Tag Archives: James Carlton Todd

Why is Senate Bill 1867 so bad? In the Exercise of Absolute Power, Justice Forbids Status Crimes and Requires Blindness to all Categories of People (Prejudicial legal Classification of “Protected” or “Disfavored” Groups ALWAYS violates due process and leads down a short, steep, and very slippery slope straight into Totalitarianism)

Someone named “Jonathan” wrote in and asked: “So I’m just curious to know whether you would extend miranda rights to foreign terrorists operating on American soil? Why should an American who joins say Al Qaeda be entitled to a trial or a lawyer or any other right under our Constitution?”***(note below)

My answer to these questions [and the pathetic Senate debate excerpted here from the December 7, 2011 Daily Show with Jon Steward (http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-december-7-2011/arrested-development)] is that, contrary to current civil rights practice in the United States, governmentally imposed categories and mandatory categorization of people NEVER promotes equality but ALWAYS tends to support and advance both tyranny and real inequality.  Nobody said it better than Rand Paul: “Detaining citizens without a trial is not American.”

By contrast, voluntary categorization, classification, and all assertions of identity originating from the people are among the surest guarantors and symptoms of freedom and genuine equality.  In fact, I would submit that the voluntary and intentional creation and maintenance of identity is one of the Great Traditions of the United States of America which has defined some of the greatest and most distinctive events in the history of this Continent, from the settlement of the Pilgrim Nonconformist Separatists in New England in the 17th Century through the “Great Awakening” of the 18th Century, the Mormon emigration Westward (and many smaller “separate community, separate lifeway” experiments) in the 19th Century (including the Amish), right up until the Cultural upheaval of the 1960s, when “Hippies” and “Flower Children” sought to give a new meaning to Freedom in America.   The decision to maintain cultural separateness has historically been protected by the United States Supreme Court in the greatest of its “substantive due process” decisions (e.g. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399, 401 (1923) and Wisconsin v. Yoder,  406 U.S. 205, 232—233 (1972)).**  

I would go so far as to maintain that involuntarily classifying people  or sorting them into “favored” and “disfavored” groups as a matter of law without trial always leads to violations of due process.  No movies or other literature ever illustrated this inherent injustice in the prejudicial and discriminatory processes of classification and labeling people one way or another than V-for-Vendetta in 2005 and Paul Verhoeven’s Black Book in 2006.  

I would also say that the only real PURPOSES people EVER have in classifying their fellow man (and woman) into involuntary groups is to deny them due process, and that this is simply intolerable under the American Constitution.

Note that the Bill of Rights contains no categories of persons, but only restrictions on the power of government: absolutely and unqualifiedly stated.  Rather, Amendments I, II, IV, IX, and X refer simply to “the people.”  Amendment V refers to “no person” and “any person”, since criminal prosecutions are almost always, by definition, brought on a one-by-one individual basis.  Even Nazi Germany, for example, never indicted “the Jews”, nor, during the 1950s, were there ever prosecutions against “the Communists”.  Due process of  law simply does not allow for categorical indictments.

Finally, Amendment VI refers only to “the accused”, again an individual classification.  (Despite the customary usage of the masculine gender throughout the bill of rights when referring to individuals, no one has ever suggested that the framers intended these rights only to apply to men: it was the grammatical economy of the time not to say “he and she” or “his and hers” or “him and her” as it is sometimes thought more acceptable to do now.)

So these are the major reasons why, in response to Jonathan’s question, I believe that “Miranda rights” (i.e. the full inventory of rights Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights) should be extended to all “foreign terrorists operating on American soil.”  To do otherwise would be to “prejudge” both who is foreign and who is a terrorist, and would  make both words “foreign” and “terrorists” into prejudicial, disfavored categories exactly analogous to “Negro” under Jim Crow in the South, “Jew” in Nazi Germany, and “Bourgeois” or “Capitalist” in Stalinist Russia.

What the 1996 AEDPA, the 2001 PATRIOT Act, and the Senate in passing S.B. 1867 have done, though, is actually MUCH worse than MERELY “discriminating against foreigners and terrorists” and in fact, much worse than “merely discriminating against, Blacks or Jews or even (to give two give two examples of a super-irrationally feared and overused but extremely vague pair of categories in modern law) “Sex Offender” and “Illegal Immigrant.”  No, the Category of “Terrorist” alone is “void for vagueness” as a matter of law.  See Papachrisou v. Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156, 169-170 (1972), and Kolender v. Lawson (Kolender v Lawson, 461 U.S. 352 (1982), attached here in adobe.pdf):

. . . “As generally stated, the void-for-vagueness doctrine requires that a penal statute define the criminal offense with sufficient definiteness that ordinary people can understand what conduct is prohibited and in a manner that does not encourage arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.” Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352, 357, 75 L. Ed. 2d 903, 103 S. Ct. 1855 (1983). 

(On the whole, the text of Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville is more amusing for its analysis of how the distinction between “idle rich” and “vagrant” under the City of Jacksonville, Florida’s “Vagrancy” ordinance blurred into meaninglessness….Papachristou v City of Jacksonville 405 US 156 92 SCt 839 02-24-1972).  “Terrorism” as a status crime under S.B. 1867 or category of criminal conduct is void for all the same reasons as was “vagrancy.”

