This woman wants to save our country, wants to restore democracy and she discovered that she is on a "watch list" by the government.

Is this country on the verge of a dictatorship? Watch this full length seminar and decide for yourself. It will take some time.

We really do need to save our country.

If you don't have time to watch this.... there is no need to comment.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9f0sBA61L0Y&feature=plcp

Don't you mean restoring Republicanism?

I still am never sure what anyone wants to 'restore' it to,,, unless they are nitpicking the good from the bad, as all through history we have had both,,,,


we had a time when there was less promiscuous sex, but it was also a time when women had little rights or equality

we had a time when there were fewer 'laws' , but it was also a time when africans were chattel

there was no perfect time then, and there will not be one now
we are no more or less at risk of being 'ended' now than we ever have been


the system will change with time, as it always has, as people always have,,,

haha..

naomi wolf wants to save our country?

haha

we can try to uproot everything because we dont like some of it

or we can hold on to those things that work and that make sense, and continue trying to improve on those things that are failing or harming others,,,,

Save "our country"* from what?

Assuming that "our country"* refers to the USA, has the U.S. Constitution been eliminated?


SIDE NOTE:

* This website is an international website. The expression "our country" is meaningless if readers of your post are not U.S. citizens.

You did not watch the video?

From a dictatorship. (That would be clear if you had watched the video.)
Do you want a dictatorship?



Yes it has. It has been rewritten and pretty much rendered useless.
Did you know that the U.S. (corporate) constitution is different from the original (real) constitution?

Holding on to a system that is about to crash only means that we will crash with it.

Instead, we should begin building something that does work.

REPENT!!!


THE END IS NIGH!!!!


RUN AWAY!!!!


FLEE!!!!

I have not found on planet Earth any evidence that supports your claim.

If I were to search the Earth's solar system for such evidence, then which planet would have it? Venus? Mars? Jupiter? Uranus?

We the People, Not We the Corporations

On January 21, 2010, with its ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations are persons, entitled by the U.S. Constitution to buy elections and run our government. Human beings are people; corporations are legal fictions.

We, the People of the United States of America, reject the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United, and move to amend our Constitution to firmly establish that money is not speech, and that human beings, not corporations, are persons entitled to constitutional rights.

The Supreme Court is misguided in principle, and wrong on the law. In a democracy, the people rule.
We Move to Amend.

". . . corporations have no consciences, no beliefs, no feelings, no thoughts, no desires. Corporations help structure and facilitate the activities of human beings, to be sure, and their 'personhood' often serves as a useful legal fiction. But they are not themselves members of “We the People” by whom and for whom our Constitution was established."

~Supreme Court Justice Stevens, January 2010



Move to Amend is barnstorming across the country, and we're coming to a town near you! Catch a talk in your area, and learn how you can get involved in the campaign to end corporate personhood and demand real democracy!

The actual SCOTUS decision does not say that corporations are entitled to buy elections and run our government. You are reading into the decision something that is not there.

Perhaps not in those exact (and simplified) words, but that is essentially what the ruling amounts to.

(Corporations do, in fact, buy elections and run our government.)

We, the People of the United States of America, reject the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United, and move to amend our Constitution to firmly establish that money is not speech, and that human beings, not corporations, are persons entitled to constitutional rights.

Below it is stated that a ban on "expenditures" (money) is a ban on "speech."



Below it gives corporations the same protection of "freedom of speech" as human persons, after the above defined "expenditures" or money as "speech."

The fact is, "person" is defined in legal and corporate terms as a corporation. Therefore, a corporation is also a "person."

If they refer to you, your birth name, as a "person" they are saying that "your birth certificate identity and alias" is a corporation.

As a corporate entity, you are subject to their corporate rules (UCC). These are what you think are real laws.

They are corporate rules. Universal Commercial Codes.

Your speculation does not equal fact.

Do your Want the facts? Really?

Egads! You don't even know the correct name of the Uniform Commercial Code.

Here is the Investopedia definition:

Right Uniform ..... it may as well be "universal" because it originated from London. (Britain)


Once the new one world government takes over they will probably rename it to UNIVERSAL COMMERCIAL CODES. LOL

(Corporations do, in fact, buy elections and run our government.)

Besides, just about everything, even people, are essentially a corporation, they don't even know it.



Goldman Sachs has advantage over other banks because it has awesome
connections in US Government. A lot of former Goldman employees hold high-level
US Government positions (chart).

Mitt Romney's top donor is Goldman Sachs, and one of Obama's best donors.
Ex-CEO of Goldman Sachs, Hank Paulson became the Secretary of Treasury under Bush and
during the 2008 financial crisis authored the TARP bill demanding $700 billion bail-out.
In UK, Goldman Sachs escaped £10 million bill on a failed tax avoidance scheme with help of good connections.
The bank is the largest player in the food commodities market, earned $955m from food speculation in 2009" - That's your $$$.
Goldman Sachs employees are arming themselves with guns in case there is a populist uprising against the bank.
Goldman Sachs calls their investors "muppets". and use clients to make money for themselves, disregarding the clients.
The bank was fined $22 million for sharing valuable nonpublic information with top clients (Think insider trading with best clients).
Goldman Sachs was part-owner America's leading website for prostitution ads until the ownership stake was exposed.
Goldman Sachs helped Greece conceal its debt with secret loans, while simultaneously taking advantage of Greece.
Goldman Sachs got a $814 billion SECRET bailout from the Federal Reserve during the 2008 crisis.
Goldman Sachs got $10 billion of the 2008 TARP bailout, and in the same year paid $10.9 billion in employee compensation and "benefits", while paying a tax rate of 1%. That means an average of $327,000 to each Goldman Sach's employee.