What Part of UNALIENABLE Do You Not Understand?

Many years ago there was an instance in which a young male mountaineer was physically held hostage by an 800-1,000 pound boulder which had fallen on him. After 5 days of being trapped with no food or water, he felt his only escape was to crudely saw away at his trapped arm with his pocket knife. We read of this story and inevitably think “how archaic.  How cruel.  Wish that someone had come along to help him and remove that boulder.” While the man has been able to survive without this appendage, I assure you that this mans arm was intended to stay with him throughout his life. That’s exactly why God usually sends us all down to earth with two arms, two hands, two legs, a brain, etc.  These body parts are unalienable to us.  They are not to be removed from us by anyone else. They are given to us as human beings. That’s simply what rights are. It was certainly unfortunate that no one could come along and help remove this boulder in order to save the freedom this man had to relinquish in losing his arm. But the real question is, there’s a boulder that has fallen on We The People. Are we going to just sit there and crudely cut away at our unalienable rights, or are we going take care of this matter as the powerful, God-fearing American people that we are?

Today’s news of Obama writing an executive order which gives Interpol the authority to act as they please in MY country is disturbing at best. For some reason Obama sees fit in his worldly wisdom to give Interpol carte blanch in conducting any investigations on American soil that they believe has merit, in any manner that they deem appropriate. This foreign, United Nations based entity has been given “untouchable” status meaning that they are not under any requirements to observe ANY of our Constitutional laws, including search and seizure, habeas corpus, fair trial, etc., regardless of whether or not they are on American soil when exercising their investigations.  In other words, Obama is attempting to undermine our 4th Amendment rights. What part of “unalienable rights” do these so-called government leaders not understand? Yes, I’m sorry to say that Reagan previously chipped away at our rights by giving Interpol democratic immunity on his executive order. But now Obama has seen fit to take this gaffe and enlarge it significantly with an accompanying executive order.

Our picture of security perfection, the Department of Homeland Security, botches their job of security and thus allows a person on a plane with a bomb, who is also on a terrorist watch list.  I’m confused.  The person who pours water in your glass in a nice restaurant…they are there to strictly pour water into your glass, right? Should the water not actually go into your glass and on your lap, should they not be fired?  The DHS has one job and one job only and that is ostensibly to protect America—from terrorists, tyrants, usurpers, and despots.  Clearly they failed at this one focused task, and they failed big time.

They mess up, so now we, the rest of the law-abiding American citizens, have to be exposed to unreasonable searches via a full body scan or even a body cavity search? Again, what part of “unalienable rights” do people not understand??  The Constitution protects us all from being treated as a terrorist or a criminal without substantiated evidence, and yet the DHS sees fit to admonish all law enforcement to do just that towards anyone who stands for freedom of religion, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of private property, the right to bear arms, as well as a love for the US Constitution, as a terrorist! 

The DHS can’t allow (or perhaps even persuade) a bad person to board an airplane and then use that as an excuse to take away American rights.  The Constitution doesn’t say “unalienable rights—unless a corrupt government is in power.”  These rights are simply unalienable—meaning that they shall never become alien to our lives or our hearts.

Our tyrannical leaders have passed an abomination of a spending bill in the form of the “stimulus” bill as well as the health care bill.  (Just to name a few.) In doing so they are completely ignoring the general welfare clause of our Constitution—general meaning that whatsoever taxes, fees, etc. which they enforce or establish must be for the GENERAL welfare of this nation, and never for the private benefit of a few.  (It doesn’t matter that the Supreme Court interpreted this clause incorrectly back in 1936. Too often folks forget that even the Supreme Court works for us, not the other way around) No one—and I mean NO ONE—can take away our unalienable rights!

