Reptilian Controlled Mesmerized Perception Coherency Correction

Lion Sleeps No More

Reptilian Controlled Mind Perception Coherency Correction

POTS 2013
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights

Human rights are commonly understood as "inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being."[1] Human rights are thus conceived as universal (applicable everywhere) and egalitarian (the same for everyone). These rights may exist as natural rights or as legal rights, in both national and international law.[2] The doctrine of human rights in international practice, within international law, global and regional institutions, in the policies of states and in the activities of non-governmental organizations, has been a cornerstone of public policy around the world. The idea of human rights[3] states, "if the public discourse of peacetime global society can be said to have a common moral language, it is that of human rights." Many of the basic ideas that animated the movement developed in the aftermath of the Second World War and the atrocities of The Holocaust, culminating in the adoption of theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights in Paris by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. The ancient world did not

possess the concept of universal human rights.[5]Ancient societies had "elaborate systems of duties... conceptions of justice, political legitimacy, and human flourishing that sought to realize human dignity, flourishing, or well-being entirely independent of human rights".[6] The modern concept of human rights developed during the early Modern period, alongside the European secularization of Judeo-Christian ethics.[7] The true forerunner of human rights discourse was the concept of natural rights which appeared as part of the medieval Natural law tradition that became prominent during the Enlightenment with such philosophers as John Locke, Francis Hutcheson, and Jean-Jacques Burlamaqui, and featured prominently in the political discourse of the American Revolution and the French Revolution. From this foundation, the modern human rights arguments emerged over the latter half of the twentieth century. Gelling as social activism and political rhetoric in many nations put it high on the world agenda. [8] All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Article 1 of the

United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights

(UDHR)[9]

Constitution Act, 1982

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Whereas Canada is founded upon

principles
that recognize the

Supremacy of God
and

Rule of Law
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution

A constitution is a set of fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a state or other organization is governed.[1] These rules together make up, i.e. constitute, what the entity is. When these principles are written down into a single collection or set of legal documents, those documents may be said to comprise a written constitution. Constitutions concern different levels of organizations, from sovereign states to companies and unincorporated associations. A treaty which establishes an international organization is also its constitution in that it would define how that organization is constituted. Within states, whether sovereign or federated, a constitution defines the principles upon which the state is based, the procedure in which laws are made and by whom. Some constitutions, especially written constitutions, also act as limiters of state power by establishing lines which a state's rulers cannot cross such as

fundamental rights.
Generally, every modern written constitution confers specific powers to an organization or institutional entity, established upon the primary condition that it

abides by the said constitution's limitations.

According to Scott Gordon, a political organization is constitutional to the extent that it "contain[s] institutionalized mechanisms of power control for

the protection of the interests and liberties of the citizenry,

including those that may be in the minority."[7]

Rule of Law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law The Rule of law in its most basic form is no one is above the law. Perhaps the most important application of the rule of law is the principle that governmental authority is legitimately exercised only in accordance with,

publicly disclosed laws,

adopted and enforced in accordance with established procedural steps that are referred to as due process. The rule of law is hostile to dictatorship and to anarchy. According to modern Anglo-American thinking, hallmarks of adherence to the rule of law commonly include

a clear separation of powers,

legal certainty,
the principle of legitimate expectation and equality of all before the law. 15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law

without discrimination
and, in particular,

without discrimination
based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. 31. Nothing in this Charter extends the legislative powers of any body or authority 32. (1) This Charter applies (a) to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all matters within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories; and (b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all matters within the authority of the legislature of each province.

publicly disclosed laws

52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency,

of no force or effect.
TIED
Tacit: Unspoken, implicit, inferred, implied, understood, unstated Inalienable: unchallengeable, absolute, immutable, not able to be forfeited, unassailable, incontrovertible, indisputable, undeniable Essential: Necessary, vital, indispensable, important, crucial, critical Demonstrably: Obviously, palpably, patently, evidently, noticeably, perceptibly, discernibly, apparently

Sane
Rational, sensible, reasonable, sound, normal, wise, commonsensical (Antonymn) Mad

Despite this, the strong claims made by the doctrine of human rights continue to provoke considerable skepticism and debates about the content, nature and justifications of human rights to this day.

