We want our leaders to read legislation before voting on it. Will you read this document to protect your rights, liberty and freedom?)
L-I-B-E-R-T-Y Say it, "Liberty", now define what liberty means. If a person cannot define liberty then how can a person know if they have liberty or not? How can a person protect and preserve their liberty if they cannot define what liberty means? At times we define things by what they are not; a sort of process of elimination. Is “Liberty” consistent with needing the government's permission before you can buy, sell, travel or work? This article will inform all citizens what they can do NOW to protect our rights, liberty and freedom.
If you decide not to read this communication, so be it. I would ask those who do not read this entire communication, what are they doing to protect our constitutional rights that can result in change NOW, not when and if we ever have enough lawmakers that actually will honor their oaths to uphold our Constitution?
Yes, who we elect is important but we do not have time to wait until November 2012, much less January 2013 when those who win in 2012 actually take office. Congress has multiple pieces of legislation (Photo Identification Security Act and Legal Workforce Act) before it NOW that would further erode our rights and thus liberty. It is not enough to oppose what the government has and is doing by sending faxes or making phone calls to lawmakers. Individuals and groups must take action now to affect change. Kaye Beach and her attorneys have and are taking action NOW.
Tuesday, September 8, 2011, the Supreme Court of the United States is expected to hear arguments in the “Jones” case. Should law enforcement be able to go onto your property, attach a GPS (Global Positioning Satellite) device to your privately owned vehicle and subsequently track the vehicle as it leaves your property and travels in public, all without a warrant? This is a very important case but I would and do argue Kaye Beach’s case is of equal or greater importance.
We should each realize by now the federal government and federal courts have not been supportive of states’ rights or citizen’s constitutional rights. This fact is precisely the reason state lawmakers and state courts must be the “buffer” between federal tyranny and the rights of citizens and states.
I am hopeful the Supreme Court rules a warrant should be needed to go onto our private property and attach a GPS device resulting in the tracking of our privately owned vehicle. I am confident the court will rule as it should? No, because recent federal court rulings since 9/11 have not been favorable to liberty minded citizens. The ruling of the Supreme Court will not come for some time.
One last point: in the Jones case the issue is a vehicle and the vehicle being tracked (anyone could be driving the vehicle in question). Kaye Beach’s lawsuit goes to the issue of her body and the use of Kaye Beach’s biometrics (ex. fingerprinting, digital facial image specifically of high enough resolution to use facial recognition software, iris scans, DNA etc.) to use surveillance technologies on Kaye Beach personally, when in public or private. Kaye Beach and her attorneys are arguing innocent citizens must have their right to be presumed innocent protected and thus innocent citizens must not be mandated/forced to provide their biometrics without a search warrant. Innocent citizens are not animals to be "tracked" with surveillance technologies.
Oklahoma woman battles against REAL ID
An Oklahoma woman has sparked a federal controversy after she refused to renew her driver's license; in February Beach was pulled over by law enforcement officials in Norman, Oklahoma and ticketed for driving with an expired license and she is now fighting that ticket as part of a larger campaign against REAL ID (Homeland Security News Wire Aug, 2, 2011) Kaye Beach prevailed in her case in traffic court and now has filed a lawsuit against the state of Oklahoma. The case is underway.
We have an opportunity to make a difference now rather than waiting on the "best" people to get elected. Keep in mind, that even should your candidate of choice get elected, that candidate is not going to have 218 like-minded members in the House of Representatives and 60 like-minded members in the U.S. Senate. Take a step back and be realistic; whether you support a Republican, Democrat, or Independent you will not have enough votes to "control" the Senate and the House. In other words, not much is going to get done, at least that will change the course we are on. This does not mean we should not work to find and elect the best possible candidates. What this does mean is we must all take action NOW while we have the opportunity.
A few people and groups can make a legitimate claim that they spoke out years ago about the theft of our rights. The same cannot be said of the public as a whole. In the first national election after the Patriot Act was signed into law, the public reelected 401 out of 405 members of Congress (the other thirty did not seek reelection). All but one senator that was up for reelection in the first election held after the signing of the Patriot Act was reelected. The point is even after the most reprehensible piece of legislation in our lifetime was enacted, we failed to speak up and have our voices heard at the ballot box. Since the Patriot Act many other pieces of legislation have been signed into law that continued to erode our rights or more accurately, converted our rights into privileges; time after time the public has failed to act.
