BOBT12
Forum Replies Created
Quote:In any event, they have created this problem, hoping for public outrage, because they already have a “solution” to it that will expand their power over the public. Remember, all but one handful of the congress voted for the Patriot Act without being permitted to read it, and the public CONSENTED and uttered not a word of protest.This is certainly a possibility given the public fool (any institution which follows the government's curriculum) system.
Quote:”What good fortune for governments that people do not think.”-Adolph HitlerQuote:[BTW, the underwear bomber would have passed the naked body scan with flying colors.]Firepants was actually escorted pass a naked body scanner by a government agent, on record. He was already on a terrorist list.
Quote:So, the new security measures are NOT a solution, they are intended to create a problem to trigger an equally horrendous “solution”…but one which will have the CONSENT of the People as required in the Declaration of Independence.Generally, all of these things are for innocent people, not real terrorist.
Here is the article revealing the whole government scam.
Quote:Obama Issues Fake Terror Alert On Eve Of ElectionsEstablishment media fearmongers about “mail bomb plot” despite no bombs being found, Obama contradicts his own federal security apparatus
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, October 29, 2010
UPDATE: As this contrived scare unravels, Obama has given a press conference reversing earlier announcements that there were no explosives in the packages found on the planes. Obama claimed that the packages “did apparently contain explosive material,” completely contradicting earlier reports which quoted authorities as saying that both the package found in the UK and the two found in the U.S. were all duds and contained no explosive material.
A few hours ago CNN reported, “Investigators examined two UPS planes that landed at Philadelphia International Airport and another at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey, said Mike Mangeot, a UPS spokesman. Authorities later gave the “all-clear” at the airport in Newark, U.S. and U.K. officials said,” and yet now CNN is running with the headline, Suspicious packages ‘contain explosive material,’ Obama says. This stinks to high heaven. Obama is directly contradicting the announcements of his own federal security apparatus.
Obama also said that the events were a scare tactic designed to shake up Americans before the elections. On this point he’s correct, but all the evidence points to his White House being behind the scare. Obama was informed last night of the events as the packages were discovered and even after it was known that the UK package contained no explosive material, he issued a full security alert anyway.
As we predicted on four separate occasions would happen, the Obama White House has deliberately contrived a fake terror scare on the eve of the mid-term elections in an effort to subdue the rampaging political appetite for anti-big government candidates that threatens to sweep aside establishment incumbents next week.
Despite the fact that the so-called suspicious package discovered on a flight in the United Kingdom tested negative for any explosive material, President Obama, after being informed of the apparent “threat” yesterday, “directed U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and the Department of Homeland Security” to launch a full-scale security alert, according to a White House press release, which in turn was helpfully elevated to levels of hysteria by the corporate media today.
The scaremongering was focused around two UPS planes that landed at Philadelphia International Airport and another at Newark Liberty International Airport in New Jersey, but just like the incident in the UK, both were soon given the “all clear,” reports CNN, and no bombs were found.
Despite the fact that no explosives at all were found on any of the planes, the establishment media is still feverishly running with the story that this was a “mail bomb” plot targeting the United States and that it was run out of Yemen, which coincidentally is also the US Military-Industrial Complex’s number one target for attack.
Quite how a “mail bomb plot” can succeed without any actual bombs is something the hysterical press has failed to properly explain. Like every other single major terror scare targeting the United States that we have covered, this smacks of an engineered political ploy.
As the video at the top of this article highlights, the terror scare also arrives just days after British Airways Chairman Martin Broughton attacked US authorities for the continuation of “completely redundant” airport security checks. It also comes amidst an increasing backlash against naked body scanners.
Just as former Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge admitted that fake terror alerts were issued by the Bush administration for political gain, Obama is taking a leaf out of the Neo-Con’s playbook – and his timing couldn’t be better – just four days before the mid-term elections on Super Tuesday.
Having A Supply Of Healthy Foods That Last Just Makes Sense (AD)
Over the last few months, on four separate occasions, we warned that the Obama White House would pull a terror stunt on the eve of the election in an effort to corral an increasingly resentful and angry electorate into acquiescence. As we reported back in July, former Clinton advisor Robert Shapiro wrote that Obama was relying on an October surprise in the form of a terror scare to rescue his presidency.
“The bottom line here is that Americans don’t believe in President Obama’s leadership,” wrote Shapiro, adding, “He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he is a leader who can command confidence and, short of a 9/11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can’t think of how he could do that.”
Last month we reported on how the Obama administration’s threat that a “small scale terror attack” was on the cards was just another political ploy to instill fear within Americans. In another subsequent article we again highlighted the probability of the government contriving a terror scare for political grist.