What the Senate has done in S.B. 1867 is worse than “mere discrimination” against any of those categorical groups because in each case (Black, Jew, Sex Offender, Illegal Immigrant) there is at least a fairly narrow and objectively determinable set of traits or characteristics which define membership in the group.  There may be ambiguity at the edges, people of mixed race and ethnicity, “sex offenders” convicted of “statutory rape” where the girl lied about her age in  an objectively credible way, cases of “illegal immigration” where family hardship brought or kept people together for mutual support in violation of immigration laws, but on the whole, Blacks, Jews, Illegal Immigrants, and Sex Offenders all know who they are, and they can either “lie low” or decide to leave the country if they are able.

What is so totally monstrous about the category of “terrorist” in particular and “foreigner operating on American soil” is that theses terms are simultaneously vague, overbroad and subject to arbitrary and capricious application to the degree that even racial categories and categories based on convictions for violation of laws are not.    And in the context of modern America, merely calling someone a terrorist MAKES them a terrorist, especially (but not only) when it is a member of the government making the accusation.  To allow denial of Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights to individuals accused of terrorism is simply to allow the government to deny these rights to anyone it wants, whenever it wants, for any reason it wants.  We now have a “Government of the Dictators, by the Dictators, and For the Dictators” (as Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address should honestly and probably have been written).   The dictatorial decision about who is a terrorist is left open—WIDE OPEN.   The Office of the Attorney General of the State of Texas (Greg Abbott and James Carlton Todd) have been calling the author of this blog a “dangerous paper terrorist” since 2005.  (Yes, I admit it, I have occasionally thrown paper airplanes at government buildings in protest against policies with which I disagree, OK?   So I guess that means I’m off to Guantanamo Bay? or the Domestic Equivalent?   In fact, when arrested by Live Oak at the edge of the Suwannee River on the order of Houston Federal Judge Lynn N. Hughes in August 2006, they raised the prospect of Guantanamo Bay for me in Jacksonville, only half joking…at most half….or maybe not at all I’m still not sure, but here I am in West L.A./Santa Monica).   It is not trivial at all.  They have been throwing around these terms like “paper terrorist” ever since 9/11, and the purpose is, frankly, to create an atmosphere of terror and prejudice against the people so labelled.  After that experience, I just “went with it”.  But even in 2005, there was another disbarred attorney (Zena D. Crenshaw NJCDLP “National Judicial Conduct & Disability Project) who came in from Indiana to help Francis Wayne Williams-Montenegro with my family law case in 2005.  She tried to show that the Attorney General was trying to prejudice the Court against me (it was difficult to make the Williamson County 395th Judicial District any more prejudiced against me than it was) by calling me “the most dangerous paper terrorist” in Texas, but it didn’t go anywhere.  Zena rightly predicted that they were trying to sweep all Judicial Reform activists into the category of “terrorists.” In fact, Judicial Reform, Anti-Income Tax/IRS Reform, Prison Reform, Anti-Big Oil Activists, we’re ALL terrorists now.  The FBI has guidelines and we “fit” even before S.B. 1867 became law.  I said to Zena in 2004-5 and I say now that to be accused of anything so preposterous is a “red badge of courage” and I wore it proudly (still do in fact), despite the fact that my saying so on videotape resulted in my getting arrested AGAIN in December 2007 in Mexico City and brought to Los Angeles (this time on the order of Judge Janis Graham Jack of Corpus Christi, in the same Southern District of Texas in which Judge Lynn N. Hughes sits, and which George H. W. Bush [Bush 41st] calls “home”).

The way “Jonathan’s” questions above are written actually illustrated just how bad S.B. 1867 is: After asking whether I would “extend Miranda Rights to foreign terrorists operation on American soil” (I submit that such rights have existed ever since the adoption of the Bill of Rights and the problem is not “extending” such rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, but in taking them away), “Jonathan” then asks: “Why should an American who joins say “Al Qaeda” be entitled to a trial or lawyer or any other right under our Constitution?”

This question is probably the scariest of all, if serious and not merely rhetorical. My answer is simple: BECAUSE AN AMERICAN WHO JOINS AL QAEDA IS STILL AN AMERICAN, THAT’S WHY.  But Again, to Repeat, and this is SO IMPORTANT: the Bill of Rights do not discriminate between Citizens and Non-Citizens, Americans and Non-Americans, just “people” and “persons” (so the only categorical distinctions made implicitly, if any, would be those between “people” or “persons” and animals [sorry, PETA][or plants I guess—wheat plants have any Constitutional rights before being eaten…even for arbitrary and capricious purposes as being ground into flour and made into extremely unhealthy and fattening cakes or cookies….]) .

But then that does wrap up this little exercise about why S.B. 1867 is such a very bad law: Americans can be characterized as “terrorists” and reduced to ashes by such categorization.    And it could be that “Jonathan” has more confidence in the meaning of these terms than I do.  I happen to believe that “Al Qaeda” was basically created and established, fostered, aided, and abetted, by the Bush-Reagan administration and set loose to create “domestic terrorism” to justify the very repression of civil liberties which have taken place since the Fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989-90 and the consequent evaporation of the Cold War as a reason for suppressing freedom and the Bill of Rights.  So I think “Al Qaeda” is a government made fraud, that 9/11 was a U.S. government-sponsored “false flag” attack, and that Oklahoma City MAY have been a government-sponsored incident of false terrorism.  (Please view this brilliant 5 minute summary, text also copied below at Note*: http://www.corbettreport.com/911-a-conspiracy-theory/)

In support of these hypotheses of mine, I can only point to patterns of history: from 1963-1972, from John F. Kennedy through George Corley Wallace,  a series of public assassinations by public shootings of “troublesome” non-conformist politicians took place in a waive of “lone gunmen” with no precedent in American History, and no tradition that survived.  The failed attacks on Ford and Reagan were just that, failures, and were easily traceable either to Squeaky Fromm/ Manson or John Hinkley personal and family psychological problems.

It is hard to believe that the generation that came of age during the decade 1963-1972 simply bred a series of “lone gunmen” who acted without obvious motive (but all happened to oppose, directly or indirectly, the policies and power of Lyndon Baines Johnson, even though John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr., and George C. Wallace were all at least nominally allies or at least in the same [Democratic] Party at one time or another, though Wallace ran Third-Party [American Independent] in 1968 and Malcolm X, though he hated all Democrats “categorically” as “Dixiecrats” was partially allied with Johnson on the question of Civil Rights).

It is equally hard to believe that another Decade long episode, namely the series of incidents of Domestic “Terrorism” or at least confrontation between Federal and Private parties that the Government sought to characterize somehow as “terroristic” from Ruby Ridge in 1992-9/11/2001, was merely a historical accident and not planned.  ALL the major terrorist acts since 9/11 have occurred in Europe….THAT is the legacy of 2001-2011.  Every decade has a different set of problems, with no overlap at all between the “Assassination” decade and the “Terrorism” Decade (unless you count the early 70s epidemic of hijacking which led to early restrictions on air-travel as partly overlapping with the decade of assassination).   No, it seems that the Government picks its crisis formula based on what it wants to achieve and then “stages” criminal acts and history accordingly.   So, Jonathan, whoever you are, does this answer your question?  Do you really want to live in a country where they can decide, tomorrow, that YOU are a terrorist and lock you up forever?

****I know only a few Jonathans… I hope that “Jonathan” who is the author of these questions is posing them only for rhetorical purposes to test my commitment to moral consistency and philosophical coherence.  Because, if the author of these questions is serious, and if he reflects widespread opinion in America, then…. I’m even more depressed about the passage of Senate Bill 1867 than I was before.  I can only hope this Jonathan is Dr. Jonathan Harris Levy (Brimstone & Co.)(http://www.brimstoneandcompany.com/), formerly attorney for noted Orange County Dentist Orly Taitz and (the one and only) other William Howard Taft Law School graduate I’ve ever encountered, because that would just confirm my suspicion that Orly supports the 93 bad guys who voted for this bill….  If it’s anyone of any higher level of academic achievement in law than the William Howard Taft Law School involved in presenting these questions, well that’s just demoralizing….

**If we desire homogeneity in this Country, we are well on the way to a “shake and bake” society of people no more different than one box of hamburger helper is from another.  I do not personally desire such homogeneity, but I think it is best left to the people to make voluntary associations and define local color and establish meaningful cultural diversity by devolving power downward rather than concentrating it upward.

Note*:

Everything you ever wanted to know about the 9/11 conspiracy theory in under 5 minutes.

(Watch FrenchGermanSpanish or Portuguese translations of this video.)

TRANSCRIPT: On the morning of September 11, 2001, 19 men armed with boxcutters directed by a man on dialysis in a cave fortress halfway around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop directed the most sophisticated penetration of the most heavily-defended airspace in the world, overpowering the passengers and the military combat-trained pilots on 4 commercial aircraft before flying those planes wildly off course for over an hour without being molested by a single fighter interceptor.

These 19 hijackers, devout religious fundamentalists who liked to drink alcoholsnort cocaine, and live with pink-haired strippers, managed to knock down 3 buildings with 2 planes in New York, while in Washington a pilot who couldn’t handle a single engine Cessna was able to fly a 757 in an 8,000 foot descending 270 degree corskscrew turn to come exactly level with the ground, hitting the Pentagon in the budget analyst office where DoD staffers were working on the mystery of the 2.3 trillion dollars that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had announced “missing” from the Pentagon’s coffers in a press conference the day before, on September 10, 2001.

Luckily, the news anchors knew who did it within minutes, the pundits knew within hours, the Administration knew within the day, and the evidenceliterally fell into the FBI’s lap. But for some reason a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists demanded an investigation into the greatest attack on American soil in history.

The investigation was delayedunderfundedset up to fail, a conflict of interest and a cover up from start to finish. It was based on testimonyextracted through torture, the records of which were destroyed. It failed to mention the existence of WTC7Able DangerPtechSibel EdmondsOBL and the CIA, and the drills of hijacked aircraft being flown into buildings that were being simulated at the precise same time that those events were actually happening. It was lied to by the Pentagon, the CIA, the Bush Administration and as for Bush and Cheney…well, no one knows what they told it because they testified in secretoff the recordnot under oath and behind closed doors. It didn’t bother to look at who funded the attacks because that question is of “little practical significance“. Still, the 9/11 Commission did brilliantly, answering all of the questions the public had (except most of the victims’ family members’ questions) and pinned blame on all the people responsible (although no one so much as lost their job), determining the attacks were “a failure of imagination” because “I don’t think anyone could envision flying airplanes into buildings ” except the Pentagon and FEMA and NORAD and the NRO.

The DIA destroyed 2.5 TB of data on Able Danger, but that’s OK because it probably wasn’t important.

The SEC destroyed their records on the investigation into the insider trading before the attacks, but that’s OK because destroying the records of the largest investigation in SEC history is just part of routine record keeping.

NIST has classified the data that they used for their model of WTC7′s collapse, but that’s OK because knowing how they made their model of that collapse would “jeopardize public safety“.

The FBI has argued that all material related to their investigation of 9/11 should be kept secret from the public, but that’s OK because the FBI probably has nothing to hide.

This man never existed, nor is anything he had to say worthy of your attention, and if you say otherwise you are a paranoid conspiracy theorist and deserve to be shunned by all of humanity. Likewise himhimhim, and her. (and her and her and him).

Osama Bin Laden lived in a cave fortress in the hills of Afghanistan, but somehow got away. Then he was hiding out in Tora Bora but somehow got away. Then he lived in Abottabad for years, taunting the most comprehensive intelligence dragnet employing the most sophisticated technology in the history of the world for 10 years, releasing video after video with complete impunity (and getting younger and younger as he did so), before finally being found in a daring SEAL team raid which wasn’t recorded on video, in which he didn’t resist or use his wife as a human shield, and in which these crack special forces operatives panicked and killed this unarmed man, supposedly the best source of intelligence about those dastardly terrorists on the planet. Then they dumped his body in the ocean before telling anyone about it. Then a couple dozen of that team’s members died in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan.

This is the story of 9/11, brought to you by the media which told you the hard truths about JFK and incubator babies and mobile production facilitiesand the rescue of Jessica Lynch.

If you have any questions about this story…you are a batshit, paranoid, tinfoil, dog-abusing baby-hater and will be reviled by everyone. If you love your country and/or freedom, happiness, rainbows, rock and roll, puppy dogs, apple pie and your grandma, you will never ever express doubts about any part of this story to anyone. Ever.

This has been a public service announcement by: the Friends of the FBICIANSADIASECMSMWhite HouseNIST, and the 9/11 Commission. Because Ignorance is Strength.

If you would like to help the fight for “corny old values” like Truth, Justice, and the American Way, for Family, Home, and Freedom, and to add one Senator for the Bill of Rights and against Indefinite Detention, against the PATRIOT ACT, and against the use of United States Troops in this Country against its own citizens, please support Charles Edward Lincoln, III, for U.S. Senator from California.  We are fighting one of the most entrenched establishment seats in Congress—Dianne Feinstein who tried to make cosmetic changes in S.B. 1867 to hide and disguise its truly oppressive nature (and to claim she had “done the best she could”, perhaps?)—and we ask you to send your check or money order to Lincoln-for-Senate 2012 to Charles Edward Lincoln, III, 952 Gayley Avenue, #143, Los Angeles, California 90024.  Call 310-773-6023 for more information.

MEDINA VALLEY ISD: “As Educators, we are the Ultimate Rule-Followers”—or—Cypress Creek Elementary, is “Law Abidingness” a virtue or a vice? All Followed by an Invitation to Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott to debate me publicly.

When my son Charlie was in the fifth grade, there was a special project at his school, Cypress Elementary in Cedar Park, Texas 78613, on the importance of “Law Abidingness” as a virtue.  I did volunteer teaching in the school in biology, geography, American history, natural history, world history, Spanish and French from time-to-time, and so I thought it was probably OK for me to have an opinion on such things.  So, naturally, as was my custom, I immediately went in to see the principal to inform her that there was, in none of five major hard-bound English dictionaries I just happened to keep by my bed at night, any such word as “Abidingness”–for Law or anything else.   I also suggested that any valid school discussion of the importance of—what I would call—“conformity” with the law should be accompanied by a discussion of “when is it acceptable to break a rule, violate a law?”  I also suggested a discussion of whether law was made for man or man for the law…  I know that she was annoyed, but listened politely, and as was HER custom, pretty much ignored everything I said, except to circulate a memorandum to the teachers that “Law-Abidingness” was not a word in the dictionaries and should be explained in other terms to the students.   I guess I’d chalk that up as a 24% victory.

In any case, this episode from the Palaeolithic, possibly the Palaeozoic, past came to my mind when I listened to Medina Valley ISD School Superintendent Chris Martinez and Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott discussing the “Graduation Prayer Crisis” brewing near Castroville west of San Antonio in the Good Old Western District of Texas:  https://www.oag.state.tx.us/oagnews/release.php?id=374;  https://www.oag.state.tx.us/media/videos/play.php?060211schoolruling&id=435 

Chris Medina promised to obey the Honorable Fred Biery’s Amended Order (Judge Biery’s Amended Order of June 1 2011) and his promise contained these telling words, “As Educators, we are the Ultimate-Rule Followers.”  I have for a long-time been debating whether there are any possible virtues or benefits remaining in public education, and I think that Medina ISD Superintendent Chris Martinez may just have convinced me that there are none.

I idolize Thomas Jefferson in many ways, and Thomas Jefferson advocated public schools (but not necessarily “compulsory” public education), but even the Gods are sometimes wrong, and I can forgive Thomas Jefferson one or two errors or even downright disgraceful conduct (including his affair with his slavegirl, Sally Hemings) in a life which otherwise changed history for the better.

