LadyBroadoak Visionary Planetary Healing Tutorial: Robert Dziekanski

Showing posts with label Robert Dziekanski. Show all posts

May 03, 2008

Evidence That Stun Guns May Stimulate The Heart

Submitted by MichaelVail on Fri, 05/02/2008 - 5:14pm.

Science Daily
Posted: 2008-05-02 17:52:03

On the eve of the British Columbia inquiry into the death of Robert Dziekanski, a review of scientific data in CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal) finds that in some cases, stun guns may stimulate the heart in experimental models. This evidence is contrary to current views that stun guns only affect skeletal muscles.

"The frequency and the shape of the pulses generated by stun guns are designed to incapacitate the target by electrically overwhelming his or her control of these muscles," state Dr. K. Nanthakumar and colleagues. "In principle, these pulses are designed to act only on skeletal muscles and to not affect internal organs such as the heart." The evidence that stun guns do not stimulate the heart is based on "...theoretical studies [that] suggest that stun guns cannot deliver the amount of energy required to stimulate the heart or cause ventricular fibrillation."

Dr. Nanthakumar and collegues point out that most theoretical and some experimental studies reveal that cardiac stimulation does not occur with stun gun discharges. However, experimental studies on pigs by 3 independent groups of investigators found that "a stun gun discharge can stimulate the heart" depending on the location of the stun gun barbs. Barbs that are located such that they form a vector across the heart have greater effect than those focused on the abdomen. In one study, swine blood pressure was abruptly lost after discharge of a stun gun, and another study "reported the deaths of 2 animals caused by ventricular fibrillation immediately after the stun gun discharge....This suggests that sufficient current density was produced by the stun gun to stimulate the heart, which according to theory should not and could not occur."

The researchers caution against applying data from pigs to humans, although "most of the basic mechanistic concepts in cardiac fibrillation and defibrillation are derived from animal studies, not humans."

Recently, there have been several deaths after the use of stun guns, including Robert Dziekanski in Richmond, British Columbia, a Montréal, Quebec man and 24 year-old Chicago, Illionois resident, Kevin Piskura. More than 300 deaths following stun gun use have been documented, 20 of them in Canada.

Regarding arrhythmias long after the discharge of the stun gun, Dr. Nanthakumar, Dr. Paul Dorian and colleagues conclude "...there is no conclusive evidence to show whether stun gun stimulation (under certain electrophysical conditions) can result in cardiac arrhythmias late after stun gun discharge. With regards to deleterious effects on the heart during the discharge they state "In our view, it is inappropriate to conclude that stun gun discharges cannot lead to adverse cardiac consequences in all real world settings."

Submitted by MichaelVail on Fri, 05/02/2008 - 5:14pm.

Science Daily
Posted: 2008-05-02 17:52:03

Ah, dah, the heart IS a muscle.

Anatomy 101.

EIGHTH GRADE SCIENCE!!

March 25, 2008

the recent taser commentary in Canada ..

None of your business

From http://rustyidols.blogspot.com/2008/03/none-of-your-business.html

You may believe that Tasers are a weapon of second to last resort for the police. That the RCMP and municipal forces are only supposed to be using them in lethally dangerous encounters when the only options are 50,000 volts or a bullet.

You'd be wrong.

Don't be embarrassed, it's not an unreasonable belief. Ujjal Dosanjh former Attorney General of BC certainly believed that was the use model intended when BC adopted them. It was only after the tragic death of Robert Dziekanski that he was flabbergasted to discover that the RCMP considered the high voltage electrocution weapon an 'intermediate tool' like pepper spray or physical restraint and are increasingly using them on "clearly non-combative" people that the police would just rather not take the time and effort to talk down or restrain physically. Pressing a button and unleashing instant agonizing pain and the clear risk of death is easier than engaging in what used to be considered basic police work.

When this zap first model was revealed in the tragic case of Robert Dziekanski, an agitated and frightened, but clearly non-threatening visitor to our country shocked multiple times only seconds after the police confronted him, the RCMP seized and tried to withhold from the public the video that revealed their willingness to skip any kind of engagement and go straight to the electric torture.

Now we discover that they are still attempting to keep the details of their ever increasing use of the device from the Canadian people. It's none of our business apparently.

OTTAWA - The RCMP is stripping crucial details about Taser firings from public reports as use of the controversial stun guns skyrockets across the country.
A joint investigation by The Canadian Press and CBC found the Mounties are now refusing to divulge key information that must be recorded each time they draw their electronic weapons.
As a result, Canadians will know much less about who is being hit with the 50,000-volt guns, whether they were armed, why they were fired on and whether they were injured.
Taser report forms obtained under the Access to Information Act show the Mounties have used the powerful weapons more than 4,000 times since introducing them seven years ago.
Incidents have increased dramatically, topping 1,000 annually in each of the last two years compared with about 600 in 2005. The overwhelming majority of firings took place in Western Canada, where the national force often leads front-line policing.
As Taser use escalates, however, the RCMP has tightened the lid of secrecy.

Information stripped from the forms includes details of several Taser cases the Mounties previously made public under the access law. In effect, the RCMP is reclassifying details of Taser use - including some telling facts that raised pointed questions about how often the stun guns are fired and why.
A Canadian Press analysis last November of 563 incidents between 2002 and 2005 found three in four suspects Tasered by the RCMP were unarmed. Several of those reports suggested a pattern of stun-gun use as a handy tool to keep drunk or rowdy suspects in line, rather than to defuse major threats.
But the Mounties are now censoring Taser report forms to conceal related injuries, duration of shocks, whether the individual was armed, what police tried before resorting to the stun gun, and precise dates of firings.

It is legal to film the police anywhere they are performing their official duties, although it makes them very unhappy and making armed people who've have a tendency to electrocute first and ask questions later unhappy has it's risks. There's a growing movement worldwide to have multiple cameras aimed at the police whenever they're in sight.

This is beginning to seem like simple self defense.

Spotted at Larry Hubich's place.

January 20, 2008

Rein in those tasers

January 19, 2008
Editorial, The Globe and Mail

At a public forum organized by the Toronto Police Services Board on Thursday, Thomas Smith, co-founder of Arizona-based Taser International Inc., found himself placed on the defensive by members of the public opposed to the weapon. Patti Gillman, the sister of a man who died after being tasered by Vancouver police in 2004, told Mr. Smith that her brother, Robert Bagnell, was unarmed and was no threat to police or to the public when he was fatally shot with the stun gun. There was little Mr. Smith could really be expected to say in response to such information. His company merely manufactures the 50,000-volt weapon. Taser International doesn't decide how and when to use it. That's left to the discretion of individual police officers. And that's part of the problem.

Tasers are held up by police as a relatively safe alternative to handguns. Yet they are often used in cases where police would never have pulled handguns. It is inconceivable, for example, that police would have used handguns in the case of the 17-year-old Ottawa high-school student tasered last month because he was acting strangely near a busy road. The boy said he was distraught over a breakup with his girlfriend, but was out of the traffic and had his hands up when he was tasered by police.

The same surely can be said of 16-year-old Randy Fryingpan, who was tasered six times in just over a minute by Edmonton police in 2002. The boy was drunk, and sleeping in the back seat of a friend's car. He was tasered when he failed to respond to an officer's orders to get up. A judge later described the incident as cruel and unusual punishment. The same applies to the 2004 Edmonton police tasering of Hector Jara, who was given jolts even though he had surrendered to police and was lying face down on the ground after a car chase. The courts said that Mr. Jara was "completely at [the police's] mercy" when he was twice tasered and that police actions in that case were "irresponsible."

Deaths as a result of police taserings, such as those of Mr. Bagnell or Robert Dziekanski, the Polish newcomer tasered to death by the RCMP at Vancouver International Airport last Oct. 14, are still relatively unusual. But police taserings are not, and would become even more a matter of routine if police in Toronto and many other jurisdictions in Canada had their way.

That fact must weigh heavily in the assessment by the Toronto Police Services Board and the Ontario government of the request from Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair to spend $8.6-million to equip and train every front-line officer in Toronto with a taser. Mr. Blair believes that wide dissemination of the taser among officers is a way to "save lives." In some instances it might. But the tasers also cost lives, and risk imposing other costs, including jeopardizing public confidence in the police. Civilian authorities should be highly dubious about making Mr. Smith's frightening device ubiquitous.

