Post by Jodi on Nov 7, 2005 11:01:18 GMT -5
arizona.indymedia.org/news/2005/08/29944.php
War on Pork in Yavapai County
by Benjamin Robert "Bob God" Taylor Sunday August 28, 2005 at 12:07 AM
bobgod@bobgod.com 928-636-2666 pob 2986 Chino Valley, az 86323
18 USC 794 and Article III, Section 3. Clause 1. of the Constitution are Not the Only Indicators of Treason Against these United States of America!
Article III, Section 3. Clause 1. of the Constitution states:
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."
The Pork in Yavapai County Arizona are traitors against the United States of America; from Sheriff Steve Waugh to the lowliest feces-eating pig on his payroll. The government of yavapai County is a criminal enterprise under United States Code and international law.
When a cadre of bullies hiding behind masks and with black tape over the identification numbers on their badges arm themselves with state-of-the-art military weapons not available to the general public, or designated ‘law enforcement only,’ don body armor, use a battering ram to break down a person’s front door, toss in a stun grenade and another grenade spewing tear gas, then rush in wielding short barreled “entry” shotguns and automatic assault weapons with laser aiming devises, and employ the use of armored vehicles to assault the private property of individual American citizens, who can deny that these combined actions are anything short of the waging of War?
The pork themselves have gone so far as to declare that it is War; they have declared a War on Drugs, a War on Crime, and most recently a War on Terror.
Whenever your local newspaper or t.v. news commentator uses the phrases "war on poverty, war on crime, war on drugs, war on terror," what are they really saying?
“War on private American citizens suspected of being poor.
“War on private American citizens suspected of a crime.
“War on private American citizens suspected of using drugs.
“War on private American citizens suspected of having duct tape, flashlight batteries, dishwashing detergent, brillo pads, PVC pipe, or any of literally hundreds of other common household items classified as bomb making materials."
Suspected by whom? By any one of the millions of maladjusted goons that carry badges in this great land of ours! A popular t.v. program that glorifies these traitors succinctly describes them as, "the men and women of law enforcement."
The “enemy” in these police Wars are We, the People of these United States of America (who were, once upon a time, "innocent until proven guilty in a Court of Law"). Whenever anyone wages war against private American citizens, they're also waging war against the United States of America - and that, boys and girls, is TREASON, pure and simple !
Just how can these treasonous 'wars' being waged by the traitorous pork state against private American citizens, and thereby against America itself, be turned around and won by We the People?
Pork agencies throughout America have fulfilled the requirements for having declared War on the People of America in accordance with BH035 of the Geneva Convention (III) Relative to the Opening of Hostilities (18 Oct 07)
Elements of Pork Departments and Sheriffs' Offices all across America and, by extension, the Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs themselves together with entire City, County, Parish and Township governments, constitute criminal enterprises; guilty of not only felonious acts under local ordinances and State statutes, but treasonous acts under United States Code in violation of articles of the Constitution and flagrant disregard for the Bill of Rights, but are also guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity under the Geneva Conventions and Hague Laws, which address the participants and victims of war.
This is most especially true of the swine at the YCSO.
The widespread wanton, careless use of pepper spray against the civilian population that the police themselves have determined to be their "enemy" in their diverse "wars" in itself is only one example of American police forces standing in violation of the Geneva Conventions - specifically, article TIAS 8061 of the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare , which has been in effect since February of 1928!
Since sworn officers are self-avowed uniformed enemy combatants of the People of America, it's open season on Pork under international law - there is no limit and no tag or permit is required!
The United States Army Field Manual “The Law of Land Warfare,” 1956 in chapter 3. ‘Basic Principles’ part a. ‘Prohibitory Effect,’ states, in part,
“The law of war ... requires that belligerents refrain from employing any kind or degree of violence which is not actually necessary for military purposes and that they conduct hostilities with regard for the principles of humanity and chivalry.”
Do YOU know any humane, chivalrous pigs? Me neither.
The above-cited United States Army Field Manual “The Law of Land Warfare,” 1956 continues from where we left off above to say that,
“The prohibitory effect of the law of war is not minimized by "military necessity" which has been defined as that principle which justifies those measures not forbidden by international law which are indispensable for securing the complete submission of the enemy as soon as possible.
"Military necessity has been generally rejected as a defense for acts forbidden by the customary and conventional laws of war inasmuch as the latter have been developed and framed with consideration for the concept of military necessity.
Does a "military necessity" exist that requires doors to be demolished, furniture and personal belongings of a "suspect" to be destroyed in the service of a warrant? Of course not. To mentally disturbed bullies with badges, though, having such fun is only one of a great many of the fringe benefits that come with the job.
