PEOPLE CONTROL The General Accounting Office released a report a while back revealing that

---
Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

PEOPLE CONTROL The General Accounting Office released a report a while back revealing that federal prisons are now at 56 percent above capacity. The GAO also pointed out that federal prison populations have doubled since 1980. Look at the industry they have created . . . people warehouses. The immediate past Attorney General of the United States announces there will be indictments for fraud in the oper- ation of the Chicago Commodity markets. They've already had their sacrificial flesh from the New York markets. This is an absolute scam! The federal government is the perpetrator of tremendous hoax. The one we're concerned with here is the federal criminal justice system. They have NO constitutional authority to define any criminal activity! When investigat- ing fraud, these people are truly experts. What is a 'federal crime'? There are only four listed in the document. (1) counterfeiting of securities and current coin, (2) piracy and felonies committed on the high seas, (3) offenses against the law of nations and (4) treason. This is the limit of federal criminal jurisdiction and of their authority to ask a Grand Jury to issue any indict- ment. The only exception would be criminal activity on property owned by the federal government. There are much more severe restrictions on property ownership by the feds than what we see today. They have exceeded their authority there too. (Check The Traitor Within the Gate Volume 1) Article IV of our Constitution clearly shows that the determination and prosecution of other crimes are functions of state governments. Period. Nevertheless, we read about indictments, prosecutions and convictions by the federales every day. For authority, they rely on Title 18 of the United States Code (Criminal Code) which lists over 100 'crimes' and penalties. Other sections of the US Code also contain what they call 'crimes'. How the hell did this come about? Simply put . . . people control. This has been high on the agenda of the movers and shakers behind government for many years. The greatest push to define and punish crime on the federal level occurred in the 1930s. Under the reign of His Majesty Franklin Roosevelt, Congress and Washington honchos eagerly expanded federal criminal jurisdiction. I mean it was during the great depression and after all, many lawyers were hungry. This was a pathetic period in our history when they foisted an array socialistic programs on Americans. It's obvious from daily news broadcasts that a basic tenet of socialism is people control. Being able to throw a dissenter in jail is the most vicious and very effective. Five or ten years in the slammer will quiet the most vocal thorn in their side.  Hundreds of millions of our dollars support this scheme annually. A top heavy federal judiciary would be twiddling their thumbs if proper restraints limited their jurisdiction. US attorneys are stumbling over each other, each eager to get their face in front of a TV camera. There is a network of mindless faces in the parole/probation system. The prison system spreads over the entire country and complaints about overcrowding are common place. Latest figures from the GAO say it will cost over $51,000 per bed to build new prisons. The cost of real estate and buildings to support this menagerie today is astronomical. ALL unlawful spending. How much less would your tax bite be if they stopped unconstitutional spending? People are always appalled at the mention of slave labor in China and elsewhere. We have a very efficient slave labor system in this country today also. In federal prisons they have built factories where the slaves work for perhaps a dollar an hour and manufacture all sorts of items for the profit of huge corporations. Never heard of it? Ask your congressman to explain the slave labor system of federal prisons. It's happening. Entrapment and use of informants are normal procedure. To justify their jobs, employees of criminal 'justice' go through fantastic schemes to set-up and get people to break their 'laws'. Federal promotions depend on convictions so the more you get into the system, the higher your proficiency rating and the more frequent your promotions. It's self perpetuating and we are the jerks who pay for it. A good example of this witless entrapment was a farmer in the midwest who the postal agents enticed for two years into ordering what they called child pornographic literature. The Supreme Court threw it out, surprisingly. There must have been gross violations in that case. The Supreme Court doesn't usually overturn entrapment cases. And speaking of pornographic material, where do they find the authority to define that? When they can't catch or trap violators of their 'law', they ask our help via Crime Stop numbers or TV most wanted programs. Roadside billboards proclaim that people who call crime stop numbers are heroes. This is really sick! Recent history shows the result of neighbor watch neighbor programs. This has always been a favorite tool of tyrants and dic- tators. Let's check out some historical writings. The Federal- ist Papers were written during the period when our country was considering the acceptance of our new Constitution. James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay, as authors, argued and clearly defined the limitation of powers sur- rendered to the new national government. James Madison, father of our Constitution, wrote that punishment for counterfeiting belonged to the federal government since, under the new Constitution, they were the only level of government allowed to coin money. (Not a word  about printing money.) They included the power to punish piracies, felonies committed on the high seas and offenses against the law of nations to show a national definition of these crimes. He also remarked that the provision on the subject of piracies and felonies extends no further than to set up courts for the trials of these crimes. (Paper No. 42). "As treason may be committed against the United States, the authority of the United States ought to be able to punish it." Madison continued. "But as new-fangled and artificial treasons have been the great engines by which violent factions, the natural off-spring of free government, have usually wreaked their alternate malignity on each other, the convention have, [sic] with great judgment, opposed a barrier to this peculiar danger, by inserting a constitutional definition of the crime, fixing proof necessary for the conviction of it, and restraining the Congress, even in punishing it, from extending the consequences beyond the person of its author." (Paper No. 43). "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and in- definite. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State." (Madison, Paper No. 45). Hamilton was also clear on the issue of criminal jurisdiction. He said "There is one transcendent advantage belonging to the province of the State governments, which alone suffices to place the matter in a clear and satisfac- tory light -- I mean the ordinary administration of criminal and civil justice." Paper no. 17. John Marshall was a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for many years. He was on friendly terms with many of the men who helped draw up the Constitution and knew the limit and substance of powers given under the document. In an 1821 decision, Marshall said, "It is clear that Congress cannot punish felonies generally." (Cohen vs Virginia, 6 Wheat 264). In the same case, he stressed the importance of using the Federalist Papers to determine the power allowed to the federal government. From the beginning, there was no intention for the new federal government to exercise jurisdiction over crime or criminal behavior. Other than the basic four, there is nothing in the document which allows for its existence. Continued usage and enforcement of any unconstitutional law does not magically give it respectability nor does it become legal. Being illegal when it started, it's still illegal. If this isn't clear from the basic document, let's check out the Tenth Amendment once more: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the  States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the People." If we didn't grant the authority, there is no power to function. Plain and simple. Somewhere in the document it would have to say: Congress has the authority to define and prosecute federal crimes. IT SAYS NO SUCH THING . . . there is no power to prosecute new federal crimes . . . period. This seizure of powers would be no problem if our Grand Juries realized they are completely independent bodies, under the control of no judge or federal attorney. Their duty is to first determine if the law under which the US attorney wants an indictment is constitutional. If the Constitution actually allows for the law, then their investigation has to evolve around the innocence or guilt of the individual the US is charging with criminal conduct. The problem with that today is Grand Juries no longer know they are independent. Most believe the judge or the federal attorney can decide their actions. This is simply not true. They are independent and their investigations have to be independent also. Regular juries at criminal trials also have the duty to try the law. These are called petit juries and it's imperative that they believe that the accused is innocent. This is not the case any longer. The judge won't tell them that their duty is to try the law even though he would have to admit that it is true. If they are shown in the trial or otherwise that the law is not constitutional, they have an honest duty to throw out the law and declare the accused to be innocent. These are the protections that the American jury system are supposed to perform! The Fifth Amendment guarantees that our Government cannot take life, liberty or property from any person without due process of law. Due process begins with the Consti- tution. Once the commands in the document are ignored, due process vanishes. Claims that the 'necessary and proper' clause of the constitution gives the federales the right to prosecute all crime is gobbledegook. The clause applies only to powers granted in the document and is verified by Hamil- ton. (Paper no. 33.) What's the answer? We have to demand Congress end this nonsense. They are the creeps who passed this legislation and have to be the ones we must go after. We have the right to honest government and it doesn't take an intellectual giant to see how dishonest it is today! We must make a hell of a lot of noise. They are putting our citizens IN PRISON illegally. Our form of government is only a ghost of it's former self. We hear much talk about constitutional rights and guarantees. They claim they have certain 'constitutional duties' which in fact are not duties at all. They are getting far out in left field now impressing us with their constitutional knowledge. So certain are they that no one will check the document to see if they are telling the truth, they invent 'duties'!  On the flip side, under the Internal Revenue Service, you are guilty and have to prove your innocence. Another crock. What happened to constitutional rule? The only way their mode of operation can change is through the amendment process. This requires our consent. We have never invoked the process to enlarge criminal jurisdiction. They have perfected a new wrinkle now. The feds have become experts at using public opinion polls. Their first step is to create a problem. Americans are convinced to clamor for a solution no matter what has to be done. When opinion poll responses are at the proper level, bureaucrats do what they want as an answer and in defiance of their authority. Public opinion polls are no substitute for constitutional authority! If the public wants change, amend the document. Another wrinkle today is the catch phrase . . . civil rights. These are diversionary tactics to keep us off balance so we'll pay no attention to what is really going on. They were given no authority to pass 'civil rights' legisla- tion. The most important thing we can do is make them obey the Constitution so we still have our constitutional rights which will guarantee our civil rights. How many billions of our tax dollars have they wasted on this phrase? The United States Attorney gets on a TV talk show after the LA riots. Talking about the display of violence there, he tells us the "Rule of law is the glue which holds the country together." This is true. But we must impress them the basis for this rule of law is our Constitution. These people must be made to obey the basic document. The drivel about cigarette smoking is a good example. The Congress passed laws banning advertisements about cigarettes. Where do they find the right for that? Can you imagine what the inhabitants of the original thirteen colonies would have done on that issue back in 1789? Why is it any different today? The Chief Justice on the US Supreme Court says, "A lot of water has gone under the bridge since then." Isn't that brilliant? What a clever mind thought that up! But when did government authority change? IT HASN'T! We've just sat by and allowed for these changes in their operation while assuming we had honest men in government. Taking the issue through federal courts is not the answer. Judges are a part of the problem and belong to the same bureaucracy. Their whole intent is the protection afforded each other and perpetuation of the power mad structure. Many of us were in the service. Remember your oath? To "protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign or domestic." It's clear we now have domestic enemies. What we need in this country is a little of that spirit of freedom which is overwhelming eastern Europe. How long will you wait before you help rope in the power mad govern-  ment? Until you or one of your friends becomes a pawn in the numbers game? It'll be too late then. The time to stop them is RIGHT NOW! Controlling people isn't new. It's been going on for a long time. Look what Cornelius Tacitus, a Roman senator and historian, (A.D. c.56-c.115), said as he warned his country- men just before the collapse of Rome: "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." Is this the United States today? Someone once said that the best way for evil to succeed is for good people to do nothing.  SUPPORT THE SHAREWARE CONCEPT .... REGISTER WITH THE AUTHOR .... ONLY $19.95

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank