The Elite Live Above Their Worthless Peasants Means but OK Because They Are Priceless As Collateral

The elite live above their worthless peasants means but OK because they are priceless as collateral Motor Mouth RPM Religious Political Media Edict runneth through the ears De facto runneth though humanity heart and they cheered and cheered play it again Uncle Sam Justice begins with a Court of Competent Jurisdiction Independent Judiciary Legal Certainty http://www.scribd.com/doc/113882977/Spirit-Intent-Precedence-de-Jure-Constitution-or-Romans-13- Gaming-the-System-de-Facto Though clearly written in Spirit Intent Antiquity Common Law Tradition Romans 13 Gaming the System De facto it is quite possible they will not admit so Answer Spirit Intent Golden Rule Supremacy of God and the Rule of Law 1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights Human rights are commonly understood as "inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being."[1] Human rights are thus conceived as universal (applicable everywhere) and egalitarian (the same for everyone). These rights may exist as natural rights or as legal rights, in both national and international law.[2] The doctrine of human rights in international practice, within international law, global and regional institutions, in the policies of states and in the activities of non-governmental organizations, has been a cornerstone of public policy around the world. The idea of human rights[3] states, "if the public discourse of peacetime global society can be said to have a common moral language, it is that of human rights." TIED Tacit: Unspoken, implicit, inferred, implied, understood, unstated Inalienable: unchallengeable, absolute, immutable, not able to be forfeited, unassailable, incontrovertible, indisputable, undeniable Essential: Necessary, vital, indispensable, important, crucial, critical Demonstrably: Obviously, palpably, patently, evidently, noticeably, perceptibly, discernibly, apparently Sane: Rational, sensible, reasonable, sound, normal, wise, commonsensical (Antonymn) Mad Despite this, the strong claims made by the doctrine of human rights continue to provoke considerable skepticism and debates about the content, nature and justifications of human rights to this day. Indeed, the question of what is meant by a "right" is itself controversial and the subject of continued philosophical debate.[4] What's it all about Alfie? 2 Insane considered legally incompetent or irresponsible because of a psychiatric disorder showing a complete lack of reason or foresight people legally considered as psychiatrically disordered people who are considered legally incompetent or irresponsible because of a psychiatric disorder Ya but http://www.scribd.com/doc/112431371/Would-a-Government-Appointed-Court-of-Competent- Jurisdiction-Independent-Judiciary-Be-Appropriate-to-Protect-Us-From-Appropriating-Governments http://www.scribd.com/doc/116136232/CLASP-SELFS-Common-Law-Antiquity-Serpentine- Precedence-Self-Exposed-Logistics-Foil-Self http://www.scribd.com/doc/113312547/Ministry-Attorney-General-Responsible-for-Doublethink- Oversight-of-No-Accused-Counsel-Illegal-Certainty http://www.scribd.com/doc/112776958/Attorney-General-Guardian-of-the-Public-Interest- Predetermined-Not-Responsible-for-His-Actions-Under-Section-8 http://www.scribd.com/doc/114245248/Conflict-of-Interest www.cdfji.ca www.RCMP.cc www.McFrauds.com www.Tree13.com Complicit: • It was clear that some of the staff were complicit in the attempt to cover up the scandal. Right on Alfie ... precisely as I was thinking!!! Many of the basic ideas that animated the human rights movement developed in the aftermath of the Second World War and the atrocities of The Holocaust, culminating in the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Paris by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. 3 The ancient world did not possess the concept of universal human rights.[5] Ancient societies had "elaborate systems of duties... conceptions of justice, political legitimacy, and human flourishing that sought to realize human dignity, flourishing, or well-being entirely independent of human rights".[6] The modern concept of human rights developed during the early Modern period, alongside the European secularization of Judeo-Christian ethics.[7] The true forerunner of human rights discourse was the concept of natural rights which appeared as part of the medieval Natural law tradition that became prominent during the Enlightenment with such philosophers as John Locke, Francis Hutcheson, and Jean-Jacques Burlamaqui, and featured prominently in the political discourse of the American Revolution and the French Revolution. From this foundation, the modern human rights arguments emerged over the latter half of the twentieth century. Gelling as social activism and political rhetoric in many nations put it high on the world agenda.