Out of more than four-hundred countries that the organization monitors, it is sad and somewhat shocking that Amnesty International names the United States of America as the number one violator of human rights in the international community. The mistreatment of "suspects" and prisoners by police agencies and the pandemic proportions of police 'misconduct' are cited as the reasons.
The real reason, however, is not that cops cannot be controlled; it is that we, the lackadaisical, complacent People, have failed misserably in our job to control them.
The United States Army Field Manual “The Law of Land Warfare,” continues;
"b. Binding on States and Individuals. The law of war is binding not only upon States as such but also upon individuals and, in particular, the members of their armed forces....
Since States are forbidden from keeping their own standing armies by the Constitution, police agencies assume that role in our social structure. When a single cop turns pig and tramples an individuals civil rights, the State is held just as responsible as the pig itself!
How far up the chain of command have YOU complained?
The United States Army Field Manual “The Law of Land Warfare,” continues;
"498. Crimes Under International Law Any person, whether a member of the armed forces or a civilian. who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible thereof and liable to punishment....
"499. War Crimes The term "war crime" is a technical expression for violation of the law of war by any person or persons, military or civilian. Every violation of the law of war is a war crime....
"501. Responsibility for Acts of Subordinates In some cases, military commanders may be responsible for war crimes committed by subordinate members of the armed forces, or other persons subject to their control. Thus, for instance, when troops commit massacres and atrocities against the civilian population of occupied territory or against prisoners of war, the responsibility may rest not only with the actual perpetrators but also with the commander. Such a responsibility arises directly when the acts in question have been committed in pursuance of an order of the commander concerned. The commander is also responsible if he has actual knowledge, or should have knowledge, through reports received by him or through other means, that troops or other persons subject to his control are about to commit or have committed a war crime and he fails to take the necessary and reasonable steps to insure compliance with the law of war or to punish violators thereof....
Bob Marley comes to mind; if one has shot the sheriff, but did not kill the deputy... The job is only half done!
If you complain about an officer to a superior who does nothing, complain about the superior - and so on up the line to the Governor of your State, your congressional representative(s), the Attorney General and President of the United States; don't stop at the Supreme Court, either, use the links provided on this page to press charges for international war crimes in the World Court.
As a closing note, the United States Army Field Manual “The Law of Land Warfare,” goes on to explain that;
"505. Universality of Jurisdiction . . .
"b. Persons Charged with War Crimes. The United States normally punishes war crimes as such only if they are committed by enemy nationals or by persons serving the interests of the enemy State. Violations of the law of war committed by persons subject to military law of the United States will usually constitute violations of the Uniform Code of Mlitary Justice and, if so, will be prosecuted under that Code.... Commanding officers of United States troops must insure that war crimes committed by members of their forces against enemy personnel are promptly and adequately punished.
"508. Penal Sanctions The punishment imposed for a violation of the law of war must be proportionate to the gravity of the offense. The death penalty may be imposed for grave breaches of the law....
"509. Defense of Superior Orders
"a. The fact that the law of war has been violated pursuant to an order of a superior authority, whether military or civil, does not deprive the act in question of its character as a war crime, nor does it constitute a defense in the trial of an accused individual, unless he did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know that the act was unlawful. In all cases where the order is held not to constitute a defense to an allegation of war crime, the fact that the individual was acting pursuant to orders may be considered in mitigation of punishment.
"b. In considering the question of whether a superior order constitutes a valid defense, the court shall take into consideration the fact that obedience to lawful military orders is the duty of every member of the armed forces; that the latter cannot be expected, in conditions of war discipline, to weigh scrupulously the legal merits of the order received; that certain rules of warfare may be controversial; or that an act otherwise amounting to a war crime may be done in obedience to orders conceived as a measure of reprisal. At the same time it must be borne in mind that members of the armed forces are bound to obey only lawful orders.
"I was only following orders." Reich Marshal Himmler at the World Court, 1945.
Provisions for war crimes by military personnel under a military tribunal are well defined. There are no such clear-cut rules for the punishment of war crimes comited against civilians by a civil police force. We are, therefor, left to our own devices.
There are numerous ways in which resistance fighters might retaliate against the pork; use your imagination!
The United States Army Field Manual “The Law of Land Warfare,” concludes;
"510. Government Officials The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a war crime acted as the head of a State or as a responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility for his act."
As above. If the Deputy did the deed, the Sheriff is responsible; if the Sheriff covers up, the County administrator is responsible; it goes all the way up until the proverbial buck stops in the Oval Office - whomever may occupy that Office at any given time.
The Public at large absolutely must regain control of the Public Servants. The present situation is too badly skewed in the wrong direction to be allowed to continue.