Indeed,
the question of what is meant by a "right" is itself controversial and the subject of continued philosophical debate.[4]

The concept is not without controversy, and it has been said that "the phrase the rule of law has become

meaningless
thanks to ideological abuse and general over- use"

GO POE
General Over-use Proclamations Only Elusivity

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_Act,_1982 The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a bill of rights. The Charter is intended to protect certain political and civil rights of people in Canada

****from****
the policies and actions of all levels of government. It is also supposed to unify Canadians around a set of principles that embody those rights.[3][4] The Charter was preceded by the Canadian Bill of Rights, which was introduced by the government of John Diefenbaker in 1960. However, the Bill of Rights was only a federal statute, rather than a constitutional document. Therefore, it was limited in scope and was easily amendable. This motivated some within government to improve rights protections in Canada. The movement for human rights and freedoms that emerged after World War II also wanted to entrench the principles enunciated in the

Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[5]

Hence, the government of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau enacted the Charter in 1982.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The pursuit of human rights was a central reason for creating the UN. World War II atrocities and genocide led to a ready consensus that the new organization must work to prevent any similar tragedies in the future. An early objective was creating a legal framework for considering and acting on complaints about human rights violations. The UN Charter obliges all member nations to promote "universal respect for, and observance of, human rights" and to take "joint and separate action" to that end. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights,

though not legally binding,

was adopted by the General Assembly in 1948 as a common standard of achievement for all. The Assembly regularly takes up human rights issues. A large share of UN expenditures addresses the core UN mission of peace and security. The peacekeeping budget for the 20052006 fiscal year was approximately US$5 billion, 2.5 billion (compared to approximately US$1.5 billion, 995 million for the UN core budget over the same period), with some 70,000 troops deployed in 17 missions around the world.[60] UN peace operations are funded by assessments, using a formula derived from the regular funding scale, but including a weighted surcharge for the five permanent Security Council members, who must approve all peacekeeping operations. This surcharge serves to offset discounted peacekeeping assessment rates for less developed countries. As of 1 January 2011, the top 10 providers of assessed financial contributions to United Nations peacekeeping operations were: the United States, Japan, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy, China, Canada, Spain and the Republic of Korea.[61] Special UN programmes not included in the regular budget (such as UNICEF, the WFP and UNDP) are financed by voluntary contributions from other member governments. Most of this is financial contributions, but some is in the form of agricultural commodities donated for afflicted populations. Since their funding is voluntary, many of these agencies suffer severe shortages during economic recessions. In July 2009, the World Food Programme reported that it has been forced to cut services because of insufficient funding.[62] It has received barely a quarter of the total it needed for the 09/10 financial year. Many of the basic ideas that animated the movement developed in the aftermath of the Second World War and the atrocities of the Holocaust, culminating in the adoption of the

Universal Declaration of Human

Rights
in Paris by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. The ancient world did not possess the concept of universal human rights.[5] Ancient societies had "elaborate systems of duties... conceptions of justice, political legitimacy, and human flourishing that sought to realize human dignity, flourishing, or well-being entirely independent of human rights".[6] The modern concept of human rights developed during the early Modern period, alongside the European secularization of Judeo-Christian ethics.[7] The true forerunner of human rights discourse was the concept of natural rights which appeared as part of the medieval Natural law tradition, became prominent during the Enlightenment with such philosophers as John Locke, Francis Hutcheson, and Jean-Jacques Burlamaqui, and featured prominently in the political discourse of the American Revolution and the French Revolution. Multinational companies play an increasingly large role in the world, and have been responsible for numerous human rights abuses.[52] Although the legal and moral environment surrounding the actions of governments is reasonably well developed, that surrounding multinational companies is both controversial and ill-defined.[citation needed] Multinational companies' primary responsibility is to theirshareholders, not to those affected by their actions. Such companies may be larger than the economies of some of the states within which they operate, and can wield significant economic and political power. No international treaties exist to specifically cover the behavior of companies with regard to human rights, and national legislation is very variable. Jean Ziegler, Special Rapporteur of the UN Commission on Human Rights on the right to food stated in a report in 2003: In August 2003 the Human Rights Commission's Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights produced draft Norms on the responsibilities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises with regard to human rights.[54] These were considered by the Human Rights Commission in 2004,

but have no binding status on corporations and are not monitored.[55]

