Thursday, July 06, 2006
One of the local news stories I've been following is the story of 1st Lt. Ehren Watada, an Asian American officer from Hawaii who is refusing to go to Iraq on the grounds that the Iraq War is immoral and that the US government misled the country in claiming Iraq was connected to the 9/11 attacks. Today, the army formally charged Lt. Watada.
While it was expected that Lt. Watada would be charge for intentionally missing the deployment of his unit, apparently the more serious charges have to do with the government's assertation that Watada's statements are equivalent to contempt and conduct unbecoming an officer. A quote from the article:
As I ate lunch in the International District yesterday at my favorite Japanese comfort food restaurant, Takohachi, and I happened to read an interesting letter in the North American Post, the Nikkei community newspaper they carry there.
The letter (July 5th, 2006 issue):
Mr. Odoi asks an interesting question... as far as I can tell, most Japanese American and Asian American groups have been reluctant to announce any sort of support for Lt. Watada. Is it really because the Asian American community fears that supporting him will give the appearance of creedance to the "perpetual foreigner" stereotype - the myth held by many people that assume that by virtue of our looks and culture, that Asian Americans are "disloyal" Americans? Or could it be that the lack of a strong Asian American political voice in general means that any potential support for Lt. Watada is automatically drowned out?
One thing's for sure... already there's plenty of letters to the editor ripping into Watada from the local set of Bush followers...
In July 2004 almost 200 Americans filed a landmark lawsuit against the U.S. Government seeking to have the federal Judiciary declare -- for the first time in history -- the constitutional meaning of the First Amendment Petition clause including the Right of the People to enforce the Right of Petition if Redress is denied.Post a Comment
We The People believes the Right to Petition is, in fact, the "capstone" Right of the Bill of Rights and that its effect is the direct exercise of Popular Sovereignty -- the First Principle of the Founding documents that declares government is the servant of Men
In addition to the property tax case, the Judges of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals are coming to grips with these truths now that all the briefs have been filed in We The People v United States.
This, of course, is the landmark lawsuit brought against the federal government for its failure to respond to our Petitions for Redress of constitutional torts regarding the war powers, tax, privacy and money clauses of the Constitution of the United States of America.
In its April response brief to the Court of Appeals the government argues most strenuously for, and relies completely upon, a claim of "Sovereign Immunity" against We the People. In short, the government openly asserts that it possesses absolute immunity from its own People -- even for the commission of constitutional torts. The government argues that because Congress has not authorized this kind of lawsuit via federal legislation, that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction under the doctrine of sovereign immunity.
In our Reply Brief, the People refute these hollow and dangerous assertions and establish that in America, and under the Constitution of the United States of America, the concept of government immunity is, and by legal design, must be a myth. We argue that in a legal sense, sovereign immunity cannot exist without practically "upending" our Constitution and depriving the People of their most fundamental Right -- i.e., the Right to dominion over their servant governments and that any assertion by the Government to such sovereign immunity is an anti-constitutional and unlawful usurpation of power.
In sum, the Plaintiff's Reply brief to the DC Circuit asks the appellate court to recognize that sovereign immunity is a myth, that no act of Congress can trump the Constitution, and that the higher order constitutional questions of the Rights of the People and the obligations of the government under the Petition Clause must be determined by the Court before the Court determines the question of the obligations of the People and the limited privileges and immunities the government may enjoy under the Internal Revenue Code, including the Anti-Injunction Act.
Please, find out more and support the fight to defend the constitution! Get on board guys. I read a ruling that found the IRS's enforcement sections of the internal revenue code where found unconstitutional! They can't take any of your posesions for not paying taxes unless they take you to court and give you due process and get a federal court order! This guy is taking it to the MAN!
Just thought you would like to know!