To wrap up, let me mis-paraphrase somebody somewhere who once said something like; "We didn't start this damn war, but we're sure gonna finish it!"
www.bobgod.com/
War on Pork in Yavapai County
by Benjamin Robert "Bob God" Taylor Sunday August 28, 2005 at 12:07 AM
bobgod@bobgod.com 928-636-2666 pob 2986 Chino Valley, az 86323
18 USC 794 and Article III, Section 3. Clause 1. of the Constitution are Not the Only Indicators of Treason Against these United States of America!
Article III, Section 3. Clause 1. of the Constitution states:
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."
The Pork in Yavapai County Arizona are traitors against the United States of America; from Sheriff Steve Waugh to the lowliest feces-eating pig on his payroll. The government of yavapai County is a criminal enterprise under United States Code and international law.
When a cadre of bullies hiding behind masks and with black tape over the identification numbers on their badges arm themselves with state-of-the-art military weapons not available to the general public, or designated ‘law enforcement only,’ don body armor, use a battering ram to break down a person’s front door, toss in a stun grenade and another grenade spewing tear gas, then rush in wielding short barreled “entry” shotguns and automatic assault weapons with laser aiming devises, and employ the use of armored vehicles to assault the private property of individual American citizens, who can deny that these combined actions are anything short of the waging of War?
The pork themselves have gone so far as to declare that it is War; they have declared a War on Drugs, a War on Crime, and most recently a War on Terror.
Whenever your local newspaper or t.v. news commentator uses the phrases "war on poverty, war on crime, war on drugs, war on terror," what are they really saying?
“War on private American citizens suspected of being poor.
“War on private American citizens suspected of a crime.
“War on private American citizens suspected of using drugs.
“War on private American citizens suspected of having duct tape, flashlight batteries, dishwashing detergent, brillo pads, PVC pipe, or any of literally hundreds of other common household items classified as bomb making materials."
Suspected by whom? By any one of the millions of maladjusted goons that carry badges in this great land of ours! A popular t.v. program that glorifies these traitors succinctly describes them as, "the men and women of law enforcement."
The “enemy” in these police Wars are We, the People of these United States of America (who were, once upon a time, "innocent until proven guilty in a Court of Law"). Whenever anyone wages war against private American citizens, they're also waging war against the United States of America - and that, boys and girls, is TREASON, pure and simple !
Just how can these treasonous 'wars' being waged by the traitorous pork state against private American citizens, and thereby against America itself, be turned around and won by We the People?
Pork agencies throughout America have fulfilled the requirements for having declared War on the People of America in accordance with BH035 of the Geneva Convention (III) Relative to the Opening of Hostilities (18 Oct 07)
Elements of Pork Departments and Sheriffs' Offices all across America and, by extension, the Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs themselves together with entire City, County, Parish and Township governments, constitute criminal enterprises; guilty of not only felonious acts under local ordinances and State statutes, but treasonous acts under United States Code in violation of articles of the Constitution and flagrant disregard for the Bill of Rights, but are also guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity under the Geneva Conventions and Hague Laws, which address the participants and victims of war.
This is most especially true of the swine at the YCSO.
The widespread wanton, careless use of pepper spray against the civilian population that the police themselves have determined to be their "enemy" in their diverse "wars" in itself is only one example of American police forces standing in violation of the Geneva Conventions - specifically, article TIAS 8061 of the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare , which has been in effect since February of 1928!
Since sworn officers are self-avowed uniformed enemy combatants of the People of America, it's open season on Pork under international law - there is no limit and no tag or permit is required!
The United States Army Field Manual “The Law of Land Warfare,” 1956 in chapter 3. ‘Basic Principles’ part a. ‘Prohibitory Effect,’ states, in part,
“The law of war ... requires that belligerents refrain from employing any kind or degree of violence which is not actually necessary for military purposes and that they conduct hostilities with regard for the principles of humanity and chivalry.”
Do YOU know any humane, chivalrous pigs? Me neither.
The above-cited United States Army Field Manual “The Law of Land Warfare,” 1956 continues from where we left off above to say that,
“The prohibitory effect of the law of war is not minimized by "military necessity" which has been defined as that principle which justifies those measures not forbidden by international law which are indispensable for securing the complete submission of the enemy as soon as possible.
"Military necessity has been generally rejected as a defense for acts forbidden by the customary and conventional laws of war inasmuch as the latter have been developed and framed with consideration for the concept of military necessity.
Does a "military necessity" exist that requires doors to be demolished, furniture and personal belongings of a "suspect" to be destroyed in the service of a warrant? Of course not. To mentally disturbed bullies with badges, though, having such fun is only one of a great many of the fringe benefits that come with the job.
Out of more than four-hundred countries that the organization monitors, it is sad and somewhat shocking that Amnesty International names the United States of America as the number one violator of human rights in the international community. The mistreatment of "suspects" and prisoners by police agencies and the pandemic proportions of police 'misconduct' are cited as the reasons.