I appreciate why many people are frustrated and even angry over issues such as illegal immigration. What I do not understand is how a person in our country illegally is more of a threat to our rights than those in government who use the issue of illegal immigration to rationalize citizens foregoing their rights. On the issue of terrorism, you are four times more likely to get struck by lightning than you are of dying in a terrorist event. The general attitude of the public is, let government do what it wants to do as long as we are safe. If it safety you want, a person could argue that you could move to N. Korea, Iran or China; they have low crime rates and very few instances of terrorism. There is one small issue to be considered, if someone's primary concern is safety and does move to N. Korea, Iran or China, freedom not only does not exist but even just speaking about it could cost them their life.
Well before the Real ID Act 2005 was passed and signed into law I began warning citizens and groups of a threat all citizens were facing and just as importantly what company would be a leader in the attacks on our Constitution. At the time, I argued that a small unknown company, Viisage Technology which was worth roughly only $50 million was gearing up to become, the tool of destruction for our government. The destruction would be of our constitutional rights. Do all the "searches" you like and you will not find where anyone else or any group warned citizens about Viisage Technology.
Viisage Technology morphed into L-1 Identity Solutions, a company that had three related business divisions. 1) A document production division producing nearly every driver's license in the United States involved in the production of all U.S. passports and provides all "passport cards". 2) A biometrics division. 3) An intelligence consulting division that had or has contracts with nearly every intelligence agency within our government.
Who was it that first warned citizens, groups and lawmakers that L-1 was being sold to two European companies, one being Safran, a French company 30% owned by the French government? Who was it that warned you to check with your state lawmakers to determine how much access L-1 and now Safran have to your personal information including your biometrics and social security number that are in your state Department of Motor Vehicle database? It was the Constitutional Alliance that informed citizens that Safran has a nearly forty year partnership (Safran's own words) with Communist China. It was the Constitutional Alliance that informed citizens that the former directors of the FBI and CIA, the former head of the TSA, the former project leader for the State Department that oversaw the implementation of E-Passports (biometrics and RFID) and many other government officials left their government positions and immediately went to work as employees or members of the of the Board of Directors of Viisage/L-1.
It was also the Constitutional Alliance that disclosed L-1 had entered into an agreement with the World Bank.to provide biometric identification documents to both developed and underdeveloped countries. Finally, it should not go unnoticed that it was the Constitutional Alliance that was the first organization to disclose and document the Real ID Act 2005 was not simply about a "national ID" but rather that all U.S. citizens are being enrolled into a global system of identification that directly links a person's body through biometrics to their ability to buy, sell, travel and even work if Congress has its way.
Kaye Beach and what her lawsuit has to do with ensuring all citizens’ rights are protected
Kaye Beach's lawsuit against the state of Oklahoma will define what liberty does or does not mean. Yes, there are those who object for religious reasons to the mandated collection of innocent citizen's biometrics. The religious objection is just one of two causes of action in Kaye's lawsuit. The second cause of action is based on Article II, section 30 of the Oklahoma Constitution. Article II, section 30 is essentially the same as the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
To the credit of the good people in Oklahoma, people and groups have and are supporting Kaye Beach financially and otherwise. To the discredit of most people and groups outside Oklahoma there has been little support financially or otherwise. This is not to say there has been no support from outside Oklahoma. Freedom is not free. The Constitutional Alliance is being asked by groups and lawmakers from all across our country to come and help so their state courts and legislatures are the buffer between federal tyranny and citizens/states. Kaye Beach and her attorneys are creating the blueprint for the rest of our country. We each have a stake in Kaye Beach lawsuit.
Anyone who has followed the Stop Real ID Coalition and/or the Constitutional Alliance, two organizations I co-founded, knows I do not toot my own horn. I seek neither glory nor recognition. I certainly do not do what I do for financial reward. I do what I do for the children of today and tomorrow. I do what I do because I believe our "Liberty" comes from our Creator. I do what I do in appreciation of the brave men and women who have sacrificed for each of us so their deaths will have not been in vain.
There are also very personal reasons that I also do what I do. I have had the unfortunate experience of getting up close and personal with those in the biometrics industry, those who arranged the funding for companies who provide biometrics and those in our government who are supposed to be providing oversight. That story is for another day. I was not always as concerned as a citizen about what Congress or more generally the federal government was doing. I know a number of people who have been "activists" for decades. These people have earned their "stripes". The eight years I have spent 16 plus hours a day pale in comparison to some who have spent three or four decades fighting to protect the rights of citizens and states.
I have had the privilege of knowing Kaye Beach for several years. Kaye is a Board member of the Constitutional Alliance and one of the most unselfish people I know. Kaye has told me often that people associate two "sound bites" with me personally. 1) "All people are being enrolled into a global system of identification that directly links their body to their ability to buy, sell, travel and work". 2), "The government wants to know the, who, what, how, when and where of our lives. This is being accomplished by creating a 24/7 digital footprint of our daily activities." Think about it, the federal government would like us each to carry biometric identification documents that would be required to do anything including but not limited to opening up bank accounts, conducting any financial transactions, fly commercially, get a job, be treated medically, or even visit our elected members of Congress. Keep in mind this list is not all inclusive. Gun owners and others beware because the Department of Homeland Security has already been given the authority to name any restrictions they would like to the list I just provided. Under CURRENT federal law the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security can add to the list at any time without having to inform either Congress or the President. I know it is difficult to be believed but is it any harder to believe than citizens have allowed this to happen?
Never forget that information is power and power is control. If a person or for that matter government literally knows everything about you, it is not difficult for that person or government to identify your "weaknesses" or "vulnerabilities". Those weaknesses or vulnerabilities do not necessarily need to be about you, they could be about someone in your family.
Our emails, phone calls and financial transactions are no longer sacred. I have written many articles, published by many people and groups documenting abuses of power by the NSA, FBI, CIA and the Department of Homeland Security. If you doubt what I am saying then go to our web
site, www.constitutionalalliance.org/ and read one of the many articles on our web-site. Each fact that is provided is substantiated. A good article I recommend is “All Citizens can take ownership in ensuring our Rights are Protected”. Every point/allegation made in the article is documented.
In the United States there have been multiple abuses of power by the federal government. During the 50's we had the McCarthy investigations, in the 60"s we had Gulf of Tonkin lie that led to our deepening involvement in Vietnam. In the 70's we had the Watergate scandal. In the 80's we had the Iran/Contra fiasco. In the 90's we had the Clinton debacle. Since 2000 we have had the lies that led to our invasion of Iraq. Now we have the Obama administration redefining what transparency does or more accurately, does not mean. If you do not know what I am talking about; the Obama administration has concluded it is permissible to lie in response to Freedom of Information Act requests. Even the Democrats are outraged over the Justice Department's action or more accurately inaction regarding the "Fast and Furious" operation that not only allowed but encouraged gun running/"gun walking" from the United States to Mexico. Abuse of power is not exclusive to Democrats or Republicans which is why all citizens must be a “Watchman”.
What makes abuse of power more threatening than ever before? We have allowed government to pass laws, enact regulations and issue Executive Orders that provide for government to have total control over our lives whenever it chooses. The total control will not be exerted immediately but that being said it will be soon enough. Even though government has the laws and other "legal" instruments it needs now, there is a missing piece of the puzzle. If you are thinking it is the technology government needs, you would be sorely wrong. The government has the technology and the laws that allows for the use of the technology. What government needs is the time to fully deploy the technology to achieve maximum effectiveness. The deployment of the technology is taking place and moving forward at a lightening quick speed. Our government has created a surveillance society and there is no way to reconcile a surveillance society and a "Free" society.
Where are the Libertarians?
I have had the opportunity over the last seven years to meet with members of Congress, staff people and counsels for various committees. I have also had the opportunity to meet with literally hundreds of state lawmakers across the country. Some have been very responsive but overwhelmingly what I hear is "If the issues you (being me) discuss are so important my constituents would be telling me they care about these issues". People in the mainstream media have told me "If our readers care so much about the issues you raise, our readers would be letting us know".
Now that Kaye Beach's lawsuit is underway, we are asking that all people and groups publish/share stories about Kaye Beach's lawsuit. It can be a "difference maker" now in terms of protecting our freedom. If you are not familiar with the lawsuit the actual petition filed is on our web-site. If you start sharing Kaye’s story more in the media and government will know you do care. It is very important the all Oklahoma lawmakers and courts know the entire country is watching them just as we know the government is watching each of us.
Many Christian’s organizations and advocacy groups have released and shared articles about Kaye Beach's lawsuit. This is not surprising considering one of the causes of action in the lawsuit. What is surprising and honestly disappointing is alternative media outlets and Libertarian minded people and groups have not weighed in on Kaye Beach's lawsuit. Again, this is not a blanket indictment of all alternative media outlets or Libertarians; some have responded to our requests. If you belong to a group or organization we are asking you to ask the leaders of your group why they are not informing the membership about Kaye Beach's lawsuit. If you listen or watch alternative media, we ask that you bring Kaye Beach's story and thus lawsuit to the attention of those who make programming decisions. This is not about me; I do not care one bit if my name is ever mentioned. This about Kaye Beach, the sacrifices she has and is making to defend the rights and liberty we each have. Currently, because of what point Kaye Beach’s trial is at, Kaye Beach attorneys have asked her not to comment personally. The Constitutional Alliance is the best source for the latest information.
