Link: http://www.10news.com/news/19562217/detail.html

Couple: County Trying To Stop Home Bible Studies

POSTED: 5:31 pm PDT May 25, 2009
UPDATED: 1:45 pm PDT May 28, 2009
SAN DIEGO – A local pastor and his wife claim they were interrogated by a San Diego County official, who then threatened them with escalating fines if they continued to hold Bible studies in their home, 10News reported.

Attorney Dean Broyles of The Western Center For Law & Policy was shocked with what happened to the pastor and his wife.

Broyles said, “The county asked, ‘Do you have a regular meeting in your home?’ She said, ‘Yes.’ ‘Do you say amen?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘Do you pray?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘Do you say praise the Lord?’ ‘Yes.’”

The county employee notified the couple that the small Bible study, with an average of 15 people attending, was in violation of County regulations, according to Broyles.

Broyles said a few days later the couple received a written warning that listed “unlawful use of land” and told them to “stop religious assembly or apply for a major use permit” – a process that could cost tens of thousands of dollars.

Read more…

Link: http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/inquirer/20090128_Editorial__Judges_Sentenced.html#

Private/Public Partnerships - Kids for Cash Judges Sentenced.

Link: http://www.city-journal.org/2009/eon0212wo.html

Children’s books burn, courtesy of the federal government (U.S.)

12 February 2009

It’s hard to believe, but true: under a law Congress passed last year aimed at regulating hazards in children’s products, the federal government has now advised that children’s books published before 1985 should not be considered safe and may in many cases be unlawful to sell or distribute. Merchants, thrift stores, and booksellers may be at risk if they sell older volumes, or even give them away, without first subjecting them to testing—at prohibitive expense. Many used-book sellers, consignment stores, Goodwill outlets, and the like have accordingly begun to refuse new donations of pre-1985 volumes, yank existing ones off their shelves, and in some cases discard them en masse…Read more.

Link: http://independentcandidates.wordpress.com

For Independent Minded People

The time for Independent Candidates is NOW!

Have you run as an Independent?

Have you considered running as an Independent?

Have you considered helping an Independent?

Have you considered voting for an Independent?

Are you disgusted with the way the mainstream political parties monopolize the political process in Canada?

Are you fed up with local MPs putting the interests of their party over the interests of their constituents?

Are you tired of party leaders whipping the vote to force your MPs to vote against your interests?

If you answered YES to any of these questions, you are urged to attend the first ever Independents convention!

When: Saturday January 17, 2009

Where: Downtown Toronto – Exact Location To Be Announced

Time: 12:00 noon until approximately 8:00 p.m.

Cost (contribution to defray expenses): – Your choice:

- free admission if you help spread the word by inviting 25 people to this event (email and/or post this page: http://independentcandidates.wordpress.com

- $25 payable at the door if you do NOT invite 25 people

Your sponsor and organizer: http://www.independentcandidates.ca

by Niki Raapana
Anti Communitarian League, Niki’s Blog
July 13, 2008

There’s a lot more people in the U.S. using the word communitarian now. When I learned it in 2000, I found mainly references to it in upper academia, Free Trade Legislation, EU integration papers, and eventually (twice!) in the Washington Post. I looked it up online. I scanned every philosophy and political science text I could find. Not one textbook I’ve seen included it. It seemed to have appeared in Etzioni’s head one day at lunch, just like he said it did. Nobody I met online besides Daniel New (UNFreeZones & Michael’s father) had ever once heard the word, and while I do know of at least ten other writers who have included it in their articles, some people still accuse me of making it up.

There has been no place in academia for our approach, since our focus is on the way communitarian programs and policies thwart legitimate American law. I don’t interpret individualism as an egotism endangering the stability of democracy, I interpret communitarianism as high treason against every legitimately created people’s government in the world.

This is the usual academic approach to the communitarian versus individual theoretical divide, from an abstract posted by the University of Heidelberg:

Christian Maul (HCA PhD in American Studies Scholarship,
Landesgraduiertenförderung): “Henry David Thoreau’s Concept of Individualism in the Light of Communitarian Theory.”

