I WAS BRAINWASHED BY THE POLICE STATE LIKE EVERYONE ELSE...

Tinny Ray news.journalism@gmail.com via googlegroups.com	Mar 24 (1 day ago)
to libertarianism, rexy

Rex Curry, the historian referenced in your post, is a national treasure! It reminds me of this quote: "Remove the pledge from the flag; remove the flag from schools; remove schools from government." http://rexcurry.net Dr. Curry is the historian who showed that the American socialist Francis Bellamy's Pledge of Allegiance to the US flag was the origin of the Nazi salute and Nazi behavior (e.g. robotic chanting to flags) under Hitler's German socialism. German socialists used the Nazi flag's symbol to represent crossed "S" letters for their socialism (that is another one of Dr. Curry's jaw-dropping discoveries).

  Good to hear that Dr. Curry is cited above. Thanks for    the post and good luck Pointer Institute for Media          Studies!

      On Monday, December 26, 2005 at 3:34:53 PM UTC-5,         Pointer Institute for Media Studies wrote:

More people are joining http://rexcurry.net/pledge-lawyer.html and taking
the "pledge not to pledge" (allegiance to the flag).  It is unfortunate that
modern flag Nazis still persecute people about the pledge in the USA's
growing police state.
http://rexcurry.net/pledge-of-allegiance-flag-nazis.htmlNews reports from December 23, 2005 state that Cameron Frazier refused to
stand and recite the Pledge of Allegiance at Boynton Beach High School and
it sparked a Constitutional battle against his teacher and the Palm Beach
County School Board. The 17-year-old junior claims in a federal lawsuit that
he was ridiculed and punished Dec. 8 when he twice refused to stand for the
pledge during his fourth-period algebra class.
News reports from March 1, 2005 stated that an incident occurred in Brick
Township, New Jersey. A video of the shocking behavior is at
http://rexcurry.net/pledge-of-allegiance-mantel.wmv  Similar to some other
states, NJ has a morning paramilitary drill that includes chanting the
Pledge of Allegiance and the "National Anthem."  A videotape was made by a
student in the class of Stuart Mantel. The class started out that morning
with Mantel yelling "I don't want to hear a sound! Not a sound! Morning
exercises will come on, you will stand, you will stand quietly, you will pay
attention! Any Questions!? ... Now stand up and keep your mouths shut!"
Students stood up as the national anthem began playing.  In the middle of
the "The Star-Spangled Banner," Mantel walked over to Jay and demanded that
he stand up. Jay silently refused, and Mantel yelled again, "Stand up!" Jay
then said "I don't have to stand up." To which Mantel insisted "You have to
stand." Jay said, "No I don't." Mantel then reached over and pulled Jay's
chair out from under him. Jay responded to Stuart Mantel's outrageous
behavior by asking Mantel "Are you serious?", to which Mantel yelled "I am
damn well serious." Superintendent Thomas L. Seidenberger  held office at
the time.
stop the pledge of allegiance and what it causes
The Pledge has a long history of persecution and violence.  Francis Bellamy
(the Pledge's author) supported a government takeover of education.  The
government's schools imposed segregation by law and taught racism as
official policy.  The USA's behavior was an example for three decades before the Nazis. 

As under Nazism, the Jehovah's Witnesses, and blacks and the Jewish and others in the USA attended government schools that dictated segregation, taught racism, and persecuted children who refused to perform the straight-arm salute and robotically chant the Pledge. 

There were acts of student violence, teacher violence, police violence and mob violence. There were arrests and prosecutions. Children were taken away from their parents on the government's claim of unfit parenting if the children were not forced to pledge. Some kids were expelled from government schools and had to use the many better alternatives. The government schools then persecuted those non-government schools.

 The Pledge routines are part of the USA's growing police-state.  The insane government in the U.S. could cause comatose persons to Pledge dis-allegiance, desecrate the flag, and recite a declaration of independence. Remove the Pledge from the flag, remove flags from schools, remove schools from government. 

