Circumcision of the Heart Ministry
For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit,
and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
Philippians 3:3
and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
Philippians 3:3
1. Is a (U. S. §2241) the proper avenue to fight the execution of a judgment?
2. Did the appeals court err in denying the defendant due process based on a case that was granted on direct appeal, opposed to the §2241 submitted by the defendant? (Pouty v. U.S.)
3. Does the court have an obligation to find a way to grant a defendant’s motion when they know that the motion has merit?
4. Does the court (as it seems) have a way to deny a motion (from the defendants) if it does have merit?
The purpose of the court is not to be pro government, but, that justice will be served, be it for the petitioner or the government. The court is to be a neutral entity in any court proceeding; they are to judge righteously according to the laws set forth by our fathers in the U.S. Constitution. However, it seems just the opposite is happening.
The court these days only side with the government, that appointed them and not the law that anointed them. This is a tragedy in this country. The anointing of righteousness flows from the head down; but, if the head is not taking a stand for righteousness and is not taking a righteous place of authority as overseers, then what is to be thought of its people?
How can good come out of evil? There is no formula for this. Our heads of government can see that there are injustices within our court system, yet, they stand by and watch the people being taken advantage of by the same government that makes the laws, yet does not uphold them. The government seems to only honor the law when it benefits the government; they circumvent the law to cover their unjust judgments.
When will the Appeals court take a stand and commit itself to preserving the righteousness of the law by denouncing the circumvention of the law denying defendants petitions when clearly their merit to grant their motions and find grace, mercy, and or relief from the injustices done in the district courts.
When will the district courts hear the cry of the people in affliction? There are many injustices done by this court. Many cases go unnoticed when they have to have merit. The defendant’s voice seems to go unheard; the petitions seem to fall on deaf ears.
When will congress take a step forward to say what they really mean? Congress has put laws into effect that allow the courts to perceive it in three or four different ways. What kind of system is this? Do they not know that the righteousness of the law can never flow down to the people if there is no anointing (of righteousness) in the head. The head of the people have to be righteous judges; if not there will be no righteousness in the people. It seems as if the people are against the government (antiterrorism act) when in actuality it’s the government against the people.
This country is in disarray because its heads are not of a righteous mindset; they are selfish and inconsiderate. Laws are made to govern and protect the people. Laws are also made to protect the government from the people; but it seems that the government is taking advantage of its people.
What can you say to this? Is there an answer?
Written by,
Brother Luther Austin- 59673-004
FCI-Coleman-Medium
P.O. Box 1032
Coleman, Florida, 33521-1032
Written by,
Brother Luther Austin- 59673-004
FCI-Coleman-Medium
P.O. Box 1032
Coleman, Florida, 33521-1032
2. Did the appeals court err in denying the defendant due process based on a case that was granted on direct appeal, opposed to the §2241 submitted by the defendant? (Pouty v. U.S.)
3. Does the court have an obligation to find a way to grant a defendant’s motion when they know that the motion has merit?
4. Does the court (as it seems) have a way to deny a motion (from the defendants) if it does have merit?
The purpose of the court is not to be pro government, but, that justice will be served, be it for the petitioner or the government. The court is to be a neutral entity in any court proceeding; they are to judge righteously according to the laws set forth by our fathers in the U.S. Constitution. However, it seems just the opposite is happening.
The court these days only side with the government, that appointed them and not the law that anointed them. This is a tragedy in this country. The anointing of righteousness flows from the head down; but, if the head is not taking a stand for righteousness and is not taking a righteous place of authority as overseers, then what is to be thought of its people?
How can good come out of evil? There is no formula for this. Our heads of government can see that there are injustices within our court system, yet, they stand by and watch the people being taken advantage of by the same government that makes the laws, yet does not uphold them. The government seems to only honor the law when it benefits the government; they circumvent the law to cover their unjust judgments.
When will the Appeals court take a stand and commit itself to preserving the righteousness of the law by denouncing the circumvention of the law denying defendants petitions when clearly their merit to grant their motions and find grace, mercy, and or relief from the injustices done in the district courts.
When will the district courts hear the cry of the people in affliction? There are many injustices done by this court. Many cases go unnoticed when they have to have merit. The defendant’s voice seems to go unheard; the petitions seem to fall on deaf ears.
When will congress take a step forward to say what they really mean? Congress has put laws into effect that allow the courts to perceive it in three or four different ways. What kind of system is this? Do they not know that the righteousness of the law can never flow down to the people if there is no anointing (of righteousness) in the head. The head of the people have to be righteous judges; if not there will be no righteousness in the people. It seems as if the people are against the government (antiterrorism act) when in actuality it’s the government against the people.
This country is in disarray because its heads are not of a righteous mindset; they are selfish and inconsiderate. Laws are made to govern and protect the people. Laws are also made to protect the government from the people; but it seems that the government is taking advantage of its people.
What can you say to this? Is there an answer?
Written by,
Brother Luther Austin- 59673-004
FCI-Coleman-Medium
P.O. Box 1032
Coleman, Florida, 33521-1032
Written by,
Brother Luther Austin- 59673-004
FCI-Coleman-Medium
P.O. Box 1032
Coleman, Florida, 33521-1032
