, making up murder and mayhem stories to amuse the proletariat? While the media exercises its right of free speech and chips away at the ideals of the Founding Fathers, the government is sneaking around as though collectivism had replaced the common good.

If you dare connect the dots, you’ll see that the Fifth Column has taken over the Fourth Estate.

Mr. Klump, like many ranchers, is not a rich man. Due to the extensive drought, cattlemen have seen an upward movement in beef prices. This is the first positive movement for them in thirty years. If a rancher has been able to keep a herd grazing, the four major meat packers were willing to pay them a bit more for it. But Mr. Klump won’t see any of it since he can’t herd cattle from prison.

How is it that good, red-blooded American cattle can’t graze on American land in Arizona, but illegals can travel through the same land, steal from the ranchers, cut fences, trash the land and be rewarded with free medical care, drivers licenses and voting privileges?

Why aren’t the illegals being charged $5,000 per day for violating our national sovereignty? Why are these criminals allowed to graze on the taxpayer but honest cattle are treated like criminals?

Has the bureaucracy gone mad? Give illegals and criminals everything but deprive a man, attempting to make an honest living, of his livelihood? Why is the land no available for people to cultivate, mine, forest or use?

If illegals were pursued with the same tenacity as Mr. Klump, the invasion would rapidly cease. If the federal lands were turned over to the states to whom they belong, this country would be a far better place for humans.

[JohnBT]

"...failing to follow the Court’s order..."

He can't say they didn't warn him.

Good luck to him on the appeal(s).

John

P.S. - That's got to be one of the worst pieces of journalism I've ever seen. Talk about a one-sided hack job.

[suijurisfreeman]

>more and more you gotta ask, what Constitution?:rolleyes: <

I think that you're referring to the Constitution that "We the People" have failed both individually and collectively to enforce elected public officials to obey! It is not in the nature of 'public servants' to limit those powers that are available to them, or should I say powers that were never lawfully delegated to them! Each and every one of "We the People" form one link in that chain called the Constitution that is supposed to bind our government to 'the rule of law'! It's like what I posted in "The First Wrong was Ours" thread, we have all stood by like timid sheep while our government has run rampent over our inherent and inalienable rights, some of us actually cheering while our newly crowned king 'took out radicals' like Luther W. Klump! It's time we all stood up like true Patriots and took back our sovereign power, it's time to hold elected public official's feet to the fire of our Bill of Rights and Constitution!

JohnBT, this is not the whole story, I read a much more complete picture on another forum, I'll try to find it and post the website!

[suijurisfreeman]

Back in 2002 I had the Monroe County Fiscal Court to deal with that had gone mad! I bought 20 acres in Monroe County, Kentucky 4 years ago, my property is located off a small chip-sealed dead-end road. Since I bought that property, even before I actually moved there, I kept all the trees and brush cut back so that nothing was hanging over onto the road, so there never was a problem for the county road crew to mess with. One night late in December of 2001, my youngest son and I turned onto Richard Hammer Road and immediately I could see that the road crew had bushhogged the sides of the road. :cuss: was everywhere on the road! By the time we got down to our property I could see that they had also butchered trees on my property, now understand I had asked the summer mowing crews to make sure that since I had always kept the trees and brush cut back not to bushhog my side of the road!
Well needless to say I was livid :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: , like I said I was livid!

Got to take my daughter to the ER again, will finish this later.

[2dogs]

That's got to be one of the worst pieces of journalism I've ever seen. Talk about a one-sided hack job.

I think it falls under the category of "editorial" since it is, as you said, a tad one sided.;)

However, I did read some other articles regarding this and even the "fair and balanced" seem to agree this guy is getting the shaft. Seems to be happening more frequently.

[Graystar]

:rolleyes:

I can't comment on the poor rancher's problems...he may certainly been treated unfairly...I don't know.

However, your interpretation of the Constitution is not correct. The section you pointed to conveys a power to congress. It says "you can do this." There is *no* language in there that says "but you can't do that." That is, the section delegates a power, and leaves the door open for similar powers to be granted to Congress.

There's another thing you need to understand. Although the Constitution is the primary source of delegated powers to Congress, it isn't the only source. Congress has many more powers delegated to it through the US Code. And there is a good deal of law in the US Code about the acquisition of lands.

[tyme]

(Graystar) There's another thing you need to understand. Although the Constitution is the primary source of delegated powers to Congress, it isn't the only source. Congress has many more powers delegated to it through the US Code. And there is a good deal of law in the US Code about the acquisition of lands.
Are we talking about the same country? U.S. Code is (supposed to be) written based on powers granted to Congress by the Constitution. You think Congress adds the phrase "in or affecting interstate commerce" to most of its legislation for fun?

You think some of the founders were just talking BS when they wrote about how the BoR was unnecessary because the Government had not been granted any powers that could infringe on basic liberties?

[Graystar]

Are we talking about the same country? Yes we are. Before the AWB of 1994, The feds couldn't put you in jail for possessing a magazine that holds more than ten rounds. After Sept 1994, they could. So, obviously, the power of the Federal government has expanded without a Constitutional amendment.