“Emanating from my MA thesis, my PhD project explores the representation of a core value of American identity, individualism, in the works of the influential transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau, who created one of the most consistent concepts of American individualism and the image of an economically and intellectually autonomous self. From the point of view of modern political philosophy, however, Thoreau’s approach to individual autonomy seems to have lost its value; communitarian philosophers such as Michael Sandel, Michael Walzer, and Charles Taylor argue that individualism
interpreted as egotism endangers the stability of democracy as it exposes the self to a process of de-solidarization. In fact, the communitarian movement pleads for a return of the individual into the community through active participation in democratic processes and institutions. Thus, the modern American individual exists in an area of tension between individualism and social commitment. In my current research work, I am developing a model for the interpretation of the relationship between the individual and society and of Thoreau’s concept of individualism from a communitarian perspective. This model is based on major writings of communitarian theorists and depicts the ideal communitarian self by tracing fundamental characteristics of an American self which interacts with the social forces surrounding it. My further research interests include the contemporary American novel, autobiographical literature, and American-German literary interrelations.” Primary supervisor: Professor Dr. Dieter Schulz

I’m living proof that there has never been any funding for anti communitarian studies in the United States. If it hadn’t been for a few generous private doners and people purchasing 2020, I would have starved to death, been found slumped over my laptop, still trying to find more evidence to convince Americans communitarianism is a REAL threat to their liberty.

Since April 2000, I’ve written thousands of letters to academic institutions around the globe asking for assistance with our opposition thesis. When our 2002/3 ACL thesis was included in a sociology class at Vassar College Spring 2008, I thought that would open up the debate to include opposition arguments. As recently as last month I wrote the Ludwig von Mises Institute, the bastion of individualist economic theory. Dead silence is all I ever hear back.

I’ve been attacked and ridiculed for years for refusing to shift my focus away from communitarianism. I’ve been advised more than once to start using a term Americans were more “familiar” with. The Libertarian Party told me
they only use terms Americans can understand. The Democrats told me I sound like a Right Wing Property Rights wacko; Nancy Rising wanted me to include Jim Marrs’ alien theory in my work. The Nebraska Republicans told Michael Shaw I look like a nutcase because I live in a tent. People who said they wanted to “help” ALWAYS told me told me the word was just too long and too hard to spell, so I should quit using it. Just recently I was asked to shift my educational focus to a bumper sticker with the words, “Sustainable development is a UN coup against Americans.”

In the past year I’ve seen my work plagiarized by Dave Hodges of the Arizona Constitution Party, I’ve been hounded for not submitting to the Fusionist Borg and the Wizard of Oz characters who followed Terry Catzman666 Hayfield to leftrightunite, and I have serious doubts about the Bridgestone Media Group’s purpose for including my interview in One Nation Under Siege. To top it all off, Nancy Levant, who became a dear friend and a prolific vocal opponent of communitarianism suddenly stopped emailing me last fall. I have only Darren Week’s assurance that she is just taking a break because she
works as a field laborer all the time now, and there’s no internet where she lives.

Now, without any fanfare or apologies from anyone, I can find hundreds of references to communitarianism on all kinds of websites and online magizines. People all over the place are talking about it, almost as if it’s been around forever. It’s as if everyone should already know what it is. This article in the *National Review* on June 30, 2008 by Michael Know Beran
refers to it hitorically, assuring us it’s always been part of American politics:

“The late Arthur Schlesinger Jr. once opined that the United States vacillates between phases of glittering, communitarian “public purpose,” associated with appealing patrician showmen like the Roosevelts, and drab, profit-seeking “private interest” periods presided over by presidents so boring no one remembers their names. Amid his many errors, Schlesinger was
right in perceiving that the idea of communitarian public purpose has a glamor, a charm, a way of touching the high-minded, generous instincts of the soul, that the ethos of profit-and-loss will never match, golden-egg-laying goose though it be.”

Try to access Schlesinger’s articles without paying for them, take this search link leading to JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/pss/1849465:

* Review: [untitled]
* Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.
* Reviewed work(s): Tomorrow A New World: The New Deal Community Program by Paul K. Conkin
* The American Historical Review, Vol. 65, No. 4 (Jul., 1960), pp. 933-934 (review consists of 2 pages)
* Published by: American Historical Association

Note: This article is a review of another work, such as a book, film,
musical composition, etc. The original work is not included in the purchase
of this review.

So how is it possible that the whole “Idea” just popped into Etzioni’s head in 1990 if thirty years earlier, Arthur Schlesinger Jr. was talking about communitarianism in his review of the New Deal Community Program? Beran’s
article continues:

“Americans, with their democratic traditions, have an aversion to the word “aristocracy,” but not to the idea of it, which, in its most innocent and natural form, merely acknowledges what everyone knows to be true–that in any one of the various departments of life, some people are vastly superior to others."I suspect that many voters might even be persuaded to distinguish between aristocracy’s more- and less-salubrious forms. Of the two competing patrician philosophies on the hustings this year, one of them, McCain’s, represents the aristocratic ideal in its prime, when the knight aspired to
fight the good fight. The other, Obama’s, represents the patrician ideal in its decadence, when the novice qualifies for the exercise of public power by dreaming the good communitarian dream.”