We repeated our warning about Obama seeking to exploit terror earlier this month in the aftermath of the supposed airport lobby bombing plot, which again turned out to be nothing but hot air.
We’d be loathe to forget that the media and the government have been totally discredited over and over again by their complicity in issuing phony terror alerts designed to manipulate elections and frighten the public into slavish obedience, accepting naked body scanners, an intensification of the police state and any other indignity in the name of the government protecting them from terrorists like Christmas Day bomber Farouk Abdulmutallab, who was allowed to board the airliner he tried to attack by order of the US State Department.
Within hours of this new terror scare breaking every indication, most notably the fact that Obama was informed last night and decided to go ahead with a full security alert despite the UK package being a dud, screams out that this is a contrived political stunt designed to sway the many key undecided voters in anticipation of next week’s mid-terms.
Emphasis added.
- 'franklin' wrote on '29:
If enough people on any given day (say 12) refused both the x-rays and the sexual battery on the grounds that Janet Napolitano cannot unilaterally amend the Constitution (the right to be secure in one's person from unreasonable searches), and then demanded a refund from the airlines after they had been refused permission to fly, you can bet that the airlines would weigh in and this perverted nonsense would be stopped.
Of course, if that happened it would be on economic grounds and not constitutional grounds. But, you use whatever ammo gets the job done when you are being sexually assaulted or attacked with radiation devices.
And now we have this phony cargo plane incident. Oops, I guess they will need more naked body scans, and more groping, to keep us safe from government attacks, aka “terror attacks”. This is what Major (lying) Media says anyway. Funny they don’t seem to understand that people aren’t packages. Move along, there’s nothing to see here.
Oh yeah, remember, Barry Obama kept us safe through this very scary event, which just unexpectedly happened at election time. Pay this coincidence no attention. Bye the bye, vote for the Obama team even though he didn’t do anything, but preen and prance, worth mentioning.
- 'Admin' wrote on '27:
If this doesn't chill you to the bone I don't know what will. This is only a small portion of the Doctor's speech on the Health Bill in Ann Arbor (Saline) Michigan, on Oct. 10, 2010.
He is a prominent surgeon who testified before a committee at the Capitol in Washington D.C. Please listen to his facts.
CLICK HERE: http://www.youtube.c…h?v=8HnkxIh62dQ
Local orthopedic surgeon Dr. David Janda laid out some of the problems of John Dingell's approach to taking care of seniors in this presentation Oct. 10 in Saline, Michigan. If you think Dingell's health care plan and associated legislation won't ration care, listen to this video. Hear what Dingell's colleagues said they will do to Dr. Janda if he insists on giving the best treatment available to his patients: They'll put him in jail.
Fortunately, most of the people do not want this plan. People need to say no to this killer ObamaNoCare plan. Many state are suing due to the fact that the plan is unConstitutional.
- 'stone83' wrote on '15:
I just read that rain-water tax story. That IS insane!
I can't help it….I think America, as we know it, is about to change for even WORSE than Nazi Germany.
Last year at this time, my local newspaper was running stories about how the Homeless Shelter is having to turn people away for lack of room and beds. This year, there are no stories about that.
A month ago, there was a story about one of the food 'pantries' (controlled by the gov.) not getting enough food to feed needy people.
And, just recently, there was a happy-go-lucky news piece that talked about the City Council people eating pie without their hands……whooopeeeeee dooooooooo!!!!
(Kansas – as dumb as you think, lolololol)
It is a sad state of affairs when there is mostly just BAD NEWS on the airwaves/TV/internet.
(Don't worry, be happy, I guess
)This is fast becoming one of the most lawless times in memory. It is time to stock up on things you will likely need, like stored foodstuffs, water plans, gold/silver, Second Amendment supplies. Let's talk to neighbors and Nazis, while we can. We can refer people to this site, there are many videos, “Don't Tread on Me”, “The Obama Deception”, “Fall of the Republic”, “Police State” (1-4), ae911Truth. Many of these videos are free, search names for more information.
- 'Bing' wrote on '15:'Admin' wrote on '12:
These forums are a mock court, not a political platform. Show me the beef. NO PRESUMPTIONS PLEASE!
And speaking of beef, that reminds, I just watched a movie titled Food Inc.
Uggghhhh!! Not good.
