Saturday, May 02, 2009

Janet Napolitano Supreme Court Justice Appointment

We're watching you Janet Napolitano.
Orwellian's dark nightmare may soon be a stark reality.

Napolitano's ambition becomes clear for us to see
as a Supreme Court Justice, remake the country in her image.

Published: 02 may 09
Updated: 14 may 09, 0604

©2009. All rights reserved.
No portion of this article be reproduced without expressed consent of author.

Janet Napolitano Supreme Court Justice Appointment

Potential Setback to Individual Liberties and Constitutional Values

The appointment of Janet Napolitano as a U.S. Supreme Court Justice—former Arizona Governor & Arizona attorney general, and now current Director of Homeland Secretary—may further serve to undermine our individual civil liberties.

Janet Napolitano has been a long-time advocate of an Totalitarianistic institution (involving the joint collaboration with certain domestic law enforcement and multi-national private industry) which, among other things, has driven the proliferation of due-process robbing, civil-rights' eroding, and hugely profitable photo enforcement systems.

To achieve this end, Napolitano has sourced government and/or industry-related funded traffic highway 'safety' studies, comprised of 'biased-statistics' (both cognitive and attributional) replete with error.

These studies "conclusions"—and often promulgated by surrogates of certain social-agenda-driven funded institutions of 'hire' learning— have already been predetermined, conjured , or fabricated by domestic and/or foreign institutions of government/education/industry (which adhere to different societal rule-sets than those of our own nation (IIHS Status Report: Speed—Effect of Speed Camera Enforcement).

Using the conclusions from reports such as these or other similar documents which share similar agenda-driven conclusions, has enabled former Arizona governor, Janet Napolitano to build the framework in Arizona for a police state by encouraging the huge proliferation of automated photo-enforcement throughout Arizona's highway and roadway systems (outsourced for profit to the very same private or foreign/multi-national industry that had either direct or indirect influence on the conclusions put forth by these very same reports).

Furthermore, Napolitano's cabal has undertaken Orwellian-like tactics including the dissemination of disinformation and use of double-speak.

Napolitano's past public outreach "safety" campaigns, were neither concerned about enhancing highway safety, nor "public" in their outreach.

Through the likes of law-enforcement organizations and the very private-institutions standing to profit, Napolitano has resorted to coordinated efforts of reporter intimidation, media management, and agenda-driven public opinion shaping/influencing.

I believe it is self-evident that a Janet Napolitano appointment as a Supreme Court Justice would most certainly be championed by these very same (often foreign-owned) companies and their paid lobbyists to influence (through campaign financial contribution) key political insiders who could ensure a rapid confirmation process of Janet Napolitano to the Bench.

These companies include, RedFlex (Australia-based) and American Traffic Systems, among others, most of them foreign-based.

Barely a 100 days have elapsed since Janet Napolitano was nominated to head Homeland and already she may be packing her bags for an even more-lasting and Supremely impactful position, if fast-tracked into the High Court (where the constitutionality of automated photo enforcement systems may ultimately be determined).

Isn't it ironic that much (media) coverage has been given, over the years, to the "deprivation of rights" of certain individuals who have shown themselves to be enemies-of-the-state and yet very little (if any) substantive new coverage (by the media) given to the individuals, groups, or enterprises who have been steadily working to together to further erode our own U.S. citizens' individual liberties (for the sake of corporate profiteering and alternative taxation?)

To be clear, I respect, understand, and support our nation's need to establish new security "rule-sets" ("rule-set reset") in a globalized post-911 Internet-connected world, however I am compelled (as a U.S. citizen being protected by both sets of rule-sets) to draw the line (firewall our existing long-established rights: as codified in our young nation's Founding Documents from portions [of these] emerging rule-sets) when [that security] need leads our society to connect globally certain technologies and systems which can or do encroach upon our long-established and sacred individual rights or collective society's rights—by tasking automated computer systems to act as a witness, judge, jury and "executioner" and by doing so, usurping our established rule-of-law and by extension of that usurpation, undermine the very fabric of (our Constitution) that our government leaders (and their appointees) have sworn an oath to the Almighty, to protect before being permitted the assumption of their respective elected (or appointed) offices.

President Barack Obama being administered the oath of office
by Chief Justice John G. Roberts

20 jan 09

Regardless of where you fall in the political spectrum, if you oppose Janet Napolitano's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court on this basis alone, please exercise your 1st Amendment right to free-speech by expressing your voice of objection to your state's senators: U.S. Senators, the current administration, and most importantly to the Chairman, Patrick J. Leahy (Vermont) and the Ranking Member, Jeff Sessions (Alabama) of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

What will a future United States be the next 100 days...or the next 100 years?

Is it not up to US citizens to decide, today?

Despite these expressed concerns, I remain very optimistic about our nation's (and our world's) future, I simply wish us not to forget the very principles that have so faithfully guided this great nation of ours to this point in history and I trust into the future: a 'future worth creating,' for us all...

Veil Guy

PS: If we were to take President Obama's articulate speech at face-value, it would appear that Janet Napolitano would not meet his standard (full transcript):


"... I will seek somebody who is dedicated to the rule of law, who honors our constitutional traditions, who respects the integrity of the judicial process and the appropriate limits of the judicial role. I will seek somebody who shares my respect for Constitutional values on which this nation was founded, and who brings a thoughtful understanding of how to apply them in our time..."*

President H. Obama, 1 May 09, 1623

*Note: Emphasis is mine.

Recommended Further Resources:

United States Founding "Rule-Sets":

Emerging Global "Rule-Sets":
Global "Rule Sets" Coordinating Organizations:

Online Townhall:
Post a Comment