Yea, verily, the Fifth Circuit let the Medina Valley ISD off the hook at the last minute, but Judge Fred Biery’s threat of incarceration for prayer needs to be publicized everywhere—it needs to become a rallying call for advocates of free speech all over the world, not just in Texas and the United States.   I wish the Fifth Circuit had allowed Judge Biery’s order to stand and that teachers and students alike had been forced to defy the order—

“Blessed are ye when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake:” Darby Bible Translation 
bible.cc/matthew/5-11.htm

But, aside from whether Chris Martinez should not have aroused his students to stand up and risk Fred Biery’s threat of “Jail for Public Prayer at Graduation”—because it would have been healthy and salubrious to the national soul if he had, I have an issue or two I’d like to discuss with both Greg Abbott and Chris Martinez arising from this case.  I can see the headlines now: “Jail for Prayer?  Praying Students & Speakers Taken in Shackles by US Marshals for Deportation to Guantanamo Bay and/or FEMA camps”—it would have been a glorious day.   The FIfth Circuit, naturally, weaseled out of making any hard decisions, dissolving the Temporary Restraining Order at the last minute before graduation on the grounds that they were not convinced official school conduct was involved.  But see the Schultz’ application for TRO here: Schultz Application for TRO—to Judge Fred Biery re MEDINA VALLEY

At implicit issue in Greg Abbott’s commentary on the Medina Valley ISD situation is an almost inevitable tension between two clauses of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution: the Free Speech/Freedom of the Press clause, on the one hand, and the Free Exercise/Anti-establishment clause on the other.

Looking through the two versions of Judge Biery’s Orders and the impressive list of citations contained therein, it is easy to see how the Judge found that the Schultz’ might have shown a “likelihood of success on the merits.”  Judge Biery’s Original June 1 2011 Order in Schultz v Medina Valley.

This case has only just begun, and once it reaches trial, en banc review in New Orleans, and finally the Supreme Court, it seems inevitable that Shultz v. Medina Valley ISD and Judge Briery’s threat of incarceration to disobedient “prayers” will be revived as periodically, politically, necessary or expedient to distract the ignorant masses from really important points.  Schultz v Medina Judge Fred Biery WDTEX Docket Report as of June 3 2011.  And talking of ignorant masses, I wonder just how Michael P. Davis, Jana Duty, Laurie J. Nowlin, and James Carlton Todd are doing these days, and whom they are persecuting this week in Williamson County?

As an aside: I cannot escape the feeling that there is a depressing real-politik (“zeitgeist-“ly?) association between the Indian Subcontinental-Indian Ocean sounding name of the Schultz’ lawyer, “Ayesha N. Khan”, and the fact that our current sitting, de facto President appears to have been born close to the waters of the Indian Ocean in Mombasa, in the Coastal Province of British East Africa, a subject of her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, II, whom I admire greatly, even if I cannot say the same either for her late uncle the Duke of Windsor or the even more absurd marital exploits of her children and grandchildren—not much in the way of royal role models I fear.

What I need to discuss and possibly debate with Chris Martinez is simple: is it REALLY a good idea to teach students to obey unjust laws? “As Educators, we are the Ultimate Rule-Followers.”  THIS PHRASE ALONE, to my mind, justifies the complete abolition of public schools everywhere—at least the abolition of MANDATORY or COMPULSORY public education—because in this phrase alone, THE SPIRIT OF THOMAS JEFFERSON HAS DIED.

Rather, if these were Jeffersonian Schools, we should teach students that this country was BUILT on revolution, that it falls to each generation to move the revolution farther along, or at least to restore lost freedoms.  And we should, in particular, that freedom and democracy can only survive if revolution be continued—not “institutionalized” as they tried to do in Mexico—the Partido de la Revolucion Institucional” was a failure, at least as far as revolutionary spirit goes—but actually continued and renewed (as Jefferson suggested, in each succeeding revolution) by a constant state of something which can only be called “revolution = rapid evolution” or perhaps even “self-controlled anarchy.”   The government should exist ONLY to minimize bloodshed and maximize freedom in this process—not to prevent it by enforcing unjust and anti-Constitutional rules.  Mr. Martinez, or any other school educator, I await your call….notify me through Peyton at 512-968-2666—“Fear Not the Devil or his Mark—the Coward Flees from all who call out his name to Fight.”

To Greg Abbott—I have a much more personal, and yet much more politically sensitive—bone to pick with you.  Throughout the five and a half years 2003-2008, you and your office persecuted me in Texas (along with anyone who worked with me, including but not limited to Francis Wayne Williams-Montenegro, Valorie Wells Davenport, Rhonda Moe and her family, Dan Simon, John Henry Franks, etc.).  This all culminated with a March 25, 2008 injunction against me for entered by Judge Walter S. Smith, U.S. District Judge and then Chief Judge of that same Western District of Texas, preventing me from making any further filings against the constitutionality of the Texas Family Code or Texas Family Courts, until and unless I pay $150,000.00 (payee unspecified).

But Mr. Abbott, I find myself moved by and in agreement with your words concerning Judicial overreaching and the war on morality and decency being fought in the Courts.   What I want to know is: if you believe that Judges should not have the right to restrain freedom of speech under the First Amendment, why did you and your office, especially Deputy Texas Attorney General James Carlton Todd, fight me in action after action starting in June 2003 in both State and Federal Court in Austin and Georgetown, Texas when I asserted exactly the same thing?