Sovereignty
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a geographic area, such as a territory.[1] It can be found in a power to rule and make law that rests

on a political fact for which

no purely legal explanation can be provided.

In theoretical terms, the idea of "sovereignty", historically, from Socrates to Thomas Hobbes, has always necessitated a moral imperative on the entity exercising it.
Rule of Law The rule of law is a legal maxim which provides that no person is above the law, that no one can be punished by the state except for a breach of the law, and that no one can be convicted of breaching the law except in the manner set forth by the law itself. The rule of law

stands in contrast
to the idea that the leader is above the law a feature of and certain other legal systems. The phrase has been used since the 17th century, but the concept is older. For example, the Greek philosopher Aristotle said, "Law should govern".[2] One way to be free from the rule of law is by denying that an enactment has the necessary attributes of law.

Roman Law, Nazi law,

Edict De facto
The rule of law has therefore been described as

"an exceedingly elusive notion"[3] giving rise to a "rampant divergence of understandings".[4]

At least two principal conceptions of the rule of law can be identified: a formalist or "thin" and a

substantive or "thick" definition of the rule of law.

Formalist definitions of the rule of law

do not make a judgment about the "justness" of law itself,

but define specific procedural attributes that a legal framework must have in order to be in compliance with the rule of law. Substantive conceptions of the rule of law go beyond this and include certain substantive rights that are said to be based on, or derived from, the rule of law.[5] Renewed interests? Since ancient times responsible to eradicate the abrogated Satanic bastards, but Satanic bastards enjoying luxurious lifestyle rather reluctant to eradicate self That's left for them they leave in hopelessness and despair The General Assembly has considered rule of law as an agenda item since 1992, with renewed interest since 2006 and has adopted resolutions at its last three sessions.[41] The Security Council has held a number of thematic debates on the rule of law,[42] and adopted resolutions emphasizing the importance

of these issues in the context of women, peace and security,[43] children in armed conflict,[44] and the protection of civilians in armed conflict.[45] The Peacebuilding Commission has also regularly addressed rule of law issues with respect to countries on its agenda.[46] [edit] International Bar Association

2009
The Council of the International Bar Association passed a resolution in 2009 endorsing a

substantive or "thick" definition

of the rule of law:[47] An independent, impartial judiciary; the presumption of innocence; the right to a fair and public trial without undue delay; a rational and proportionate approach to punishment; a strong and independent legal profession; strict protection of confidential communications between lawyer and client;

equality of all before the law;

these are all fundamental principles of the Rule of Law. Accordingly, arbitrary arrests; secret trials; indefinite detention without trial; cruel or degrading treatment or punishment; intimidation or corruption in the electoral process, are all unacceptable. The Rule of Law is the foundation of a civilized society. It establishes a transparent process accessible and equal to all. It ensures adherence to principles that both liberate and protect. The IBA calls upon all countries to respect these fundamental principles. It also calls upon its members to speak out in support of the Rule of Law within their respective communities.