November 20, 2007

update: Hundreds honour man hit by Taser at airport

Again, I ask .. where were the EMERGENCY workers?

Where tasars used on a man having a PTSD attack?

Are people really that IGNORANT??

VIDEO: Hundreds pay respects to Taser victim

Video shows final minutes before death

Taser gun: How it works (.pdf)

Hundreds honour man hit by Taser

CP Video: Funeral for taser victim

Day: Tasers necessary

RCMP officers reassigned

RCMP confident about Taser probe

Video stirs outrage

RCMP officers reassigned

OTTAWA–RCMP commissioner William Elliott broke his silence yesterday on the death of Robert Dziekanski, who was hit with a Taser, saying the four officers involved in the incident at Vancouver International Airport have been reassigned.

Grief, anger expressed at memorial service for 40-year-old Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski

Petti Fong
Western Canada Bureau Chief

Kamloops, B.C.–Hundreds of people packed a funeral home here yesterday to both grieve and express their outrage over the death of Robert Dziekanski, the Polish man who died last month at the Vancouver airport.

Many of those attending the memorial service in Kamloops, the town where Dziekanski was supposed to start his new life in Canada, only knew him through the lens of a video camera.

Millions of people around the world saw the video of his last moments – a panic-stricken man barricading himself into the international arrivals hall before police shot him with a Taser gun.

His mother, Zofia Cisowski, wiped away her tears to quietly narrate a slideshow of Dziekanski's photographs shown during the memorial celebration of the 40-year-old man's life.

"That's my brother, that's my uncle, that's us,"

Cisowski whispered to pictures of her son, a smiling, swarthy man, arms wrapped around family in his native Poland.

Cisowski had worked for seven years to save up enough money to sponsor her son.

He was supposed to look after her and support her as she aged, according to Maciej Krych, Poland's consul general in Vancouver.

"The people in Poland are still in shock. They cannot believe something like this could happen in Canada,"

said Krych, who vowed that the Polish government will continue pressing the federal department of foreign affairs for answers.

Dziekanski was cremated following a private funeral two weeks ago. His mother, who plans to keep part of her son's ashes with her in Kamloops and return part to Poland, said she hopes some good comes from her son's death.

When Yuri Baltakis, a friend of Cisowski, got up to speak at the memorial service, he said a few words in Polish and nearly half the mourners raised their right hand.

"Most of you are confused and can't follow that simple instruction," said Baltakis. "That is what it was like for him for nine hours at the airport."

Mother and son were separated at the airport by just a few hundred feet behind frosted windows and security doors.

But because of language difficulties and poor signage, neither could find the other.

After hours of searching, Cisowski made the four-hour drive back to Kamloops hoping there would be a message waiting from her son.

Baltakis said yesterday that the airport should have had people on staff who could provide help or at least direct someone like Dziekanski, who had taken his first flight from Poland to Canada, to a phone where he could call for directions.

At the service, Joseph and Maria Drobina, who emigrated from Poland a year ago, said they had a similar experience. Just two days before Dziekanski arrived at the airport, Joseph Drobina's sister, who did not speak any English, could not find anyone to help her.

"She had travelled before but there was no effort from anyone at the airport to help her or help us try to connect," said Maria Drobina. "When we heard what happened to Zofia's son, we knew this will happen to other people, and pray to God it will not be the same tragedy."

Among the nearly 300 people who attended the memorial service, a handful were outside carrying signs urging the RCMP to ban the use of Taser guns.

Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day has ordered a review of the weapon, but has resisted calls by critics galvanized by Dziekanski's death for a moratorium on the guns, which deliver 50,000 volts of electricity to their targets. Since 2002, Amnesty International, which has advocated banning Tasers, reports that 17 people have died in Canada as a result of the weapon.

A preliminary autopsy done on Dziekanski showed that he had no drugs or alcohol in his system, but a definitive cause of death has not yet been determined.

A coroner's inquest will be held in May.

With files from The Canadian Press

update: Hundreds honour man hit by Taser at airport

Again, I ask .. where were the EMERGENCY workers?