Judge Michael Jergins had no lengthy list of case citations comparable to Judge Biery’s when he, on September 18, 2001, enjoined me NOT from discussing religion with my son, although that was implicit, but from discussing my son’s health and happiness with my son after he was return to a woman who, at that time, seemed very vengeful and intent on harming our son?

Why did you assign your Deputy Attorney General James Carlton Todd to fight me, almost non-stop, for those five and a half years to prevent us from obtaining any limitation on a Family Court Judge’s power to invade our home and inquire what we discussed over breakfast or dinner or at night after homework before bed?  Why did you allow Laurie J. Nowlin, as Jergins’ appointed Guardian ad Litem, to challenge my fitness as a Father when I started training to become a scoutmaster in my son’s Boy Scout Troop?  Why did you defend the position that State Court Judges can enter orders violating fundamental civil rights by entering “gag” orders (injunctions against freedom of speech—prior restraint censorship), backed by threats of incarceration without following the procedural safeguards outlined by both the United States Supreme Court: Nebraska_Press_Association_v_Stuart_1976 or the Texas Supreme Court: Davenport v Garcia 834_S_W_2d_4 (Texas June 17 1992).

Davenport v. Garcia is really and truly one of the great pro Freedom of Speech (and anti-Judicial abuse) decisions in U.S. History I think.  I was privileged, later on, to work with Valorie Wells Davenport, the Plaintiff in this case, who ran and almost unseated Nathan Hecht, one of the most repressive and reactionary of all Texas Supreme Court Judges, in 2000.  It shames me to think how unaware I was in 1992 of everything that was going on in the United States of America—1992 is the year I finished Law School at the University of Chicago, took and passed my first Bar Exam (in Florida), started working for the Honorable Kenneth L. Ryskamp, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Florida, and was offered a job at the Law School of the University of Miami, Coral Gables, which at my wife’s urging I did not take—she wanted me to move to Cadwalader, Wickersham, & Taft (although she didn’t know that my destiny involved Securitized Mortgages—first creating them, then fighting them).  That year, 1992, I thought, “I had a life” even though I didn’t realize just how fast my world was dying….

But, returning to Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart and Davenport v. Garcia, the bottom line is that No Judge May EVER enter any order of prior restraint on Freedom of Speech without following certain procedural safeguards to determine that such restraints are, after careful reflection, both necessary and proper to their intended purpose—this is now generally called “strict scrutiny review” of any law or order restricting the exercise of fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

So Greg Abbott: I challenge you to come out and fight me on the field of honor by debate—my glove is on your doorstep—will you dare to open it up and fight like a man?  Because of your words regarding Judge Briery I believe you are a worthy opponent.  In challenging you today I am not threatening a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent I do not this—you have at least some wits about you.

I challenge you to explain why Judges should be absolutely immune from suit for infringing upon fundamental, expressly guaranteed constitutional rights.  I challenge you to show me that mere political advantage is not the key the difference in your stance on these cases. I challenge you specifically to show me how you can be correct about Schultz v. Medina Valley ISD if I were wrong about Lincoln v. Jergins, Lincoln v. Williamson County, and yes, Simon v. Abbott….in which your office approved entry of draconian sanctions against me in a case to which I was neither a party nor witness.

Mr. Greg Abbott, I ask you: Would it be beneath your dignity to debate a disbarred and sanctioned attorney?  Would it be stepping too far down off your perch to debate publicly with me: a fellow-“natural born” citizen of your state whom you and your office, the United States District Courts in the Western and Southern Districts of Texas, and more than one Texas State District Court in your state have “hated, rejected, despised” trying your best to make me into a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief?

This is not just a matter of honor, this is a matter of Truth, Justice, and the American Way.   Do those words mean anything to you?  Or are they just a dream, flickering shadows in the walls of a cave lit only by torches, where the light of day is never seen?

(I have sent this letter to Messrs. Greg Abbott and James Carlton Todd by e-mail as follows: Gregg Abbott <greg.abbott@oag.state.tx.us>; James Carlton Todd <jim.todd@oag.state.tx.us>; these are their on-line published e-mail addresses).

Rites de Passage: High School Graduation in Austin, Texas, May 29, 2010

Harmony Science Academy is a “Charter School” with several branches, including one in Austin.  According to Wikipedia: “Charter schools are primary or secondary schools in the United States that receive public money (and like other schools, may also receive private donations) but are not subject to some of the rules, regulations, and statutes that apply to other public schools in exchange for some type of accountability for producing certain results, which are set forth in each school’s charter.[1] Charter schools are opened and attended by choice.[2] While charter schools provide an alternative to other public schools, they are part of the public education system and are not allowed to charge tuition.” (June 5, 2010).

My son was born on August 23, 1992, during the onset of Hurricane Andrew in Palm Beach, Florida, so he had just completed 17 years and 9 months of life on Sunday May 23, 2010.  The following Saturday he graduated High School at Harmony Science Academy with a National Honor Society cowl/hood/ribbon around his neck with about 30 other students.  I was there, like many other proud and happy parents.  My son had survived a rather strange childhood fraught with weird traumas of which his mother and I were the primary, material and efficient, causes, although I would submit perhaps neither of us were the formal and final causes—because those higher levels of causation are to be found outside us and in the socio-political structure of our society.