[suijurisfreeman]

Anyway back to the Monroe County Fiscal Court having gone mad! I ended up waiting for a week before I went down to talk to the Monroe County Highway Department, have to cool off! :cuss: I went in and asked to speak with whoever handled complaints, told him what the problem was, he called the local Magistrate, Maxie Harlan. When Magistrate Harlan arrived, I again explained my problem, he told me that that road right-of-way was owned by Monroe County and they would do whatever they damn well pleased with it and if I didn't like it I should get a lawyer and sue the county, that's what they had a county attorney for! I assured Magistrate Harlan that I didn't need the help of an attorney, that I did all my own legal work and I would be down at the Monroe County courthouse fist thing the next morning and we would see who owned what! Well I spent 5 hours that day going from office to office and all I did was get the run around! The first thing that I wanted to check was the Kentucky Statutes to see what the law was regarding road right-of-ways, found that and copied it, took it down to the Judge Executive's Office and asked to see where the road righ-of-way deeds were kept as required by law. You see in Kentucky either the State or the county are supposed to own the road right-of-way , however by law they must lawfully acquire it through one of three ways, (1) the property owner can give it to them (2) They are required to purchase it from the property owner (3) the State can exercise their power of Eminent Domain, but they still have to pay the owner for it. By law all road right-of-way deeds are required to be filed in a special book at the County Clerk's Office. Guess what?! There was not one, yes that's right, not one road right-of-way deed in that book for properties along Richard Hammer Road! I pointed this out to the Judge Executive, he really couldn't seem to give me an answer as to what was going on, neither could the County Clerk, I think they were hoping that I would simply go away! Well after some more research, I discovered that the county had only acquired something like 20 road right-of-way deeds for the entire county, when in fact there should have been literally 1000's of them filed in that special book! I went up to the county attorney's office and informed him that I now understood why no one seemed able to help me with my problem! Obviously there was a cover-up going on here!, the county had failed to follow the law and no one wanted to talk about my problem because that would expose the fraud! :banghead: I went to the next monthly meeting of the Monroe County Fiscal Court, I again told them of my problem and the new problem with the county not having lawfully acquired the road right-of-way over my property and that the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution for the united States of America and Section 13 of the Bill of Rights of Kentucky's Constitution states that private property cannot be taken for public use without just compensation. The County Attorney, Doug Carter ever so smugly stated that if I wanted to attempt to prevent the county roadcrews from maintaining the road right-of-way that I would have to take the Fiscal Court to Circuit Court and sue them! He claimed that they had acquired the road right-of-way through adverse possession'! I responded, "if the Constitution doesn't mean anything to this Fiscal Court then I guess I'm wasting my time here!" I then left the meeting! That was in March of 2002, I then decided to picket in front of the Monroe County Courthouse, yes a one man demonstration for about one week! :evil: One of my protest signs read, Adverse possession, my @$$, obviously your oathes of office don't mean diddly-squat! another read, Adverse possession, perhaps I should call an exorcist, to like cast them out of office! , eventually I took my mountain bike with a two wheeled cart pulled behind with 8 signs on it to do my demonstrating. That's a story all by itself, the owner of the Tompkinsville newspaper came over to interview me, they ran a front page story about my problems with the Fiscal Court, maybe I'll post it later.

I knew exactly what I was going to do in responce to Doug Carter's statement that they had acquired the road right-of-way through adverse possession when he said it at the March monthly meeting, and it sure wasn't 'take them to Circuit Court'! Yes my trusty little Constructive Notice was served to the Monroe County Fiscal Court on April 17, 2002: CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE: To the member of the Monroe County Fiscal Court, your attempt to acquire a road right-of-way over my property that fronts Richard Hammer Road in Monroe County, Kentucky thru what you call "adverse possession" is a violation of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution for the united States of America which states: '... nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.' and Section 13 of the Bill of Rights of Kentucky's Constitution which states, '... nor shall any man's property be taken or applied to public use without the consent of his representatives, and without just compensation being previously made to him. As elected public officials you are presumed to be acting in 'good faith', however any further violation will constitute acting in 'bad faith' and therefore the loss of your 'good faith immunity'. You can and will be held personally liable for any further violations. Dated: April 17, 2002 Winston Ward Johnson, a Freeman, Sui Juris

[buzz_knox]

You think some of the founders were just talking BS when they wrote about how the BoR was unnecessary because the Government had not been granted any powers that could infringe on basic liberties?

No, they weren't BSing. But they were speaking from an age where idealism and patriotism and concepts of honor and duty were still prevalent. Having just broken away from what they perceived as a tyrannical gov't, and when career politicians were largely unknown, they couldn't perceive the intentionally weak and limited national gov't becoming a major threat with the system of checks and balances in place.

Those conditions do not apply now, of course. Thankfully, a few anticipated this and insisted on the BoR.

[Keith]

Another guy sucking a living off the public teat gets cut off... So what?

If he can't make a living ranching without the government charity, then he needs to get a real job.

Keith

[tyme]

That example is rather poor :) . The AWB isn't constitutional and everyone knows it.

Within the bounds of Article 1, Congress can do anything it wants. That doesn't mean every new law not resembling common law is a new grant of power. Either a power already exists (granted through Article 1), or Congress does not have the authority to construct legislation exercising that power. If you want to say powers don't exist until they are implemented through legislation, that's a semantic game I'm not interested in.

Your argument (the statement I quoted earlier) is just silly. You're saying Congress delegates itself power. This may be true in practice, but it is not the way things are supposed to work, and it is not remotely reasonable for Congress to work that way. Elected oligarchy, here we come! Why even bother with a constitution? Just let Congress exercise its good judgement to lead us out of the darkness and into light!

Buzz, I'm not saying those principles apply today in practice. But those were the principles of the Constitution, and without them any sort of government (good or bad) based on the Constitution is, at best, of dubious legitimacy.

[Graystar]

This may be true in practice, but it is not the way things are supposed to work, and it is not remotely reasonable for Congress to work that way. What do you call a constitutional amendment??

Yes, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, but it is not the word of God....it is the word of man. We wrote it....we can change it. And Congress is charged with that responsibility.