Where tasars used on a man having a PTSD attack?

Are people really that IGNORANT??

VIDEO: Hundreds pay respects to Taser victim

Video shows final minutes before death

Taser gun: How it works (.pdf)

Hundreds honour man hit by Taser

CP Video: Funeral for taser victim

Day: Tasers necessary

RCMP officers reassigned

RCMP confident about Taser probe

Video stirs outrage

RCMP officers reassigned

Grief, anger expressed at memorial service for 40-year-old Polish immigrant Robert Dziekanski

Petti Fong
Western Canada Bureau Chief

Many of those attending the memorial service in Kamloops, the town where Dziekanski was supposed to start his new life in Canada, only knew him through the lens of a video camera.

Millions of people around the world saw the video of his last moments – a panic-stricken man barricading himself into the international arrivals hall before police shot him with a Taser gun.

His mother, Zofia Cisowski, wiped away her tears to quietly narrate a slideshow of Dziekanski's photographs shown during the memorial celebration of the 40-year-old man's life.

"That's my brother, that's my uncle, that's us,"

Cisowski whispered to pictures of her son, a smiling, swarthy man, arms wrapped around family in his native Poland.

Cisowski had worked for seven years to save up enough money to sponsor her son.

He was supposed to look after her and support her as she aged, according to Maciej Krych, Poland's consul general in Vancouver.

"The people in Poland are still in shock. They cannot believe something like this could happen in Canada,"

said Krych, who vowed that the Polish government will continue pressing the federal department of foreign affairs for answers.

When Yuri Baltakis, a friend of Cisowski, got up to speak at the memorial service, he said a few words in Polish and nearly half the mourners raised their right hand.

"Most of you are confused and can't follow that simple instruction," said Baltakis. "That is what it was like for him for nine hours at the airport."

Mother and son were separated at the airport by just a few hundred feet behind frosted windows and security doors.

But because of language difficulties and poor signage, neither could find the other.

After hours of searching, Cisowski made the four-hour drive back to Kamloops hoping there would be a message waiting from her son.

"She had travelled before but there was no effort from anyone at the airport to help her or help us try to connect," said Maria Drobina. "When we heard what happened to Zofia's son, we knew this will happen to other people, and pray to God it will not be the same tragedy."

Among the nearly 300 people who attended the memorial service, a handful were outside carrying signs urging the RCMP to ban the use of Taser guns.

A preliminary autopsy done on Dziekanski showed that he had no drugs or alcohol in his system, but a definitive cause of death has not yet been determined.

A coroner's inquest will be held in May.

With files from The Canadian Press

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

~ What must be done next ~

Website: http://www.MoveToAmend.org Mission: We, the People of the United States of America, reject the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United, and move to amend our Constitution to: * Firmly establish that money is not speech, and that human beings, not corporations, are persons entitled to constitutional rights. * Guarantee the right to vote and to participate, and to have our votes and participation count. * Protect local communities, their economies, and democracies against illegitimate "preemption" actions by global, national, and state governments. Company Overview: On January 21, 2010, with its ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations are persons, entitled by the U.S. Constitution to buy elections and run our government. Human beings are people; corporations are legal fictions. The Supreme Court is misguided in principle, and wrong on the law. In a democracy, The People rule.

Proposed change to the US Constitution

We the People

I. Powers and Rights Reserved To We the People, Never Delegated or Violated Without Consent

A. The People are expressly defined as human beings and does not refer to corporations or contractual relationships.

B. No contract, agreement, or promise may ever bind any human to refuse to enforce the law, or prohibit them from speaking on matters of public interest.

C. We the People may believe anything, including the possible belief that this Constitution must be discarded and replaced with a superior document which defends the People and protects their power to enforce this Constitution against the Government.

D. The People are educated to apply the lessons of history to ensure rights are preserved, power asserted, and this Constitution is protected from domestic and foreign enemies.

E. The People have the enforceable right and power to review any public document and access any public official.

F. The People have the enforceable right to engage in any speech, communication, or discussion on issues of war crimes, government incompetence, or allegations of reckless government planning and maladministration.