That was a well-done movie. It is scary how the food supply is so dangerous based upon big corporation’s bad practices, and government (FDA) protection of this garbage. How Congress want us to stop growing private farms and even gardens. As far as Tim Turner, well I have not heard any good reports. Thus, I have not had a desire to do business with him.
http://www.suijurisclub.net/court/9081-man-convicted-using-tim-turner-paperwork.html
- 'franklin' wrote on '14:
Taxpayers who signed up for tax benefits in the form of deductions or who signed up to “pay their fair share” should NOT cheat on their taxes — EVER.
Those people probably also steal paperclips, pens, pencils, paper and other things for the other company, besides the IRS, Inc., that they work for.
If people signed voluntarily this may be true. However, we know that the current system is based upon massive force and fraud (see the Great IRS Hoax for more information); hence, it is criminality masquerading as a legitimate system. Hey, I suppose this is a real trick or treat (mostly trick).
- 'stone83' wrote on '13:
BOBT12,
Wow, where do you find all this stuff?? I rented Blacks Law Dictionary 2nd Edition and have been reading that, but WOW, you have a ton of info – – I would like to know how you know where to look for this stuff so that I can look all this stuff up too!
Use a search engine, I use startpage.com They will keep your information private. You put in a search term, such as, “Kansas Rules of Civil Procedure”. And you see what comes up. Try it yourself.
Quote:I thank you for researching this stuff and sharing it – please do not think that you are obligated to do this research.No problem. I love helping fellow freedom seekers. The courts, and even the law libraries, seem to want to confuse the uninitiated.
Quote:”It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made be men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man who knows what the law is today can guess what it will be tomorrow.” -James Madison, Federalist no. 62, 1788Emphasis added.
However, the people need to understand the law, thus, they can do more to uphold the law.
Quote:REPUBLIC [L. res/thing, object, matter, affair + poblicos, publicus / belonging to the people]Quote:I think I might visit the JurisdictionaryYou should really look into getting this information. It will give you an overview of the system. Hence, you will not feel like a mouse in a maze.
Quote:or suijuirsclub forums for some information, but I don't even know the court rules for my specific traffic court. (I know MOST traffic courts operate under 'informal' rules…I would just at least like the court clerk to provide them to me so I know what they may expect of me.)I hope all goes well.
Here is some interesting information.
Quote:60-201. Rules of civil procedure; citation; scope. (a) The provisions of article 2 of chapter 60 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, and amendments thereto, shall be known and cited as the rules of civil procedure.(b) This article governs the procedure in the district courts of Kansas, other than actions commenced pursuant to the code of civil procedure for limited actions and governs the procedure in all original proceedings in the supreme court in all suits of a civil nature whether cognizable as cases at law or in equity, except as provided in K.S.A. 60-265, and amendments thereto.
http://law.justia.co…tute_23063.html
Emphasis added.
Quote:60-207. Pleadings allowed, forms of motions and petitions. (a) Pleadings. There shall be a petition and an answer; a reply to a counterclaim denominated as such; an answer to a cross-claim, if the answer contains a cross-claim; a third-party petition, if a person who was not an original party is summoned under the provision of K.S.A. 60-214; and a third-party answer, if a third-party petition is served. No other pleading shall be allowed, except that the court may order a reply to an answer or a third-party answer. Any petition filed in the district court pursuant to chapter 60 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated shall designate, immediately below the names of the parties in the caption, that such petition is filed pursuant to chapter 60 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated. Any such designation shall be sufficient if labeled “Petition Pursuant to K.S.A. Chapter 60” immediately below the caption.Quote:60-238. Jury trial of right. (a) Right preserved. The right of trial by jury as declared by section 5 of the bill of rights in the Kansas constitution, and as given by a statute of the state shall be preserved to the parties inviolate.(b) Demand. Any party may demand a trial by jury of any issue triable of right by a jury by: (1) Serving upon the other parties a demand therefor in writing at any time after the commencement of the action and not later than 10 days after the service of the last pleading directed to such issue; and (2) filing the demand as required by K.S.A. 60-205 and amendments thereto. Such demand may be indorsed upon a pleading of the party.
(c ) Same; specification of issues. In the demand a party may specify the issues which the party wishes so tried; otherwise the party shall be deemed to have demanded trial by jury for all the issues so triable. If the party has demanded trial by jury for only some of the issues, any other party within 10 days after service of the demand or such lesser time as the court may order, may serve a demand for trial by jury of any other or all of the issues of fact in the action.
(d) Waiver. The failure of a party to serve and file a demand as required by this section constitutes a waiver by the party of trial by jury but waiver of a jury trial may be set aside by the judge in the interest of justice or when the waiver inadvertently results without serious negligence of the party. A demand for trial by jury made as herein provided may not be withdrawn without the consent of the parties.
Emphasis added.