PRICK I FIBIB
Political Religious Intellectual Charlatan Kleptocracy inciting Fickle Inherent Bias Ignorant Bliss

NEWS
Never Ending War Story

NEWS
Never Ending War Story

ONO
Osculate Not Oscillate

Osculate
mathematics intransitive verb to touch at a point of common tangency to a line passing between two branches of a curve, each branch continuing in both directions of the line

Oscillate
Swing, move back and forth, move to and fro, move backward and forward, fluctuate, vacillate, alternate

Reciprocals
Multiplied to give one mathematics describes a number or quality that is related to another by the fact that when multiplied together the product is one

1 Planet x 1 People x 1 Spirit x 1 Force x 1 Law x 1 Sense = 1 Humanity

HE
Human Equals

Neither Political Religious Servants or Superiors

HIM
Humanity Industrial Machine

Co-op not Coop

www.atomions2013.com HIS
Humanity is Science

ROLES
Rule of Law Enforced Stringently

HOLY SEE SACK Hierarchy of Liars Yeast Satanic Elite Exploiters Segregate and Conquer Kleptocracy

CURIONS
Cancerous Underground Roman Invisible Octopus Notorious Satanic Satanic Law aka Satani Claw "Thy kingdom come"

PIG
Puppet Incorporated Governments Enact Illegal Laws Instill the uncanny belief not accountable but the incorporated PIGLET can sue the ass off the naive Trough humans known Taxonomically
The request for God's kingdom to come is usually interpreted as a reference to the belief, common at the time, that a

Messiah figure would bring about a Kingdom of God. Traditionally the coming of God's Kingdom is seen as a divine gift to be prayed for,

not a human achievement.

This idea is frequently challenged by groups who believe that the Kingdom will come by the hands of those faithful to work for a better world. It is believed by these individuals that Jesus' commands to feed the hungry and clothe the needy are the Kingdom to which he was referring.

Puppet Incorporated Government Lawyer Exploiting Taxonomically

PIGLET PIG
Puppet Incorporated Governments Enact Illegal Laws Instill the uncanny belief not accountable but the incorporated PIGLET can sue the ass off the naive Trough humans known Taxonomically According to the Ancient Roman statesman Cicero, "We are all servants of the laws in order that we may be free."[10] During the Roman Republic, controversial magistrates might be put on trial when their terms of office expired. Under the Roman Empire, the sovereign was personally immune (legibus solutus), but those with grievances could sue the treasury. [6 Puppet Incorporated Government Lawyer Exploiting Taxonomically

PIGLET
the treasury.[6 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humans Humans (known

taxonomically
as Homo sapiens,[3][4] Latin for "wise man" or "knowing man")[5] are the only living species in the Homogenus. Anatomically modern humans originated in Africa about 200,000 years ago, reaching full behavioral modernity around 50,000 years ago.[6] Humans have a highly developed brain and are capable of abstract reasoning, language, introspection, and problem solving. This mental capability, combined with an erect body carriage that frees the hands for manipulating objects, has allowed humans to make far greater use of tools than any other living species on Earth. Other higher-level thought processes of humans, such as self-awareness, rationality, and sapience,[7][8][9] are considered to be defining features of what constitutes a "person".[citation needed] STP

Satanic Truth Prohibition

When truths such as the preceeding catch the eye of the thought police citation censors ergo now removed

Alienated, separated, not speaking, at odds, divided, on bad terms,

ESTRANGED

Elusive Snake Tongued Righteous Accountably

Navigate Genocide Excluding Demonstrably Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group.[1] While a precise definition varies among genocide scholars, a legal definition is found in the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG). Article 2 of this convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in

whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."[2] Because of the influence of Joseph Stalin,

this definition of genocide under international law

does not include political groups.

[3][4][5]

Another criticism of the CPPCG is that when its provisions have been invoked by the United Nations Security Council, they have only been invoked to punish those who have already committed genocide and

been foolish enough to leave a paper trail.

It was this criticism that led to the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 1674 by the United Nations Security Council on 28 April 2006 commits the Council to action to protect civilians in armed conflict and to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. Genocide scholars such as Gregory Stanton have postulated that conditions and acts that often occur before, during, and after genocide such as dehumanization of victim groups, strong organization of genocidal groups, and denial of genocide by its perpetrators can be identified and

1
actions taken to stop genocides before they happen.
Critics of this approach such as Dirk Moses assert that this is unrealistic and that, for example,

666
"Darfur will end when it suits the great powers that have a stake in the region".

www.Genocide2012.com
Now I lay me down to sleep if I should ... Say again why we finance the UN