G. Government officials, agencies, departments may not invoke any power or right they have denied to the People.

H. The People have the right to affordable housing. Where none is available, the government is denied the power to prosecute anyone for not living in a home, or residing in a public park, open forest, or public lands.

I. The People have the enforceable right to freely travel, without questions, and without delay. Any law enforcement officer, agents, or contacted security official who uses any ruse, scheme, or deception to engage in pretextual stops shall be enforced as a violation of this Constitution.

J. The People have the enforceable right to compel govenment officials, contractors, and securty personnel to identify themselves, disclose their policies and procedures, and respond to complaints about violations of this Constitution, the Supreme Law, or laws of war.

K. The People may not be subject to any electronic surveillance except on probable cause and a warrant before a judicial tribunal. The President, Congress and others are expressly denied the power to enact, create, use, or rely on quasi-judicial tribunals to self-certify warrants to conduct surveillance.

L. All denied powers to the US Government in this Constitution are reserved to the People to be used to defend the Constitution.

II. Powers and Rights Reserved to States

A. States shall have authority to enforce any law within their jurisdiction. Failure to enforce the laws of war shall be prosecuted as a war crime.

B. States shall, when the Federal Government refuses to enforce the Constitution or Supreme Law, enforce the national and international law against contractors, legal counsel, state or US government officials.

C. Any state may start impeachment investigations or proceedings against the President, Member of Congress, or US government official on issues of international laws of war, domestic rebellion, or violations of the Supreme Law oath of office, or Geneva Conventions. The States shall, upon receipt of an impeachment investigation or conviction from any other state, shall within 10 days debate that resolution. If convicted by 2/3 of the States, that US government official shall be removed from office. Any effort to thwart State efforts to enforce the US Constitution through impeachment investigations or impeachment proceedings at the State level may be construed as a subsequent violation of this Constitution and laws of war.

D. The States may, without notice, organize themselves to collectively defend this Constitution from the domestic enemies in the United States government. The States Governors have the standing power, right, and authority to use deadly combat force to enforce this Constitution against US government officials.

E. A failure of any State official to enforce the laws of war shall be subject to a war crimes trial within 90 days of discovering that evidence. Where there are credible allegations of war crimes, a failure to investigate shall be construed as a subsequent war crime, punishable by the death penalty.

F. States have the power to enforce contract obligations between contractors and the US government which affect the rights of their State citizens. Failure to enforce these contractual obligations against the contractors or US government could be construed as a subsequent violation under the laws of war and US Constitution against legal counsel, state officials, or court officers.

III. Independent Branch

A. All US government, contractor-provided, and legal counsel data shall be retained in an independent branch.

B. The President, Congress, and Judicial branches have no power, right or claim to not fully fund this Independent Branch.

C. The Independent Branch conducts electronic surveillance of the US government, stores that data, and ensures there are independent, safe, retained records of all US government transaction, including conversations and memos between legal counsel and government officials. Once created for the government or connected with any legal or illegal activity, these records are public records.

D. The data may be seen only upon a showing of reasonable belief or suspicion by the United States Congress, Court, or Executive Branch that the information may be useful in enforcing the Constitution, Supreme Law, or Geneva Conventions.

E. Private citizens may view any data, unless the US government provides sufficient, detailed evidence why that request for information should not be met for bonafide, lawful secrets. Any effort to hide evidence behind a claim of "state secrets," where that claim is linked with an effort to bypass the Constitution, oath of office, Supreme Law, or laws of war may be punishable by the death penalty.

F. All government data belongs to the People. Any legal counsel working for the US government shall ensure that the People's right to reliable information is protected. A failure to protect this information could be construed as a war crime.

IV. Prosecutorial Branch

A. All prosecutorial options are denied of the President.

B. The Prosecutorial branch has the power to raise independent combat power, support them, and may lawfully use that deadly combat force to confront Members of Congress, the Judicial Branch Officers, or the Presidents upon showing of probable cause for war crimes.

C. The prosecutorial power is the exclusive power of the prosecution branch. However, anyone may make a claim of illegal activity, and enforce the laws of the United States and States respectively. Any effort to block anyone from unilaterally attempting to enforce the laws of war through discovery, investigation, and open discussion of those alleged war crimes shall be construed as a possible subsequent offense under the laws of war.