The real reason, however, is not that cops cannot be controlled; it is that we, the lackadaisical, complacent People, have failed misserably in our job to control them.
The United States Army Field Manual “The Law of Land Warfare,” continues;
"b. Binding on States and Individuals. The law of war is binding not only upon States as such but also upon individuals and, in particular, the members of their armed forces....
Since States are forbidden from keeping their own standing armies by the Constitution, police agencies assume that role in our social structure. When a single cop turns pig and tramples an individuals civil rights, the State is held just as responsible as the pig itself!
How far up the chain of command have YOU complained?
The United States Army Field Manual “The Law of Land Warfare,” continues;
"498. Crimes Under International Law Any person, whether a member of the armed forces or a civilian. who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible thereof and liable to punishment....
"499. War Crimes The term "war crime" is a technical expression for violation of the law of war by any person or persons, military or civilian. Every violation of the law of war is a war crime....
"501. Responsibility for Acts of Subordinates In some cases, military commanders may be responsible for war crimes committed by subordinate members of the armed forces, or other persons subject to their control. Thus, for instance, when troops commit massacres and atrocities against the civilian population of occupied territory or against prisoners of war, the responsibility may rest not only with the actual perpetrators but also with the commander. Such a responsibility arises directly when the acts in question have been committed in pursuance of an order of the commander concerned. The commander is also responsible if he has actual knowledge, or should have knowledge, through reports received by him or through other means, that troops or other persons subject to his control are about to commit or have committed a war crime and he fails to take the necessary and reasonable steps to insure compliance with the law of war or to punish violators thereof....
Bob Marley comes to mind; if one has shot the sheriff, but did not kill the deputy... The job is only half done!
If you complain about an officer to a superior who does nothing, complain about the superior - and so on up the line to the Governor of your State, your congressional representative(s), the Attorney General and President of the United States; don't stop at the Supreme Court, either, use the links provided on this page to press charges for international war crimes in the World Court.
As a closing note, the United States Army Field Manual “The Law of Land Warfare,” goes on to explain that;
"505. Universality of Jurisdiction . . .
"b. Persons Charged with War Crimes. The United States normally punishes war crimes as such only if they are committed by enemy nationals or by persons serving the interests of the enemy State. Violations of the law of war committed by persons subject to military law of the United States will usually constitute violations of the Uniform Code of Mlitary Justice and, if so, will be prosecuted under that Code.... Commanding officers of United States troops must insure that war crimes committed by members of their forces against enemy personnel are promptly and adequately punished.
"508. Penal Sanctions The punishment imposed for a violation of the law of war must be proportionate to the gravity of the offense. The death penalty may be imposed for grave breaches of the law....
"509. Defense of Superior Orders
"a. The fact that the law of war has been violated pursuant to an order of a superior authority, whether military or civil, does not deprive the act in question of its character as a war crime, nor does it constitute a defense in the trial of an accused individual, unless he did not know and could not reasonably have been expected to know that the act was unlawful. In all cases where the order is held not to constitute a defense to an allegation of war crime, the fact that the individual was acting pursuant to orders may be considered in mitigation of punishment.
"b. In considering the question of whether a superior order constitutes a valid defense, the court shall take into consideration the fact that obedience to lawful military orders is the duty of every member of the armed forces; that the latter cannot be expected, in conditions of war discipline, to weigh scrupulously the legal merits of the order received; that certain rules of warfare may be controversial; or that an act otherwise amounting to a war crime may be done in obedience to orders conceived as a measure of reprisal. At the same time it must be borne in mind that members of the armed forces are bound to obey only lawful orders.
"I was only following orders." Reich Marshal Himmler at the World Court, 1945.
Provisions for war crimes by military personnel under a military tribunal are well defined. There are no such clear-cut rules for the punishment of war crimes comited against civilians by a civil police force. We are, therefor, left to our own devices.
There are numerous ways in which resistance fighters might retaliate against the pork; use your imagination!
The United States Army Field Manual “The Law of Land Warfare,” concludes;
"510. Government Officials The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a war crime acted as the head of a State or as a responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility for his act."
As above. If the Deputy did the deed, the Sheriff is responsible; if the Sheriff covers up, the County administrator is responsible; it goes all the way up until the proverbial buck stops in the Oval Office - whomever may occupy that Office at any given time.
The Public at large absolutely must regain control of the Public Servants. The present situation is too badly skewed in the wrong direction to be allowed to continue.
To wrap up, let me mis-paraphrase somebody somewhere who once said something like; "We didn't start this damn war, but we're sure gonna finish it!"
www.bobgod.com/