Newt Gingrich is Wrong, The Bill of Rights is Still the Law of the Land, Not Two Sets of Laws Under the Patriot Act! Any Questions?

              Newt Gingrich who claims to know history as a college professor. This same person talks about the Northwest Ordinance and claims to revere the founding documents is a hypocrite. He glorified God in the Iowa family forum talking about the faith of the founders and how he mimics them quoting the early  founding documents.. I would like to know what Declaration of Independence did he read from? Why I ask this? It is because it is not the same one I read that has the same grievances against the King is no different what we are experiencing today with Washington DC. When there was the GOP debate. How can Newt say there is two sets of laws for Robbery, rape and another for the war on terror? The truth is, Newt is a two faced politician that talks like a conservative and governs as a globalist. What he says and does are two different things.

             The truth is when the Bill of Rights was drafted and ratified by the states. It was clear there was one law of the land and not a separate law to be enforced selectively for one group of people and not another. They say we need the Patriot act to protect America from those evil terrorist. This very act allowed Federal agents and other Law Enforcement agencies to side step the 4th and 5th Amendments to write their own search warrants instead of going before a judge. This has caused the Federal government to abuse its power in the name of stopping a imaginary enemy no one can see. They are looking for ways around the Bill of Rights because these provisions chain down the power of goverment, not enhance it.

              Back in the days under reign of King George III. The British monarch and Parliament passed the Stamp Act putting a tax on all documents and items people owned. Every possession and document a person owned had to have the King's stamp on it. To enforce this Stamp Act. The Parliament passed the Townsend Act that allowed the British Soldiers to write their own search warrants to enter a person's home to see if everything had the King's stamp on it without going before a Magistrate to ask for a search warrant as directed under the Magna Carta. We are experiencing the same abuses today the early colonist dealt with. No matter what rationalization and excuse the Politicians use why we need the patriot act. The notion we have to give up our liberties for safety is nothing more then political rhetoric to sell us an fabricated fear of a phony enemy.

            Newt Gingrich is wrong and he knows it. The Bill of Rights applies to every person, regardless if they are a citizen or non citizen. These rights are unalienable. No matter what, if a person is accused of conspiracy to commit an act of terror or committed an act of Terrorism all the way down to the charge of petty larceny. The goverment has to bring a case before the grand jury to see if there is enough evidence to have a public trial The accused has a right to assistance of counsel and a trial by a jury of their own peers. The signers of the Declaration of Independence agreed " Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes;" The war on drugs and the war on terror is no exception. What happened on September 11, 2001 is no reason to usurp the rights of the people. Declaring people enemy combatants by the discretion of the President based on his own judgment without any accountability to the congress or the courts is very frightening. The right of Habeas corpus is being denied based on this designation.  King George III did the same thing depriving people of basic rights. They are doing the same thing today as fallows in this founding document. Nothing has changed, this Declaration against this British monarchy Thomas Jefferson written so well and eloquently is very clear about why we wanted to be free and independent from the King.

-For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:(Police and other agents are immune from any prosecution for abuses against the people, The TSA seems to above the law to grope, steal, and rape)

-For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:(Military tribunals at Gitmo)

-For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offenses:(Federal goverment today fabricating evidence to declare any American enemy combatants to be transported to CIA black site outside these united States)

-For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:(The government has no case most of the time and has to try to keep a jury out of the court room)

             There is no two sets of laws. The government is breaking the law. I do not care if they use administrative law, admiralty law or military tribunals to bypass these rights of the accused to bring their own witnesses and evidence in their defense against the charges presented. The war on Terror or Drugs does not establish two sets of laws. The Constitution puts limitations on goverment and does not empower them to trample on the rights of the people fighting a phony enemy. If this is how the former Speaker of the House thinks saying there is two sets of laws. Then my assumption is this. Newt Gingrich is not fit to be president or even dog catcher. If he took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. Then there is no wiggle room to get around the law of the land. I am just glad Ron Paul is in these debates to set the record straight that liberty must be preserved at all cost even in this phony war on terror. Newt is wrong, the Bill of rights is still the law of the land and not the Patriot act. As the fifth them amendment states very clearly on historical precedent. " 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." That means torture is not justified nor is killing American citizens without a trial. Any Questions Newt? I did not think so.