Fight the flag hags and their flag fetish. Government's schools should not teach kids to verbally fellate flags each morning. It is like a brainwashed cult of the omnipotent state. For adults it is childish. Remove the Pledge from the flag, remove flags from schools, remove schools from government. Shocking facts were exposed by the historian Rex Curry about the Pledge's putrid past. As a libertarian lawyer, Curry provides pro bono services at schools and events nationwide to educate the public about the news.
1. Dr. Rex Curry showed that the USA's first Pledge of Allegiance used a straight-arm salute and it was the origin of the salute of the monstrous National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nazis). Professor Curry helped to establish that it was not an ancient Roman salute, and that the "ancient Roman salute" is a myth. http://rexcurry.net/pledgesalute.html
2. The Pledge began with a military salute that then stretched out toward the flag. Historic photographs are at http://rexcurry.net/pledge2.html and
at http://rexcurry.net/pledge_military.html   Due to the way that both gestures were used, the military salute led to the Nazi salute. The Nazi salute is an extended military salute.
http://rexcurry.net/book1a1contents-pledge.html
3. Francis Bellamy (author of the "Pledge of Allegiance") and Edward Bellamy (author of the novel "Looking Backward") and Charles Bellamy (author of "A Moment of Madness") were socialists.  Edward and Charles were brothers, and Francis was their cousin. Francis and Edward were both self-proclaimed National Socialists and they supported the Nationalism" movement in the USA, the "Nationalist" magazine, the "Nationalist Educational Association," and their dogma of "military socialism," and Edward inspired he "Nationalist Party" (in the USA) and their dogma influenced socialists in Germany, and the Pledge was the origin of the Nazi salute. "Nazi" means "National Socialist German Workers' Party." 

A mnemonic device is the swastika. Although the swastika was an ancient symbol, Professor Curry discovered that it was also used sometimes by German National Socialists to represent "S" letters for their "socialism." Curry changed the way that people view the symbol of the horrid National Socialist German Workers' Party.  Hitler altered his own signature to use the same stylized "S" letter for "socialist" and similar alphabetic symbolism still shows on Volkswagens.
http://rexcurry.net/book1a1contents-swastika.html
Dr. Curry showed that many modern myths about swastikas are based on the false belief that Nazis called their symbol a "swastika."  German National
Socialists did not use the word "swastika," but called their symbol a "Hakenkreuz."  Professor Curry showed that many modern myths rely on a false
belief that Nazis called themselves "Nazis" or used some other term (Party members referred to themselves as "National Socialists" and did not use the term "Nazis").

Supreme Court forces you to eat GM food...

Supreme Court hands Monsanto victory over farmers on GMO seed patents, ability to sue

Published time: January 13, 2014 21:51
Edited time: January 15, 2014 10:42

Reuters / Darren Hauck

​The US Supreme Court upheld biotech giant Monsanto’s claims on genetically-engineered seed patents and the company’s ability to sue farmers whose fields are inadvertently contaminated with Monsanto materials.
The high court left intact Monday a federal appeals court decision that threw out a 2011 lawsuit from the Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association and over 80 other plaintiffs against Monsanto that sought to challenge the agrochemical company’s aggressive claims on patents of genetically-modified seeds. The suit also aimed to curb Monsanto from suing anyone whose field is contaminated by such seeds.
The group of plaintiffs, which included many individual American and Canadian family farmers, independent seed companies and agricultural organizations, were seeking preemptive protections against Monsanto’s patents. The biotech leviathan has filed over 140 lawsuits against farmers for planting the company’s genetically-engineered seeds without permission, while settling around 700 other cases without suing.
None of the plaintiffs are customers of Monsanto and none have licensing agreements with the company. The group argued that they do not want Monsanto’s genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) and want legal protection in case of inadvertent contact with the company’s products.
The appeals court decision was based on Monsanto’s supposed promise not to sue farmers whose crops - including corn, soybeans, cotton, canola and others - contained traces of the company’s biotechnology products.
In a June 2013 ruling, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, DC said it was inevitable, as the farmers’ argued, that contamination from Monsanto’s products would occur. Yet the appeals panel also said the plaintiffs do not have standing to prohibit Monsanto from suing them should the company’s genetic traits end up on their holdings "because Monsanto has made binding assurances that it will not 'take legal action against growers whose crops might inadvertently contain traces of Monsanto biotech genes (because, for example, some transgenic seed or pollen blew onto the grower's land).'"
The panel’s reference to “traces” of Monsanto’s patented genes means farms that are affected by less than 1 percent.
The plaintiffs asked Monsanto to pledge not to sue, but the company rebuffed the request, saying, "A blanket covenant not to sue any present or future member of petitioners' organizations would enable virtually anyone to commit intentional infringement."
Monsanto’s GMO seeds are designed to withstand the company’s own ubiquitous herbicide, Roundup. Recently, questions have begun to arise from the bioengineered seed’s resistance to pestilence, which has caused some farmers to increase their use of traditional pesticides.
"Monsanto never has and has committed it never will sue if our patented seed or traits are found in a farmer's field as a result of inadvertent means," said Kyle McClain, the Monsanto's chief litigation counsel, according to Reuters.
"The lower courts agreed there was no controversy between the parties," McClain added, "and the Supreme Court's decision not to review the case brings closure on this matter."
Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association President Jim Gerritsen expressed disappointment that the Supreme Court reaffirmed the previous ruling, refusing to hear the case.
"The Supreme Court failed to grasp the extreme predicament family farmers find themselves in," said Gerritsen, an organic seed farmer in Maine. "The Court of Appeals agreed our case had merit. However ... safeguards they ordered are insufficient to protect our farms and our families."
In addition to Monday’s news and the appeals court decision against them, the plaintiffs - many of them non-GMO farmers and who make up over 25 percent of North America’s certified organic farmers - also lost a district court case.
“If Monsanto can patent seeds for financial gain, they should be forced to pay for contaminating a farmer’s field, not be allowed to sue them,” said Dave Murphy, founder and executive director of Food Democracy Now!, in a statement “Once again, America’s farmers have been denied justice, while Monsanto’s reign of intimidation is allowed to continue in rural America.”
“Monsanto has effectively gotten away with stealing the world’s seed heritage and abusing farmers for the flawed nature of their patented seed technology,” said Murphy. “This is an outrage of historic proportions and will not stand.”
The case is Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association, et al., v. Monsanto Company, et al. Supreme Court Case No. 13-303.