I know the attorneys expect to prevail in Kaye Beach's lawsuit. The question is will they prevail on one cause of action or on both causes of action? Keep in mind, one cause of action applies to all citizens, not just Christians. Should Kaye and her attorneys only prevail on one cause of action, "the religious exemption", not all citizens will be protected against the mandated collection of their biometrics and other personal information?
What must be done now!
Each freedom loving person and group must immediately start releasing information about Kaye Beach's lawsuit. Citizens and groups/organizations must start expressing their support of Kaye and her attorneys both by writing articles and sharing information. In addition, the same citizens and groups/organizations must start supporting Kaye Beach and the Constitutional Alliance financially. There is no time for egos and personalities to get in the way. The Constitutional Alliance does not have a "staff", much less a suite of offices in a nice office building the way many organizations do. Our people and/or their spouses all work part time in our efforts while holding down their "jobs". I am the only exception because there is no way for me to hold down a "job" while personally traveling to as many as twenty plus states a year working with private citizens, groups and lawmakers on legislation and other matters. Because of current health related issues I may not be able to continue doing what I have been doing much longer; that is in the hands of God, Almighty. I appreciate the words of support and prayers on my behalf. The underlying problem for the issues I am dealing with medically has not yet been determined. My focus is on ensuring that I work with as many people and groups as possible to educate citizens and groups about what Kaye Beach is doing.
Update on Kaye Beach's lawsuit
The defendants (the State of Oklahoma and officials named individually) have responded to Kaye Beach's lawsuit. The response is a matter of public record. I am only going to comment on one part of the response. In my working with people and groups in a number of states I have identified one common response from states including Oklahoma. The argument is made that states are complying with federal law, The Real ID Act 2005. I want to be clear and ensure everyone understands that in fact, the Real ID Act 2005 is a voluntary law; in other words states have the option of complying or not complying. Yes, there are consequences to citizens of states that do not comply such as, being able to fly on a commercial airliner, entering a federal facility or a nuclear plant.
The POSSIBLE threat of the federal government not allowing citizens to fly or enter federal facilities is just that, a threat. Citizens, states and the airlines would be in court in minutes if the federal government attempted to follow through on its threats. The economic consequences of the federal government following through on its threats would be devastating to our economy and lawmakers would not want to suffer the wrath of the people. The formal implementation of Real ID has been delayed a number of times because of the action of citizens, groups and state lawmakers; the new formal implementation date is scheduled for January, 2013. We have articles on our web-site that articulate the 18 benchmarks states are required to meet if they are to be considered in full compliance with the Real ID Act 2005. The Constitutional Alliance and the Stop Real ID Coalition (sister organization of the Constitutional Alliance) have worked with more citizens, groups and state lawmakers than any other organizations to stop Real ID. I define “worked” as being on the ground in the individual states, offered legislation (passed), rallying groups both state and national, testifying before state legislative committees and educating the citizens and lawmakers in our country about Kaye Beach’s lawsuit.
Kaye Beach's attorneys say they “will prevail” but to what extent nobody knows
Kaye Beach has excellent attorneys in both Echols and Associates located in Oklahoma City and the Rutherford Institute. On what cause or causes of action they will prevail is impossible to know. Their experience and expertise is not in question. We each as citizens MUST lend our support both financially and by sharing/publishing information with as many citizens as possible about Kaye Beach's lawsuit. There are ways to support Kaye Beach both online and by regular mail that are available on the homepage of our web-site, www.constitutionalalliance.org The Constitutional Alliance needs you to support us financially in order that we can work for you to protect your rights, liberty and freedom.
Freedom is not free. Now is the time to act.
Each person will have to decide for themselves how in good conscience they can talk about "Liberty" if they have read this document and not supported Kaye Beach in her lawsuit. There might other opportunities going forward, including many originating with different citizens and groups but we do not have the time to wait. We must stop the bleeding now rather than arguing over who is responsible for the bleeding and what caused it. If we argue with one another or allow egos and personalities to get in the way, the patient will die because of a loss of blood. That "patient" is our rights, liberty and freedom.
Mark Lerner
God Bless these United States of America, the greatest country on earth
Donations are Welcome, Every Donation Helps, We Need Your Help Today! The Constitutional Alliance is a Non-Profit Corporation, your contributions are likely tax deductable; check with your tax advisor for details. Donate by Credit Card:
OR, you may write checks to "Constitutional Alliance Inc" and send them to: P.O. Box 2512, Mountain View, Arkansas 72560
Constitutional Alliance
http://constitutionalalliance.org/work/article.php/KayeBeachslawsuitandhowitdirectly