D. Legal counsel are subject to public review, audit, and can be required, with fair notice, of a requirement to demonstrate before any court their compliance with the laws of war.

E. Legal counsel may be denied authority to conduct discovery during any investigation when that discovery is linked with efforts that would thwart war crimes investigation, enforcement of the Supreme law or Geneva Conventions.

V. Judicial Branch

A. The Judicial Branch is above the Legislative Branch and Executive Branch only in order of precedence. The Judicial Branch is a co-equal branch, and closest to the People and Constitution. It is least responsive, and most slow to the People's daily interests to enforce the Constitution and Supreme Law or Geneva Conventions.

B. Where the Judicial Branch does not timely enforce the Constitution, Supreme Law, or laws of war, the States and People retain the power and right to investigate and prosecute allegations of US government illegal activity, war crimes, or violations of the Supreme law.

C. All precedents under the laws of war are binding on the Judicial Branch, US government, and the People through enforcement actions.

D. Any decision by any judicial officer not to fully enforce the laws of war, Supreme Law, or this Constitution may be construed as a war crime, subject to the death penalty.

VI. Legislative Branch

A. The Legislative Branch is listed after the Judicial Branch because it is less responsive to the People.

B. The Members of Congress may be stopped between sessions and held to account for their failure to enforce the laws of war.

C. Refusing to investigate or impeach the President, Judicial Officers, or any current or former US government official for alleged war crimes, maladministration, illegal warfare, or other crimes against the People, States, or US Government shall be prima facie evidence of an intent to not fully assert ones oath of office, and punishable by the death penalty under the laws of war.

D. There are three chambers to the Congress. The Senate and House have a legal duty to fully enforce the laws. Any decision to not timely review evidence of impeachable offenses, or not investigate war crimes or maladministration could be construed as subsequent offenses under the laws of war.

E. The Superior Chamber shall decide, before any debate, whether the proposed bill is or is not Constitutional. This determination is subject to approval, challenge, and rejection by the People, States, and Judicial Branch.

F. The Congress is denied the exclusive power to make rules. Any rule which prohibits any investigation into alleged malfeasance in re the laws of war, Supreme Law, or oath of office is illegal, and may be construed as a subsequent offense under the laws of war.

G. The Congress shall comply with public audits, and timely provide within 45 days of an audit report a statement of remedy, and outline a plan within 90 days to fully comply with all legal obligations under the Statute, Supreme Law, oath of office, and laws of war.

H. The Congress may raise and support an army, and independently order that army only against the President when the President refuses to enforce the laws of war, or comply with his legal obligations under this Constitution.

VII. Executive Branch

A. The Executive Branch is led by three Presidents, co-equal with non-overlapping jurisdictions. The Executive Branch has one power: Executive Power. All actions taken under that one power are lesser authorities not powers. The Executive Branch has no power to create new powers or assign itself broader power.

B. The Executive Branch is listed last because it is the least responsive to the People, and the greatest threat of tyranny to this Constitution. The President is a clerk, not a King or Emperor. The President only manages programs. The President has no power to ignore, rewrite, or refuse to enforce the law. Each of the three Presidents shall have an ongoing requirement to demonstrate to the People and States and Congress and Courts compliance with the Constitution, Supreme Law, oath of office, and laws of war.

C. The Domestic Affairs President is responsive to the States and US Government on internal affairs.

D. The Foreign Affairs President shall have exclusive power to interact with foreign powers. The Foreign Affairs President is denied any power to violate the laws of war, or use covert activity against American citizens.

E. The Executive Branch, Congress, Judiciary, and Foreign Affairs President are denied the power to thwart any lawful State action to organize with foreign powers and agents to defend the US Constitution, enforce the laws of war, or protect the rights and powers of the People and States against domestic encroachments by the US government, legal counsel, or other US government officials.

F. The Commander in Chief shall only have power to lead combat operations during war time. Congress shall conduct ongoing, public reviews whether the Commander in Chief is or is not competent in managing combat operations. The Presidents and Commander in Chief are denied the power to prohibit Congress from using electronic surveillance or use separately raised and supported armies to conduct this oversight during wartime and peacetime.