Legislation on firearms, privacy, Congressional spending, voting, freedom of speech, freedom OF religion (not FROM religion), and so many others that our government aims to progress are targeted directly at removing us from our unalienable rights. Again. Removing us from our unalienable rights simply cannot be done. They can try mightily to promote the façade that such rights can be relinquished, but indeed they cannot. They are God given rights that we hold the moment we breath our first breath.  As such, even if our entire nation relinquishes their BELIEF to these rights, the rights themselves still cannot be removed from us. Though the young mountaineer removed himself from his arm, will his arm not still be his throughout the eternities upon his resurrection?  Our unalienable rights can be removed from us no easier than any appendage of our body. Yes, we can crudely saw away at our rights in order to temporarily escape our plight, but in such an instance that is willingly accepting this ominous boulder of abomination as the final word on our rights.  It’s not the final word, folks. It’s not even a word of remote authority. It’s a temporary an inconvenience.  We The People should never be too busy or too distracted to remove any obstacles in our way of unalienable rights! We The People are the last line of defense for our unalienable rights.

We are to elect a portion of ourselves to defend and protect the rights and freedoms of this nation. Yet so few of us even make it to the polls or the community meetings. Those who taken to elect leaders have been sorely betrayed by a derelict and demoralized government as a whole.  As a result, the last line of defense must be called to action. Will we sever ourselves from these sacred rights by allowing a big boulder to bully our beliefs, or will we free ourselves from this attempted enslavement and remove all obstacles of our rights?

What should we do? Again, we must let our voices be heard. We must inform the government that we are not passive observers but active participants in the freedom and rights of our nations. We must logically, intelligently, and pointedly inform them that they can not deceive us. We do NOT accept the illegal labeling of us Americans by the DHS. We do not accept the illegal attempt of Obama to usurp our 4th Amendment rights. We do not accept any infringements on our right to worship God in public or in private. And we will NOT accept any future attempts to intrude on our rights. In my opinion, this must be verbalized to the usurpers just as regularly as our daily prayers.

More importantly, we must be educated in that which we intend to defend.  We must educate ourselves of this sacred document, the US Constitution. How can we defend something which we do not know?

Did you know that Joseph Smith attempted to rewrite the US Constitution?  Yes, he did. And he also attempted to have some of the apostles do so as well. They struggled with it. Joseph Smith struggled with it. As such he went to the Lord and asked, “what shall I change?”  As a result of his query we have the 98th section of the Doctrine and Covenants. “…whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.” D&C 98:7

Oh how I pray that We, His People, will not let Him down after He’s provided us with so very, very much in the form of freedom, salvation, and love. May we never CHOOSE to separate ourselves from these unalienable rights.


4 responses to “What Part of UNALIENABLE Do You Not Understand?

  1. The body scans are not only an invasion of privacy, they are indecent – an indecent act by an indecent government that has become so corrupt that it is worse than Sodom and Gomorrah. I am a middle-aged mother – I do not accept that, in order to travel, I must strip naked for a bunch of goons. I do not accept that my young daughters (four of them) must be subjected to lewd and prying eyes and disgusting comments. I do not accept that my elderly mother, in a wheelchair, must submit to this revolting assault. For that is what it is! An assault on decency as well as privacy. The Good Lord told us to be decent and modest and circumspect and this violates our religious right to fulfill that Godly mandate!

  2. What Did President Obama’s Executive Order regarding INTERPOL Do?

    Here are some background and the facts:

    On June 16, 1983, President Reagan signed Executive Order 12425, which designated the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) as a public international organization entitled to enjoy the privileges, exemptions and immunities conferred by the International Organizations Immunities Act.

    The International Organizations Immunities Act, signed into law in 1945, established a special group of foreign or international organizations whose members could work in the U.S. and enjoy certain exemptions from US taxes and search and seizure laws.

    Experts say there are about 75 organizations in the US covered by the International Organizations Immunities Act — including the United Nations, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the International Monetary Fund, the International Committee of the Red Cross, even the International Pacific Halibut Commission and Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission.