Quote:60-247. Jurors. (a) In all civil trials, upon the request of a party, the court shall cause enough jurors to be called, examined, and passed for cause before any peremptory challenges are required, so that there will remain sufficient jurors, after the number of peremptory challenges allowed by law for the case on trial shall have been exhausted, to enable the court to cause twelve (12) or sufficient jurors to be sworn to try the case.(b) Voir dire examination of jurors. Prospective jurors shall be examined under oath as to their qualifications to sit as jurors. The court shall permit the parties or their attorneys to conduct an examination of prospective jurors.
(c ) Challenges. In civil cases, each party shall be entitled to three (3) peremptory challenges, except as provided in subsection (h) of section 60-248, as amended, pertaining to alternate jurors. Multiple defendants or multiple plaintiffs shall be considered as a single party for purpose of making challenges except that if the judge finds there is a good faith controversy existing between multiple plaintiffs or multiple defendants, the court in its discretion and in the interest of justice, may allow any of the parties, single or multiple, additional peremptory challenges and permit them to be exercised separately or jointly.
All challenges for cause, whether to the array or panel or to individual prospective jurors, shall be determined by the court. Peremptory challenges shall be exercised in a manner which will not communicate to the challenged prospective juror the identity of the challenging party or attorney.
(d) Oath of jurors. The jurors shall be sworn to try the case conscientiously and return a verdict according to the law and the evidence.
Quote:60-251. Instructions to jury. (a) When made. At the close of the evidence or at such earlier time during the trial as the judge reasonably directs, any party may file written requests that the court instruct the jury on the law as set forth in the requests. The judge shall instruct the jury at the close of the evidence before argument and the judge may, in his or her discretion, after the opening statements, instruct the jury on such matters as in the judge's opinion will assist the jury in considering the evidence as it is presented.(b) When waived. No party may assign as error the giving or failure to give an instruction unless he or she objects thereto before the jury retires to consider its verdict stating distinctly the matter to which he or she objects and the grounds of his or her objection unless the instruction is clearly erroneous. Opportunity shall be given to make the objections out of the hearing of the jury.
Emphasis added.
Quote:60-401. Definitions. As used in this article unless the context otherwise requires:(a) “Evidence” is the means from which inferences may be drawn as a basis of proof in duly constituted judicial or fact-finding tribunals, and includes testimony in the form of opinion, and hearsay.
(b) “Relevant evidence” means evidence having any tendency in reason to prove any material fact.
(c ) “Proof” is all of the evidence before the trier of the fact relevant to a fact in issue which tends to prove the existence or non-existence of such fact.
(d) “Burden of proof” means the obligation of a party to meet the requirements of a rule of law that the fact be proven either by a preponderance of the evidence or by clear and convincing evidence or beyond a reasonable doubt, as the case may be. Burden of proof is synonymous with “burden of persuasion.”
(e) “Burden of producing evidence” means the obligation of a party to introduce evidence when necessary to avoid the risk of a directed verdict or peremptory finding against him or her on a material issue of fact.
(f) “Conduct” includes all active and passive behavior, both verbal and nonverbal.
(g) “The hearing” unless some other is indicated by the context of the rule where the term is used, means the hearing at which the question under a rule is raised, and not some earlier or later hearing.
(h) “Finding of fact” means the determination from proof or judicial notice of the existence of a fact as a basis for a ruling on evidence. A ruling implies a supporting finding of fact.
(i) “Guardian” means guardian as defined by K.S.A. 77-201 (32nd) and also includes the person, committee, or other representative authorized by the law of any other jurisdiction to protect the person of any individual under disability imposed by law.
(j) “Judge” means member or members or representative or representatives of a court conducting a trial or hearing at which evidence is introduced.
(k) “Trier of fact” includes a jury, or a judge when he or she is trying an issue of fact other than one relating to the admissibility of evidence.
(l) “Verbal” includes both oral and written words.
(m) “Writing” means handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating, photographing and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing any form or communication or representation, including letters, words, pictures, sounds, or symbols, or combinations thereof.
(n) “Conservator” means conservator as defined by K.S.A. 77-201 (34th) and also includes the person, committee, or other representative authorized by the law of any other jurisdiction to protect the property or estate of any individual under disability imposed by law.
http://www.suijurisc….html#post81467
Quote:If one loses in the Court NOT of Record, just appeal to a Court of Record. You should get a new (de novo) trial.http://www.suijurisc….ng-ticket.html
http://www.suijurisc….-45-today.html
http://www.suijurisc…california.html
http://www.suijurisc….html#post81918
- 'stone83' wrote on '12:
[Here's an update on the situation]
Quote:5. Q. May I request my own licensed court reporter? A. I don't know, I will have to ask. Come back in about 10 days when the case is filed.In a Court Not of Record the court reporter will not be of much help, the record won't count. The record will begin (de novo) in a Court of Record (which appears to be District Court).