G. The Executive Branch is denied the power to block anyone from getting access to illegal activity related to the laws of war.

H. During Peacetime, the Commander in Chief shall periodically cooperate with ongoing Oversight of US combat forces to ensure they are combat ready, fully trained on the laws of war, and prepared to lawfully be used to defend the Constitution against foreign and domestic enemies.

I. The Executive Branch and Presidents and officers, agents, contractors, and personnel are denied the power, right, or authority to order anyone to ignore any statute, law, legal requirement, or obligation under the Constitution.

J. The Executive Branch has no power or authority to directly contact the Legislative Branch by name. The President may only request, not order other branches of government. All Communications between the Executive and Legislative Branch shall pass through the Prosecutorial Branch, and retained in the National Archives. Those records are available for public inspection at any time. The People have the enforceable right to compel the Executive Branch, Legislature, and Judicial Branch to produce documents.

K. The Executive Branch, Congress, Judicial Branch, and Prosecutorial Branch, and States are denied the power to wage warfare, information warfare, or harass American civilians through his agents, combat troops, or third parties in the United states or from overseas. Any funds used for this illegal purpose belong to the People and States. Contracts used to enforce, compel, or organize this illegal activity are not enforceable, and contrary to public policy.

L. The Presidents are denied a presumption of competence until proven. The President shall always have the burden of proof, and is expressly denied a presumption of good faith until demonstrated with overwhelming evidence in public. An election result is not proof of competence nor does it satisfy a presumption of good faith, only of mastery to win an election through legal or illegal methods and deception.

M. The Executive Branch and Presidents and subordinate agency head, contractor, and employees are expressly denied any assurance any conversation he has related to illegal activity, war crimes, unlawful acts, or other threats to the US Constitution shall remain secret behind any shield, scheme, agreement, or technology. Any order a President or anyone gives to anyone to hide, destroy,not provide, or conceal evidence of illegal activity may be construed as a subsequent war crime, punishable by the death penalty. This restriction against following illegal orders may not be bypassed by claiming the order was from a non-person, electronic device, or other non-Constitutionally recognized entity, database, policy, guide, or other document.

N. The Presidents are denied the power to use any combat force, technology, or other military weapon or plan against American civilians, except in cases of internal rebellion which only the Congress shall approve in writing. When the Congress fails to act, or abuses its authority, the State Governors may lawfully use deadly combat force to detain and enforce the laws of war prohibiting illegal use of force against American civilians.

O. The Presidents are denied the power to induce any civilian to take any action that might deny them on any Geneva protections as a civilian. Any order, ruse, scheme, propaganda, or unreliable information to induce anyone to wage war, information warfare, or any action to harass civilians is punishable by the death penalty, and may be enforced as a violation of the laws of war.

P. The President, when delegating any power to any agency head, agrees that that agency shall be organized as if it were a separate, lesser, and not coequal branch. Those agencies shall fully cooperate with the other branches of government to ensure power within the branch or department is divided. There is no single agency, division, or office in the Executive Branch that is beyond ongoing oversight by the other four branches.

Q. The President shall have no power to block the Congress, States, Judiciary, Prosecutorial, and Independent Branch from a having co-equal status to oversee, manage, and organize that lesser branch. If the President refuses to substantially comply with that requirement, Congress may not lawfully provide funding for that agency, and the funds return to the States and People.

LadyBroadoak Visionary Planetary Healing Tutorial

May 03, 2008

Evidence That Stun Guns May Stimulate The Heart

Evidence That Stun Guns May Stimulate The Heart

March 25, 2008

the recent taser commentary in Canada ..

None of your business

January 20, 2008

Rein in those tasers

November 20, 2007

ShareThis

~ What must be done next ~

~ Please sign and pass on ~

Search This Blog

Facebook Badge

Followers

BlogCatalog

Current information clusters

War crimes/Impeachment/arrest swicki then "Peak oil, peak dollar KlusterfucK swicki

Lady Broadoak

Translate Blog

Blog Archive

LINKS, real good stuff!

Proposed change to the US Constitution

sitemeter

About Me

Labels