What is the “good communitarian dream?” It’s a vision of peace, health and happiness for everyone in the world. Visualize Heaven and you still can’t imagine how beautiful it will be. Once the state is allowed to achieve its evolutionary role and become our god, anything is possible.

In Barack Obama, Americans have found their Hegelian Messiah. Protecting individual rights, the only legitimate purpose for American governance and law, has been slowly replaced with communitarian values. Obama was named the Wonder Boy for the Third Way back in 1994. Hillary Clinton uses the term communitarian to describe more enlightened voters. Both Democratic candidates for U.S. president are committed communitarians. Yet the Republican candidate McCain and the darling of the Independents, Dr. Ron Paul, both studiously avoid addressing the theory of communitarianism in any of their speeches. IF ONLY ONE of the above candidates had openly explained the new theory of community government, ALL Americans would have had the opportunity to choose between liberty and slavery. But none of them did.

The American conservative right has proved itself to be the perfect thesis to the necessary antithesis, cleverly never alerting their followers to the real deception, keeping loyal patriots behind the times by using outdated terms like caplitalism, communism and socialism to describe communitarianism. As a result of this concerted effort to keep Americans
dumbed down, Individual Rights, the basis for the ENTIRE American political system, is now what’s defined as “outdated.”

Watch closely as millions of Americans scramble to catch up with the newspeak. Our free people will never know how many thousands of enlightened Americans are already receiving trillions of grant dollars to fund the emerging communitarian vision, but they will quickly find out that if they object to the mandatory community service theory or refuse to cooperate with the communitarian datagatherers or developers, they will be ridiculed and ostracized by the more spiritual members leading the new American collectives.

The entertaining drama that is called “democracy” in the U.S. is about to drop the final curtain on the authentic American dream. Americans aren’t voting for a new president in the national election this fall. They’re voting for a new god.

Notes:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_12_60/ai_n26678769,
“McCain’s challenge: how to preempt Barack’s communitarian dream,” National Review, June 30, 2008 by Michael Knox Beran

Mr. Hillier has introduced a bill (Hansard) that establishes a committee to oversee and modify legislation that impedes, over-regulates or denies your person its property freedoms. The bill also provides for a minimum 60 days to review any proposed legislation, in other words time to actually read the junk that passes into law these days. The bill can be found here…

RED TAPE AND REGULATORY
REVIEW ACT, 2008 /
LOI DE 2008 SUR LA RÉVISION
DES FORMALITÉS ADMINISTRATIVES
ET DES DISPOSITIONS RÉGLEMENTAIRES

Mr. Hillier moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 57, An Act to establish political oversight over legislation and regulations to reduce red tape and unjustified regulatory burdens / Projet de loi 57, Loi établissant un régime de surveillance politique des lois et règlements afin de réduire les formalités administratives et les fardeaux réglementaires injustifiés.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): The member for a short statement?

Mr. Randy Hillier: It is my pleasure to introduce my very first bill, focused on red tape and regulatory review. For far too long, the nameless have created a red sea of regulations from their ivory towers without scrutiny by this assembly. This bill empowers all members, from the back row to the front, to remove regulations that provide no value, regulations that infringe upon freedoms and reduce competition.

It is imperative that we in this House do our homework before enacting regulations. It is time to get back to basics-

The Speaker (Hon. Steve Peters): Thank you.

EXPLANATORY NOTE

The Bill establishes a standing committee of the Legislative Assembly to be known as the Standing Committee on Red Tape and Regulatory Review.

Every public bill must be referred to the Committee for a review or include a provision stating that it applies despite the requirement for a review. The review deals with whether the bill imposes a regulatory burden on persons or bodies, other than the public sector, whether the bill infringes on the freedom of those persons or bodies to own and use property, whether the regulatory burden constitutes an unjustified burden and red tape and whether the person or body that administers the bill is best suited to do so. The Committee may amend the bill before reporting it back to the Assembly.

No person or body, including the Lieutenant Governor in Council, is allowed to make a regulation under an Act without giving the Committee at least 60 days notice to review the regulation and to propose amendments to it, except if the person or body gives notice to the Committee that the urgency of the situation requires the making of an emergency regulation. An emergency regulation can remain in force for no longer than 90 days.

The Committee can also review Acts after they have been enacted and regulations after they have been made and make a report on them to the Assembly

NOTICE OF ACTION!
Contact: David Honey
Tel: 905 562-3659

This is notice to the MNR that if charges of any kind are laid against Bob MacKie as a result of the Niagara Escarpment Commission decision of November 15, 2007 that the Ontario Landowners Association will begin an escalating series of actions that will have significant political consequences. These actions may include tractor blockades of major highways in the Niagara Region.