Quote:7. Q. I do not plan on pleading anything.The judge will likely put in a “Not Guilty” for you.
Quote:Is the traffic court a court of record?It is a good idea confirm this.
Quote:4. Q. I'm not sure exactly how to draft documents to conform to this courts rules. Is there any information available on how to do this?You will need to ask for the Rules of Proceedure, which will generally apply to a Court of Record. In Traffic Court (Court NOT of Record) one generally just state his case.
Quote:6. Q. Is this a criminal or civil charge? A. It's an infraction.Likely Civil.
Quote:Also, no one could find the Kansas Motor Vehicle Act in a book, or any book containingWhen you are at the law library you may wish to ask for the Vehicle Code (see the ticket for more information).
Quote:federal Motor Vehicle Act.You won't find this, this stuff runs under state Police Powers.
- 'stone83' wrote on '11:
BOBT12 – I am currently reading the very last link you put into your post. Right off the bat, I see some juicy tidbits that I find interesting. I know 42 USC 1983 is a fed. law…..I will be doing some research on what my options are, according to content contained in the link you gave me. Thank you kind sir!
God's Peace to all of you!
You are welcome. I wish you all the best in your travels.
- 'stone83' wrote on '11:
WOW- You guys in this forum are a lot more 'talkative' than over in SEDM's forum. I really do appreciate all the support from those who have responded to my post – THANK YOU! I have been studying HARD over the last few months, and yes – I have watched a lot of the FREEKEENE.COM videos on youtube. They are informative videos, for sure! I will update you guys as this matter proceeds. I am planning on traveling down to the court and Tuesday (tomorrow) and asking the court clerk if they are going to proceed with prosecution, and if so, I will demand a verified civil or criminal complaint from someone injured by my actions. We shall see what they say.
BOBT12 – thanks for the knowledge about filing as a pauper – I will look in to this. (I have never heard anything about that, ever, so thanks for informing me about that particular option)
All in all, it's only worth $5.00…I am DEFINITELY going to have fun with this case in court!
Does anyone have any NON-legal, educational information about my options, in regards to filing a counter-claim for deprivation of rights. I have read article 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983 – Civil action for deprivation of rights. My understanding is that I do NOT have civil rights, but instead have claimed common-law jurisdiction on my ticket with the notation of 'ALL RIGHTS RESERVED UCC1-308' and reserved all of my un(in)alienable rights.
I am still learning things – as are most of you on this forum…learning NEVER stops for me.
Here is a little information from the constitution of your state.
Quote:§ 1: Judicial power; seals; rules. The judicial power of this state shall be vested exclusively in one court of justice, which shall be divided into one supreme court, district courts, and such other courts as are provided by law; and all courts of record shall have a seal. The supreme court shall have general administrative authority over all courts in this state.Emphasis added.
Quote:Does anyone have any NON-legal, educational information about my options, in regards to filing a counter-claim for deprivation of rights. I have read article 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983 – Civil action for deprivation of rights. My understanding is that I do NOT have civil rights, but instead have claimed common-law jurisdiction on my ticket with the notation of 'ALL RIGHTS RESERVED UCC1-308' and reserved all of my un(in)alienable rights.Well this is a federal law, if you want to use it you will likely need to file in federal court.
Quote:§ 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rightsHow Current is This? Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.
Emphasis added.
http://www.famguardian.org/TaxFreedom/Instructions/5.12SueGovWrongdoing.htm
Generally speaking, Traffic Courts are NOT Courts of Record, they work under “informal” rules. Hence, they will likely move ahead, treating the ticket as the Complaint. If you don't agree with the result of Traffic Court, you will need to take your case to a Court of Record (see your state's Constitution for more information). This will often be something like a Common Pleas Court, where you should get a new (de novo) trial.
You should look into filing as a pauper (a very poor person).
This is not legal advice, just lawful information.
- 'Admin' wrote on '16:
Never Gonna Stand for This
http://www.lucianne.com/Article/?pageid=never_gonna_stand_for_this
This is very good. As a free people we should NOT, and I will NOT, stand for KILLING GRANNY, worshiping these DIM scumbags as gods, nor run into their death camps!
http://www.suijurisclub.net/announcement-awareness/10072-sovereigns-their-own-saviors-2.html
If you like that…
http://www.youtube.c…player_embedded
)