[8] All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. —Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)[9] BS HABITUAL Humanity Antiquity Borderless Inalienable Tacit Undebatable Authority Logistics Spirit S ESS Epitome Simplistic Sanity So why don't the governments understand Alfie!!! What is it you don't understand Franky ... they are Satanic for Christ sake!!! Is that a Doublethink Alfie? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rule The Golden Rule or ethic of reciprocity is a maxim,[1] ethical code, or morality [2] that essentially states either of the following: (Positive form of Golden Rule): One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself.[1] (Negative form of Golden Rule): One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated. This concept describes a "reciprocal", or "two-way", relationship between one's self and others that involves both sides equally, and in a mutual fashion. [3] [4] This concept can be explained from the perspective of psychology, philosophy, sociology, and religion. Psychologically, it involves a person empathizing with others. Philosophically, it involves a person perceiving their neighbor as also "an I" or "self." [3] [4] Sociologically, this principle is 4 applicable between individuals, between groups, and also between individuals and groups. (For example, a person living by this rule treats all people with consideration, not just members of his or her in-group). Religion is an integral part of the history of this concept. [1] [5] As a concept, the Golden Rule has a history that long predates the term "Golden Rule", or "Golden law", as it was called from the 1670s. [1] [6] As a concept of "the ethic of reciprocity," it has its roots in a wide range of world cultures, and is a standard way that different cultures use to resolve conflicts.[1] [5] It has a long history, and a great number of prominent religious figures and philosophers have restated its reciprocal, "two-way" nature in various ways (not limited to the above forms).[1] Rushworth Kidder discusses the early contributions of Confucius (551–479 BCE) (See a version in Confucianism below). Kidder notes that this concept's framework appears prominently in many religions, including "Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism,Zoroastrianism, and the rest of the world's major religions".[7] According to Greg M. Epstein, " 'do unto others' ... is a concept that essentially no religion misses entirely."[8] Simon Blackburn also states that the Golden Rule can be "found in some ואהבת לרעך" :form in almost every ethical tradition".[9] In his commentary to the Torah verse (Hebrew :(ca.1300 BCE "כמוך You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against your kinsfolk. Love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD. — Leviticus 19:18 [10] , the "Great Commandment" As Plaut points out, this is the earliest written version of the Golden Rule in the Bible in a positive form.[11] All versions and forms of the proverbial Golden Rule have one aspect in common: they all demand that people treat others in a manner in which they themselves would like to be treated. Contents [hide] 1 Antiquity 1.1 Ancient Babylon 1.2 Ancient China 1.3 Ancient Egypt 1.4 Ancient Greece 1.5 Ancient India 1.6 Ancient Tamizhagam 2 Religion and philosophy 2.1 Global ethic 2.2 Bahá'í Faith 2.3 Buddhism 2.4 Christianity 2.5 Confucianism 2.6 Hinduism 2.7 Humanism 2.8 Islam 2.9 Jainism 2.10 Judaism 2.10.1 Context 2.10.2 Sources 2.11 Mohism 2.12 Platonism 2.13 Quakerism 2.14 Scientology 2.15 Sikhism 5 2.16 Taoism 2.17 The Way to Happiness 2.18 Wicca 3 Other contexts 3.1 Human rights 3.2 Psychology 4 Criticisms and responses to criticisms 4.1 Differences in values or interests 4.2 Differences in situations 4.3 Responses to criticisms 5 Scientific research 6 See also 7 References 8 External links [edit]Antiquity [edit]Ancient Babylon The Code of Hammurabi, (1780 BCE),[12] dealt with the reciprocity of the Lex talionis, in ways, such by limiting retribution, as they did concepts of retribution (literally "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth"). [edit]Ancient China The Golden Rule existed among all the major philosophical schools of Ancient China: Mohism, Taoism, and Confucianism. Examples of the concept include: "Zi Gong asked, saying, "Is there one word that may serve as a rule of practice for all one's life?" The Master said, "Is not RECIPROCITY such a word?" – Confucius [13] [14] "Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself." – Confucius [15] "If people regarded other people's families in the same way that they regard their own, who then would incite their own family to attack that of another? For one would do for others as one would do for oneself." – Mozi "The sage has no interest of his own, but takes the interests of the people as his own. He is kind to the kind; he is also kind to the unkind: for Virtue is kind.

Load more