Rites de Passage shape us, and many people hold that graduating from High School is the key rite of American life (as evidenced in the hundreds or thousands of movies, TV shows, and books—and ranging in each category from the good, to the bad, to the truly awful—-which focus on the difficulty or angst of adolescence and high school).

But adults have a role in the rites de passage of their children, also.  My son wanted me to be there for his graduation and so I was.  What was peculiar was that this was the first event at Harmony Science Academy which I had ever attended (and Graduation Commencement wasn’t actually “at” Harmony Science Academy, but at a Marriot Hotel in Round Rock about 12 miles north of the actual school in one of those large expandable or dividable conference rooms that most modern hotels have these days).

Yes, I was there, with Charlie’s mother Elena and Greek Grandmother Nina, but I had never met any of Charlie’s fellow students before.  Charlie had started Harmony Science Academy in Sixth Grade, and on the damnable advice or directions of Williamson County Guardian ad Litem Laurie J. Nowlin I was never “officially” told about Charlie’s enrollment—although the officers of Cedar Park Middle School had informed me immediately, much to their credit.  I had sought Laurie J. Nowlin out to act as an attorney ad litem for Charlie after his mother and I separated in Late July/August 2002.  Laurie J. Nowlin had immediately affirmed to me that Charlie wanted to live with me and that his feelings on the subject were fairly intense.   Money may have passed hands between Elena and Laurie—I’ll never know—there was evidence to that effect but of course bribery is an awfully ugly word (even when most relevant statutes of limitation have long since run).

But the simple truth is that Charlie, with whom I had been best friends up until age 10, as well as a reasonably good father, was not only placed against his express wishes and fears in his mother’s custody by Judge Michael Jergins of the 395th Judicial District of Williamson County, but was completely isolated from me for two full years (Memorial Day, May 2003-June 5, 2005), and I was excluded from his school life at Harmony Science  Academy until his graduation day (except for a couple of e-mail communications with an English teacher sometime in 2006-2007, and occasionally Charlie let me see his report cards and help with homework, especially in 2008-2010).   Judge Michael Jergins and his acolytes Laurie J. Nowlin, James Randall Grimes, and Michael P. Davis had an amazingly brutal custom, practice, and policy of determining, against both men and women, that the unchallenged truthful exercise of freedom of speech regarding basic questions of happiness and conditions of living between a father and son constituted “felony child abuse” (yes, those were Judge Jergins’ words).   Judge Jergins routinely included “prior restraints” on speech in all of his domestic relations orders, and had jailed at least one woman, Rhonda Moe, for 90 days for discussions with her son.  The licensing of speech, expression, petition, and associative activities which existed in England and her colonies prior to the Revolution was banned in the Early Republic, but has gradually crept back in under different guises and forms.  Nebraska_Press_Association_v_Stuart_1976 (Before any judicial prior restraints can be imposed on First Amendment activities, certain specific findings of fact and conclusions of law must be made, and of course, neither Judge Jergins nor any other family law judge in Texas ever bothers with these constitutional requirements). See also  Gregg Abbott, the Texas Attorney General, and James Carlton Todd, a Texas Deputy Attorney General, defended Jergins vigorously in litigation that I filed and pushed forward from 2003-2008.

Anyhow, Harmony Science Academy was a perfect place, in so many ways, in and from which to watch the destruction of the American Way of Life, Constitutional Democracy and World Culture in general as exemplified by Charlie’s life, Judge Michael Jergins, and Laurie J. Nowlin.

Now, to start off with, Charlie is half-Greek, on his mother’s side, and the Greeks historically live in enmity with the Turks, who conquered Greece and the Greek-ruled Byzantine Empire in the 15th century, almost reaching the gates of Vienna in the mid-16th century.  So, the first irony about Charlie attending Harmony Science Academy was that this Charter School was run by Turks.  (How so many Turks ever arrived in Austin, Texas, is quite beyond me, but many of them seem to have immigrated to the U.S. during the massive influx of South Asians that seems to have been a special Bush-Clinton project of the late 1980s-1990s, which brought Indians and Pakistanis into ownership or management of most motels and gasoline stations nationwide, cf. e.g. Patels’ Motels and Dhando, which traces the origins to about 1973 and the end of the India-Pakistan war over Bangladesh).   I always applauded French Presidents Giscard d’Estaing and Nicolas Sarkozy for opposing Turkish membership in the E.U., even as I recall driving along the highways of Serbia and Macedonia (and before that Yugoslavia) and Bulgaria, packed with Turks migrating by bus, car, and truck to guest-worker status in Austria and Germany.  These Turkish legal immigrants into Central Europe far outnumber the Ottoman warriors of the 14th-17th centuries who tried to conquer Europe by force (and did in fact dominate Southeastern Europe until the late 19th century).

At Charlie’s Harmony Science Academy graduation, there were two costumed ethnic dances: one Turkish and one Mexican.  The entire graduation was translated (either by immediate live translators or on screen by written texts) into Spanish as a “second but very nearly equal” language.  I speak Spanish fluently myself, and am not exactly opposed to bilingualism, but I couldn’t help but think of the contrast with my own high school ceremonies 36 years ago in California, where all the music was American and the language was uniformly English.

