Where are the brooms and shovels in New Orleans?

Have government regulations become so restrictive that the living cannot maintain sanitation by respectfully removing dead bodies from their midst?

Hurricane Katrina has indeed been a tragedy of catastrophic proportions for the people along the Gulf coast. However, the psycho-social implications of incremental Congressional legislation since Roosevelt's "New Deal" is apparent in the pictures coming out of New Orleans via TV.

As I watch, I see many idle people sitting amidst piles of trash and, occasionally, dead bodies. These scenes have shown a remnant of New Orleanins chanting that they need help, yet they seem to be doing nothing to clean up the relatively small area closest to them: Trash and bodies that can lead to foul odors and, ultimately, disease!

Without a doubt, water, food and shelter are vital commodities that need to be provided from sources outside this affected area. But, when it comes to the remnant's self-responsible behaviors (i.e., cleaning around their personal space), this level of dependency on NGO's, and the statutory agents/agencies of federal government to do for them what they can do for themselves should be critically questioned.

Indeed!

Where are the brooms and shovels in New Orleans? And;

Have government regulations become so restrictive that the living cannot maintain sanitation by respectfully removing dead bodies from their midst?

An UPDATE to this post was attempted when I learned that the family of a woman in a "wheel chair" had filed a law suit. The links were removed because the AP News and Find Law links for the articles no longer worked. I don't know if the woman in the 'wheel chair' is the same as the woman in the 'lawn chair', but I wish the family swift vindication for the wrongs that they suffered at the hands of those who are paid to do that which is right.

You do have options.

Click here to see what they are. And here to see why they are necessary.

Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts' Frame-of-Reference

Since Article 4, Section 4, of the US Constitution "shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government"; To whose "Form of Government" is John Roberts, a Harvard graduate, referring when he expresses a "profound appreciation for the role of the court in our constitutional democracy"?

Here is a transcript of a portion of Nominee Roberts' 7/19/2005 acceptance speech from USA Today:

ROBERTS: Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you.

Thank you very much. It is both an honor and very humbling to be nominated to serve on the Supreme Court. Before I became a judge, my law practice consisted largely of arguing cases before the court. That experience left me with a profound appreciation for the role of the court in our constitutional democracy and a deep regard for the court as an institution.

The London Explosions

I feel deep sorrow for all the victims of violent acts worldwide that are perpetrated on behalf of a handful of men/women who have an agenda to dominate. What is even more disturbing, however, is how effectively the American people have been manipulated by Madison Avenue words and visuals to buy into this agenda to the point that they are willingly contributing to their own destruction.

For instance: "Terror" is not an "act". "Terror" is a "feeling"; an "emotion".

There are two (2) proven strategies to overcome an emotion: Drugs and Empowerment.

It's been my observation that Congress' focus since the "Brady Bill" and "911" has been to disempower Americans.

Congress has been inclined to use tax payers' debt based dollars to; fund programs that screen for emotional dis-ease, create data bases which include that such screening data to be put on "mandatory" identification cards for which the people are expected to pay a cost, and protect the sharing of the people's personal information with global commercial banking and insurance entities that will eventually benefit the owners of the pharmaceutical companies, who will in turn have legal commercial access to those who have voluntarily opted into their actuarial, pharmaceutical and other studies. I suspect that Herr Mengla is smiling in his grave.

Additionally: Since both the Euro and Dollar are a debt based units of currency; How are the people's of the nations who use this currency to ever pay off a debt with a debt? Intellectually and morally this is absurd! Intellectually and morally this is 'indebted servitude'/"peonage" perpetrated and maintained by a handful of men who globally manipulate the money supply as their allied media strokes the emotions of the people under the guise of "democracy"!

As for this current "War"; It makes sense to me that "Christian" America would be pitted against the "Islamic" nations. How else can the agenda of those who profit from a debt based monetary system, whether the Dollar or the Euro, continue their dominion if there is honest trade among the nations with a tangible currency based on "honest weights and measures".

If we had enough men and women in Congress that took their oath of office seriously, we would have a tangible monetary system, be at peace with Islamic nations, and best of all, there would be no need for those with an agenda to pit believing nations against one another under the guise of "terror". Unlike a drugged or disempowered person, an empowered people have few excuses (if any) to tolerate injustices, or to injure or damage their neighbor.

FEDS CALL COURT CERTIFIED DOCUMENTS A "THEORY" IN BILL BENSON CASE

Posted: February 15, 2005
1:05 AM Eastern
NewsWithViews.com

Bill Benson is a former revenue collector for the State of Illinois. Back in 1984, Benson was commissioned to conduct an investigation into the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Benson traveled to all 48 states which had been admitted to the Union at the time of the ratification of this amendment in 1913. He spent close to a year in the bowels of these state archives collecting official documents.

What Benson found according to legal researchers was nothing short of a bombshell: Not only was the Sixteenth Amendment - the so-called "income tax amendment' never ratified by the required number of states, he also discovered that the Seventeenth Amendment wasn't ratified either.

More . . .

"OWNERSHIP": WHAT DOES IT MEAN, AND WHO HAS IT?

Here are some questions I had during the "ownership" portion of President Bush's Inaugural speech on Thursday, January 20, 2005. The text of that portion of President Bush's speech is as follows:

"In America's ideal of freedom, citizens find the dignity and security of economic independence, instead of laboring on the edge of subsistence. This is the broader definition of liberty that motivated the Homestead Act, the Social Security Act, and the G.I. Bill of Rights. And now we will extend this vision by reforming great institutions to serve the needs of our time. To give every American a stake in the promise and future of our country, we will bring the highest standards to our schools, and build an ownership society. We will widen the ownership of homes and businesses, retirement savings and health insurance - preparing our people for the challenges of life in a free society. By making every citizen an agent of his or her own destiny, we will give our fellow Americans greater freedom from want and fear, and make our society more prosperous and just and equal."

Here are my questions:

President Bush seems to be making a clear distinction between "Americans" and "citizens" in his speech. Is he?

What is the definitional difference (legal and otherwise) between having "Liberty" and being afforded statutory "freedom"?

What are the Liberties of a "citizen"? And, How are they the same, or different, from those pertaining to "the people"?

When a "citizen" becomes and "agent" doesn't he/she enter into a "commercial" relationship?

To whom are President Bush referring to as his "fellow Americans" who will "make", with him, "every citizen an agent" of "his or her own destiny"?

Why are President Bush's "fellow Americans" who have the power to make a "citizen" an "agent of his or her own destiny" concerned about "want and fear"?

President Bush seems to be outlining a global hierarchy in his speech. Is there a global hierarchy? If so, what is your status in this hierarchy? How do you perceive mine?

If a hierarchy exists; Do our representatives represent an 'endowed' "people" with "Liberty", or do they administrate the statutory "freedoms" dictated by those who are the most privileged within the hierarchy?

What does President Bush and his "fellow Americans" have planned for those men and women who they perceive to be "citizens" and "agents"?

What will be the fate of men and women who continue to believe themselves to be "endowed by their Creator (aka, "Nature's God") with unalienable Rights"?

To whom will President Bush be widening "the ownership of homes and businesses, retirement savings and health insurance"? And, how will this impact the men and women who continue to believe that they have the Liberty by Divine Law to their own unaliened possession of; "homes and businesses, retirement savings and health insurance"?

And, per President Bush in another part of his speech; "Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self-government, because no one is fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave." Who then is protecting and defending the 'self-evident truths' and the "imperative" "Right" to "self-government" for the people of the endowment?