Thursday, July 12, 2012

Re-New the Love of Virtue – Justice, Reciprocity

President Barack Hussein Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20500-0001 
Re: Re-New the Love of Virtue – Justice, Reciprocity
Dear Sir,
     We have to re-new the Love of Virtue, Justice, Reciprocity, in our American Society.  Love of Virtue predates although it is all too often erroneously linked with the weakness of Communism and too little associated with Montesquieu's original meaning -- the willingness to put the interests of the community ahead of private interests

     Neal K. Katyal, Lead Counsel in the Supreme Court case that established civil rights for detainees at Guantanamo Bay,[1] further commented I think succinctly, "To be sure, there is always some political accountability when the legislature absolutely deprives aliens of their rights. For example, American citizens could be aghast at the MCA[2] and vote out those who voted for it in Congress. But that form of accountability is too weak, as it posits an uberempathetic voting population so concerned for the rights of others that they will vote on the basis of policies that do not impact their own lives. This is just too fanciful. Virtual representation cannot be effective if it depends on heroic assumptions of empathy, just as our early countrymen recognized by placing the Privileges and Immunities Clause in Article IV and writing McCulloch with virtual representation in mind."[3]  The Supreme Court has said as stated prior, "But it must also be recognized that the Bill of Rights is particularly intended to vindicate the interests of the individual in the face of the popular will as expressed in legislative majorities; at the very least."[4]
     "For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another."[5]

     "Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."[6]

     "In all that we do, we must be guided by that simple command that binds all great religions together: Love thy neighbor as thyself."[7]
     "It's easier to start wars than to end them. It's easier to blame others than to look inward. It's easier to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There's one rule that lies at the heart of every religion—that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples—a belief that isn't new; that isn't black or white or brown; that isn't Christian or Muslim or Jew. It's a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the hearts of billions around the world. It's a faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today."[8]

     "For if there is one law that we can be most certain of, it is the law that binds people of all faiths and no faith together. It's no coincidence that it exists in Christianity and Judaism; in Islam and Hinduism; in Buddhism and humanism. It is, of course, the Golden Rule—the call to treat one another as we wish to be treated. The call to love. The call to serve. To do what we can to make a difference in the lives of those with whom we share the same brief moment on this Earth."[9]

     "We know too that whatever our differences, there is one law that binds all great religions together. Jesus told us to "love thy neighbor as thyself." The Torah commands, "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow." In Islam, there is a hadith that reads "None of you truly believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself." And the same is true for Buddhists and Hindus; for followers of Confucius and for humanists. It is, of course, the Golden Rule—the call to love one another; to understand one another; to treat with dignity and respect those with whom we share a brief moment on this Earth."[10]

     The fear mongers want to frame the issue as the weakness of Communism v. the strength Capitalist's Free Markets.  The pursuit of Justice requires that we ask "do we live as animals, survival of the fittest, or are We the People civilized by our assertion of the democratically derived and sustained supreme law of the land, the Constitution for the United States of America?

     We the People sought to separate ourselves from the animals, the survival of the fittest and the divine right of kings with our Constitution for the United States of America.  I quote from James Madison in the Federalist Papers (#51) at the ratification of the Constitution for the United States of America:
     "Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuitIn a society under the forms of which the stronger faction can readily unite and oppress the weaker, anarchy may as truly be said to reign as in a state of nature, where the weaker individual is not secured against the violence of the stronger; and as, in the latter state, even the stronger individuals are prompted, by the uncertainty of their condition, to submit to a government which may protect the weak as well as themselves; so, in the former state, will the more powerful factions or parties be gradually induced, by a like motive, to wish for a government which will protect all parties, the weaker as well as the more powerful." 
The power of any group is dependent on its cohesion.  Cohesion within a group requires the interests of the individual be, to some extent, deferential to the group.  American's feel emotionally repulsed by the Love of Virtue -- the willingness to put the interests of the community ahead of private interests -- because of its erroneously asserted though non-controlling link to the fall of communism.
     Reciprocity requires the administration of Justice based on the Jury System, without any absolute immunity.  We the People need to take responsibility for our actions amongst ourselves and as a responsible member of the world community.  There is no such thing ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY!!![11]
     If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.
Thank you in advance.
Time is of the essence,

David G. Jeep

cc:  My Blog - Thursday, July 12, 2012, 1:06:43 PM-,

[1] Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 126 S. Ct. 2749 (2006) The Supreme Court precedential case that established military commissions set up by the Bush administration to try detainees at Guantanamo Bay lack "the power to proceed because its structures and procedures violate both the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the four Geneva Conventions signed in 1949,"
[2] Military Commissions Act (MCA), Military Commissions Act of 2006, Pub. L. No. 109-366, 120 Stat. 2600.
[3] 2007, 'Equality in the War on Terror' Neal K. Katyal, 59 Stan. L. Rev. 1365-1394 (2007)
[4] Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971) (Page 403 U. S. 407) "(Missouri, Kansas & Texas R. Co. v. May, 194 U. S. 267, 194 U. S. 270 (1904)).
[11] See U.S. Court of Appeals For The Eighth Circuit case number, 07-2614   David Jeep  vs.  Philip Jones, Sr.;   Jeep, David, 08-1823   David Jeep  vs.  Jack Bennett;   Jeep, David, 09-2848   David Jeep  vs.  United States;   Jeep, David, 10-1947   David Jeep  vs.  Jack Bennett;   Jeep, David, 11-2425   David Jeep  vs.  Barack Obama, President;   Jeep, David, 12-2435   David Jeep  vs.  Barack Obama;   Jeep, David.  Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court 07-11115 and 11-8211

Thanks in advance

To Kill a Mocking Bird, The Denial of Due Process
"agere sequitor esse"
"Time is of the essence"
David G. Jeep
E-mail is preferred,
(314) 514-5228

David G. Jeep
c/o The Bridge
1610 Olive Street,
Saint Louis, MO 63103-2316