    (These privileges are not the same as the rights afforded under “diplomatic immunity,” they are considerably less. “Diplomatic immunity” comes from the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which states that a “diplomatic agent shall enjoy immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State.” That is NOT what the International Organizations Immunities Act is.)

    Basically, recognizing a group under the International Organizations Immunities Act means officials from those organizations are exempt from some taxes and customs fees, and that their records cannot be seized.

    This, I’m told, is so these organizations can work throughout the world without different countries spying on each other by accessing the records of these groups.

    Each president has designated some organizations covered by the International Organizations Immunities Act.

    President Nixon did it for the United International Bureaux for the Protection of Intellectual Property.

    President Reagan bestowed these privileges to the African Development Bank, the International Boundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico, and the World Tourism Organization, among others.

    President Bush through Executive Orders covered the European Central Bank, the African Union and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS Tuberculosis and Malaria.

    INTERPOL is course a different type of organization — it’s an investigative law enforcement body. In fact, it’s the world’s largest international police organization.

    Created in 1923, INTERPOL has 188 member countries including the US. Its purpose is to facilitate cross-border police co-operation and to work with other legitimate law enforcement organizations worldwide to prevent and combat international crime, with a focus on: drugs and criminal organizations; financial and high-tech crime; fugitives; public safety and terrorism; trafficking in human beings; and corruption.

    The US historically has participated whole-heartedly in INTERPOL; the current Secretary General of INTERPOL is Ronald Noble, a former Undersecretary of Enforcement of the Department of the Treasury during the Clinton administration.

    “The FBI and other law enforcement agencies have closely coordinated with INTERPOL for many, many years,” a former counterterrorism official who served during the Bush administration says approvingly.

    In Lyon, France, 2003, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft spoke to INTERPOL and said to Noble, “INTERPOL was already a top-flight law enforcement organization, but your dynamic leadership has brought new dimensions to this global crime-fighting resource.”

    Reagan’s 1983 executive order, however, did not provide blanket exemptions for INTERPOL officials, who at the time did not have a permanent office in the US. The provisions of the International Organizations Immunities Act that INTERPOL officials were not exempt from included:

    • Section 2(c), which provided officials immunity from their property and assets being searched and confiscated; including their archives;
    • the portions of Section 2(d) and Section 3 relating to customs duties and federal internal-revenue importation taxes;
    • Section 4, dealing with federal taxes;
    • Section 5, dealing with Social Security; and
    • Section 6, dealing with property taxes.

    I’m told INTERPOL didn’t have a permanent office in the US until 2004, which is why it wasn’t until this month afforded the same full privileges given, say, the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission by President Kennedy in 1962.

    In September 1995, President Clinton updated Reagan’s executive order with Executive Order No. 12971, giving INTERPOL officials exemption from some of the customs duties and federal internal-revenue importation taxes’.

    Then in his December 17, 2009, executive order President Obama exempted INTERPOL from the rest of the exceptions Reagan listed — Section 2(c), Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6.

    So what does the counterterrorism official from the Bush years think of this?

    He can’t believe it’s taken this long.

    “To the extent that granting these immunities to INTERPOL furthers the efficacy or ease of information-sharing or joint action on an expedited basis to act on warrants
    seems like a no brainer to me,” the official says.

    “Conservatives can’t have it both ways,” the official says. “You can’t be complaining about the hypothetical abdication of US jurisdiction at the same time you’re complaining the Obama administration is not being tough enough on national security.”

    Obama administration officials say this new executive order doesn’t allow INTERPOL to do any more than they were allowed to do once Reagan recognized them as a public international organization. Though clearly the Executive Order does prohibit US law enforcement from searching and seizing INTERPOL records, officials say, those provisions can be waived by the president if need be.

  3. It’s “inalienable” rather than “unalienable.” It seems important to be accurate.

    • Yes, and the original intent was to use the word UNalienble. Thomas Jefferson had a bit of a hissy fit in arguing with the alteration of that word. So yes, it is important to be accurate. I chose to be accurate to original history.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s