Seeking to preserve our rural identities, traditions, security, prosperity and the fundamental principles of natural justice

——————————————————————————–

If you require more background information, please contact the following:

David Honey, President, Niagara Landowners Association
Ph: 905 562-3659

Jack MacLaren, President, Ontario Landowners Association
Ph.:613 832-3201
Cell: 613 223-5534

Original Posting…

BOB MACKIE WILL CONTINUE TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT!

“Justice for Bob MacKie Day”

On March 21, “Good Friday", Bob MacKie will host an archery tournament of celebration at Mackie’s Mountain Archery, 3922 Zimmerman Rd., Beamsville from 9am - 5pm. that will be a fund raiser for the “Brain Injury Community Re-Entry Program” Bob is celebrating the indefinite continuation of his archery training business despite the Niagara Escarpment Commission’s ruling against his business.

The Niagara Escarpment Commission voted “NO” to allowing Bob MacKie to continue to operate his archery training business on November 15, 2007. The NEC said that “archery” was not mentioned in their Official Plan as an allowed use on “agricultural land". They gave him 120 days to “STOP” doing archery. March 19th was the 120th day and Bob intends to carry on with archery training.

He has the full support of the Ontario Landowners Association and its members from across Ontario. Bob’s archery training is a much appreciated service that his community supports. The OLA will be declaring that “archery is a permitted use of agricultural land in the Niagara Region". The law of “natural justice” determines that what Bob is doing “is right"!

1.00 P.M. there will be speeches from members of the community and the Ontario Landowners Association in support of Bob MacKie.

Seeking to preserve our rural identities, traditions, security, prosperity and the fundamental principles of natural justice
###

If you require more background information, please contact the following:
Jack MacLaren, President, Ontario Landowners Association
613 832 3201 cell: 613 223 5534
Bob Mackie
905-563-7336

Here’s an interesting little poll posted today on the website of the Globe and Mail Newspaper.

The question:

“Do you think Canada should work more closely with the U.S. to map out a mutually beneficial public policy agenda?”

The results at the time of this post are interesting to say the least, as you can see from the screen shot below. The question of course is redundant because this is already a reality in both countries. To bad Americans were not more “American” and Canadians too, maybe this would not have happened. It will, however, be a good barometer for the media-merchants to use to determine their next course of action with respect to convincing those of us who still believe in sovereignty and rule of law, that this is a good idea. You know, before they tell us is already a done deal. Can you say “North American Union?” nice try you conspiracy nut…

The poll can be found here.

The results so far..

Related:
Canada, U.S. agree to share troops in civil emergencies

Doug Plumb, confirmed Toronto Centre Riding candidate for the Canadian Action Party, openly discusses Communitarian Law and Agenda 21 as part of his platform. Some snippets from his piece Sustainable Tyranny (pdf) include:

“This booklet is all about the Security & Prosperity Partnership Agreement (otherwise known as the North American Union or the Public Private Partnership between USA, Canada & Mexico. This is a part of the Sustainable Development, Agenda 21 or The New World Order agenda that Bush Sr. talked about in the nineties during the previous Iraq war. These agendas are all about transforming our society to the Third Way, New Soviet and Communitarian legal system. The Third Way is an Ownership society where everything is owned by central powers. Individualism and property rights will become things of the past and unaccountable, autocratic rulers will govern society with an iron-fisted police state.
This is all being set up in secret and no one that only views or reads mainstream/corporate media knows anything about it. If you ever wondered about things like this or where money comes from then read on.

“What pleases me most is that sustainable development is on almost everybody’s agenda now.” - Maurice Strong”

“The type of new world government system is known as a collectivist or communitarian government. You and the product of your labour become the property of government. Individual rights or freedoms have no place in this new world order. This is socialism and it’s being adopted because it doesn’t work for the masses of people (it only works for the people at the very top of the power structure).”

“Fascism occurs as a result of a “public-private partnership” according to Mussolini. Fascism occurs when corporations and governments unite. This is exactly what is happening today in secret. Laws (including your right to habeas-corpus and double jeopardy protection) are being rewritten secretly in stealth with corporations and governments working together and led by the banks. The new laws that will be put into place as a result of the North American Union are known as “communitarian laws.”

“Communitarian law is a type of administrative law. Many lawyers over the past 20 years have made administrative law their specialty. Communitarian law is also known as “The Third Way” or the “New Soviet” and it is a way of centralizing an unaccountable government.”

Visit Doug’s campaign site at dougplumb.com