Harmony Science Academy was one of the most diverse and heterogenous groups of students I have ever seen.  Harmony Science Academy IS the Brave New World, much more than even horribly, artificially, self-conscious modern Harvard where Charlie and I had hung out for the past two summers.

What is the connection between Judge Michael Jergins, Laurie J. Nowlin, and Harmony Science Academy is formal and final causes of the socio-cultural and political configuration of the world today?   All are aiming at one single goal: the destruction of traditional Anglo-Saxon and European culture in the United States.  Anglo-Saxons make very uncooperative slaves, serfs, and servants of large corporate-governmental enterprises, I think, and for that reason their culture must be diluted.  The National Anthem can be sung, but it must not be sung in a proud defiant style, as a kind of cross between a Church-militant hymn (like “Onward Christian Soldiers” or “Come Labor On”) and a straight out war song, but in a soft, toned-down, mellow-yellow “pop” style with no strident defiance of anything.  In this connection I will never forget when Tony Blair became Prime Minister in 1997 and Queen Elizabeth Winced as “God Save the Queen” was likewise reorchestrated as a “pop” tune rather than a nationalist hymn as Blair announced his Brave New World “Cool Britannia” mode of government, kicked the hereditary lords out of the upper house of Parliament, and generally transformed the original Anglo-Saxon nation of the world into a colonized outpost of all the former “Imperial” Colonies’ immigrants.

The socio-cultural and political functions and roles of tradition, family and ethnic-folk-identities, and cultural continuity cannot be maintained when the state in effect pressures families to break up through the Family Court system, and especially when the court system, unsatisfied with merely breaking up families, also seeks to suppress free speech within the family.

In the name of “the General Welfare” and of Title 42 of the U.S. Code in particular, all aspects of child-rearing, Education, Family, Freedom of Speech, and the conduct of litigation are all essentially First Amendment protected activities, and yet all, in essence, are now controlled and licensed by the state.  Such licensing is contrary to the root purpose and history of the First Amendment, and Americans must stand up and assert their rights in opposition to the governmental takeover of private life.   Charter Schools are designed to insert more creativity and diversity into the American educational system, and Harmony Science Academy, at least with regard to some aspects of education, certainly seems to have produced an “above average” set of students.  I cannot say that the vision of the American present or future I saw at my son’s graduation was reassuring to me.  We live in a very insecure country where the governmentally inspired and fostered separate but related fears of self-government and expression of personal identity are related to the suffering many students have experienced as a result of their parents’ divorce and custody proceedings.

Charlie had wanted to follow his Dad and other family members to Harvard, but it was not meant to be.  Only one student at Harmony Science Academy in Austin made it into an Ivy League College at all, a girl named Ashley who was admitted to Colombia.  In one of the awful ironies of graduation day, Elena was concerned because Harmony Science Academy had sent out a warning that the Williamson County Courts had ordered Ashley’s mother to stay away from graduation—apparently Ashley’s mother had offended some one of the Brave New World’s norms, and would be arrested on the spot if she showed up to her daughter’s high school graduation.   Charlie, Elena, and I have somehow transcended the threat of governmental intervention in our lives, but the damage was already done, 2002-2009.  I never had any participation in my son’s middle or high school life except occasionally helping him with homework projects.

When we were first breaking up in April-July 2002, my wife Elena never said anything more hurtful and vicious than, “We are not a family, there is only cancer in this house” (although she said it in Greek, “Oxi Hycogenia eki, Karkinos in sto ‘ospiti.”  Elena was right, of course, our lives were infected by a kind of social cancer, but the cancer that ultimately ate Charlie’s teenage years was the cancer of governmental engineering trying to break up all families and isolate individuals not just from their relatives but from their heritage by this strange religion of global merger and fusion of all cultures and way of life into one great cultural amalgam or “shake and bake” world of uniform people with uniform lives, uniformly disposed to move the global-corporate-and-governmental entities forward.   I am now exhausted after this week of assessing and realizing all that has happened, of trying my best to be sociable and friendly with Elena and her mother Nina who inflicted so much misery on my life and Charlie’s over the past ten-fifteen years, and yet now seem anxious, at the least, to enjoy a “peaceful co-existence.”   We are currently shaping our lives without state assistance, but the scars left by state-mandated “welfare services” run deep indeed.

To challenge what Cass Sunstein (back in my University of Chicago Law days) used to call the “command and control” aspects of regulatory government and the administrative procedures which have, to a large extent, extinguished our constitution, must be among the top priorities of all Patriotic Americans.  The provisions of  U.S. Code Title 42 have all but supplanted every one of the provisions of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and merged state and federal government in one rather hellish enterprise.  Charter Schools have special tax status as do contributions to their support.  They are part of the weird merger of state-federal-and-corporate functions which has become the key Hallmark of modern American life.  Harmony Science Academy is both a microcosm of this process, and emblematic of the injury suffered by my family in particular, and inflicted on the American population and citizenry in general.  Harmony Science Academy did not destroy my son’s mind or life.  Charlie will now go to a fine college, St. John’s in Annapolis, Maryland, which is libertarian and traditional in spirit, refuses to be “rated” by Newsweek etc. “St. John’s College | News & Publications | Press Releases |” This college continues the “Great Books” tradition of classical education, eschewing textbooks of all kinds, and encouraging students to think and study for themselves.  I am very much hoping that St. John’s is in fact NOT completely infected by and absorbed into the Brave New World…..