Felons Good, Law Enforcement Bad
In this passage, the authors reveal their
contempt for and paranoia over elected officials or anyone
in the legal profession - including police officers,
sheriffs, state patrolmen, game wardens and even parking
meter readers. This paragraph bars all from serving on the
grand jury. Interestingly, it doesn't prevent convicted
felons from serving. Apparently they're more apt to be
impartial than those who swear to uphold the law - and put
their lives on the line to do it. In other words, the
Special Grand Jury could never include people who enforce
our laws. But it could include people who break them.
Felons Good, Law Enforcement Bad???
Here is another illustration of the Club's
"reverse-180." Evil is good and good is evil. We have already cited in a
previous response, Isaiah 5:20 et seq. "Woe unto them that call evil good, and
good evil..." etc.
Correctly quoting Amendment E, paragraph 12,
last sentence, provides "...except..." Now what does the word
"except" mean? Does it mean "including"? What is excepted in
paragraph 12 of Amendment E? It is "...previous adjudication of mental
incapacity, imprisonment, or parole from a conviction of a felonious crime
against persons." Now how does excepting prisoners translate
into "Felons good"? Can anybody PLEASE EXPLAIN? --we'd like to know! If someone
said they hated spinach, could that possibly be interpreted that they believe
spinach is "good"? Only the Club could come up with such absurdity! Up means
down, down means up; left means right, right means left; the lie is the truth,
and the truth is a lie; light is darkness and darkness is light. By Amendment E
excluding those with mental incapacity, perhaps members of the Club
would be excluded on that basis-- they just can't seem to understand logic and
Nowhere in the exclusions of paragraph 12 does
it say, or can it be implied, that we love felons! But this is what the Club is
attempting to plant in your minds.
Law enforcement bad?? Just because
someone has a conflict of interest does not make them "bad." It simply means
that they have a conflict of interest. If a police officer arrives
on a crime scene and the scene involves that police officer's daughter, does
that make the police officer "bad" because he has a conflict of interest? NO!
The same would apply to a judge who owns stock in a company who is a party in a
case before him.
On the subject of conflicts of interest of those listed as excluded from the Special Grand
Jury, it is totally inappropriate for judges to sit in judgment of other judges.
Judges have a propensity to cover up for elected and appointed officials, which
may include governors who appoint judges, and elected officials who often
recommend appointments to judgeships, etc. Judges are or were members of the
State Bar which is a qualification for their judicial appointments, and many
judges are former prosecutors and their personal friends. These conflicts have
nothing to do with paranoia or being evil.
Should prosecutors or police officers serve as
jurors examining judges? or as jurors at all? Most everyone with common sense
would agree that this would not be practical or appropriate. If it did happen,
the results --no matter what-- would be publicly viewed with skepticism and
disdain. But regardless of all that --government officials are disqualified on
the basis that they are NOT the People and therefore cannot,
ipso facto, be members of the Special Grand Jury, on that basis
While police officers "swear to uphold the law," so
do judges! Yet, how many do? The legal fraternity knows this all too well. They are
spinning from the reality that the People have finally caught on to them. A
police officer told the author "Go ahead and sue me. I've been sued before, and
no one's ever collected a dime." That's because the judiciary covered up for
his police misconduct, and the judiciary claims to be protected by judicial immunity. Then
judges cover up for judges. So it's a brick wall for a victim of this tyranny.
Regarding "In other
words, the Special Grand Jury could never include people who enforce our laws.
But it could include people who break them," ironically,
it is often those who are charged with enforcing the law
who find it easy to break the law, because nine times out of ten the system will
cover up for them. The author has learned this from eighteen consecutive years
of practical experience, and has received confirmation of similar experience
from many others across the country. Tyranny is rampant everywhere.
As far as convicted felons are concerned,
there's a good percentage of them who were wrongly convicted because of our
corrupt system. However, those in prison or on parole from a conviction of a
felonious crime against persons are specifically excluded.
The Special Grand Jury is the People,
and government officials and those related occupations are public servants
of the People and not eligible to serve as the People.