EXTREMELY IMPORTANT...PASS IT ON...

This so important that I am sending this to everyone I can think of

The provision of the Trading with the Enemies Act of 1917, as modified on March 9, 1933 (search Congressional Record, March 9, 1933, Emergency Banking Act, Trading with the Enemies Act), to include American citizens as enemies is now about to be more fully implemented.  (BTW, this is the “secret” provision that Obama used to justify the murder of an American citizen)   With this new proposed law, I suppose that they have to fill those camps that Haliburton built to justify their $435M cost.  The camp, just southwest of Fairbanks, Alaska, by itself, can hold 2M people; and, during the winter, I bet you can turn over the population every 2 weeks or so.  That’s better than what the Nazi’s accomplished.  There are approximately 800 camps throughout the United States, fully staffed but currently sitting empty, Alaska being the largest.  These were established under Rex-84, Operation Cable Splicer and Operation Garden Plot, by executive orders of the Reagan administration (Google for more information).  

Do nothing and this is what you are facing for you and your family. 

Senate Moves To Allow Military To Intern Americans Without Trial

NDAA detention provision would turn America into a “battlefield”

Saturday, November 26, 2011

The Senate is set to vote on a bill next week that would define the whole of the United States as a “battlefield” and allow the U.S. Military to arrest American citizens in their own back yard without charge or trial.

“The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself,” writes Chris Anders of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office.

Under the ‘worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial’ provision of S.1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which is set to be up for a vote on the Senate floor Monday, the legislation will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who supports the bill.

The bill was drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), before being passed in a closed-door committee meeting without any kind of hearing. The language appears in sections 1031 and 1032 of the NDAA bill.

“I would also point out that these provisions raise serious questions as to who we are as a society and what our Constitution seeks to protect,” Colorado Senator Mark Udall said in a speech last week. One section of these provisions, section 1031, would be interpreted as allowing the military to capture and indefinitely detain American citizens on U.S. soil. Section 1031 essentially repeals the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 by authorizing the U.S. military to perform law enforcement functions on American soil. That alone should alarm my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, but there are other problems with these provisions that must be resolved.”

This means Americans could be declared domestic terrorists and thrown in a military brig with no recourse whatsoever. Given that the Department of Homeland Security has characterized behavior such as buying gold, owning guns, using a watch or binoculars, donating to charity, using the telephone or email to find information, using cash, and all manner of mundane behaviors as potential indicators of domestic terrorism, such a provision would be wide open to abuse.

“American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?” asks Anders.

The ACLU is urging citizens to call their Senator and demand that the Udall Amendment be added to the bill, a change that would at least act as a check to prevent Americans being snatched off the streets without some form of Congressional oversight.

Under the National Defense Authorization Act bill, no declaration of martial law is necessary since Americans would now be subject to the same treatment as suspected insurgents in places like Afghanistan and Iraq.

If you thought that the executive assassination of American citizens abroad was bad enough, now similar powers will be extended to the “homeland,” in other words, your town, your community, your back yard.

https://secure.aclu.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=3865&s_subsrc=fixNDAA