The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!

Comment: I want to call Mr.

(See in situ)

In post: Big Lie
In reply to comment: Get on a Jury (see in situ)

I want to call Mr.

Bush to the stand:

I want to know "Why would Homeland Security hire former Stasi chief Markus Wolfe and former head of the KGB General Yevgeni Primakov?"

So, Mr. Bush why are you hiring foreign terror agents to “fight the war on terror” in support of Homeland Security?

The 5th you say? Well then send your patsy to the stand.
My fellow juror, how then do we decide on punishment and not become that which we abhor?

“You know "Extraordinary Rendition"?”

Please take a moment to look at that query and tell me, what do you see?

Oil for Food Program, yes, I remember reading about that after you told me about it. It seems there are more that should be brought to the stand?

I have some thoughts about the 5th Amendment :
“Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
If someone cannot testify against themselves, perhaps that was supposed to alleviate confession torture? So what is the deal with people having to sign confessions under lengthy police interrogations? You know, the kind you see on TV…good cop, bad cop. Doesn’t that violate the spirit of the 5th amendment? Or is that what is done so that the letter of the 5th amendment is not violated in a “court of law?”
I have served on a jury in Galveston, Texas. It was to determine whether a repeated dwi offender was guilty after being pulled over and was allegedly intoxicated. The whole trial hinged on whether it could be proven that the breathalyzer was calibrated correctly. It was a theatrical production as far as I was concerned. A mockery. A case of is is.