franklin
Forum Replies Created
Welcome.
It sounds like you're on fire and you want someone to put you out so you can rest easier.
You're asking a lot of difficult questions (e.g. how to litigate as a sovereign citizen, but going to 40 officers of the court to represent your sovereignty. If they represent you then you are not sovereign but a ward of the court incapable of exercising sovereign autonomy…or even speaking without being spoken to).
You might look up web sites that can help you be a sui juris individual in court so that you can be the sovereign citizen you want to be.
What follows is not legal advice…but opinion under the First Amendment to the Constitution. One possible way to act as a sovereign while you get educated on this site and others is to go back to the attorneys…officers of the court…since this site does not give legal advice…and ask one of them to sell you useful information such as:
Can you help me…for your usual fee…draft a lawsuit against my opponents and tell me how to file it? Does a filed lawsuit cloud title to the property…or doesn't it? What are rules of court…where do I get them? Etc.
The point is…you can answer your own strategy questions by picking the brains of an attorney with the questions you pose in your post…for a fee…without him or her representing you.
Good luck.
Riverway,
You wrote
Quote:I have great respect for most all of your posting as it appears well thought out, but this is suspect. Here you have some hicks on Youtube claiming to know the plans and operations of our armed forces, and you add to it claiming deadly force against even nontaxpayers.Thank you. I have great respect for your postings as well, Riverway, and have learned much from them.
And thanks for the challenge…the tone of the original post does sound a bit like Chicken Little doesn't it? Even though I used the word reportedly to indicate opinion rather than fact…and intended the post as an invitation to check things out rather than as a siren call to head for the underground shelters.
But the communication wasn't complete…as you noted. And we all know what incomplete communication leads to (like the severely edited one's the IRS puts out in order to create misunderstanding)
As for the “hicks” on You Tube…they're right there for sure…along with the knowledgeable contributors. And even the hicks are not making up the government plans for the armed forces. At least not this time.
So from my bookmarked notes here's what I hope is a better shot…with the disclaimer that I'm no legal scholar as many on this website are. And where I'm reading between the lines…or connecting the dots and speculating…I'll say so by italicizing my opinions. (In the cites below…the emphases are all mine.)
10 USC Chapter 15 Sec. 332 empowers the president to decide what constitutes unlawful activity against the authority of the United States. He can also decide that it is “impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in the ordinary course of judicial proceedings [e.g. habeas corpus]” The present decider wouldn't be able to pronounce 'impracticable' so his advisers would tell him it means he doesn't have to bother.
10 USC Chapter 15 Sec. 333 states that the president may employ the armed forces and the national guard in major public emergencies to enforce the laws of the United States[/B] if he determines that domestic violence has occurred [as a result of natural disasters, terrorist attack, public health emergency, etc] to such and extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession[/B] are incapable of maintaining public order; and (ii) such violence results in a condition described in paragraph (2); or suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrection, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition described in paragraph (2). (2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition that? (A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or possession, as applicable, and of the United States within that State or possession, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws. (3) In any situation covered by paragraph (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.
That all sounds like discretionary power has been put into the hands of a benign decider. But you'd have to be a very good salesman to convince me to buy that.
The real difficulty for the benign decider is in the significant detail in 10 USC Sec. 335 which states in its entirety….
For purposes of this chapter, the term ?State? includes Guam and the Virgin Islands.
If my time in these forums has been well spent…and I think it has…then by the rule of ejusdem generis these statutes cannot apply to the 50 Union states.
These federal laws do not give the president the awesome powers that some of the hicks on You Tube or some of the hicks that rule in federal courtrooms believe they do.
And the present decider has summed up his contempt for the Constitution in an often quoted statement that the Constitution is only a gd piece of paper. Bound by the Constitution cited in the above statute and by the boundaries of Guam and the Virgin Islands…what to do…what to do…to enlarge federal and especially executive power.
Well…here's one plan from the DoD “Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support” http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/lib…630homeland.pdf …which seems to have no foundation in law but possibly can be rationalized as the president using his war powers as commander in chief (even though he is not the commander in chief of natural disasters etc.)
Quote:The Department isprepared to conduct homeland defense missions whenever
the President, exercising his constitutional authority as
Commander in Chief, authorizes military actions. Footnote p. 5
Another plan is the Garden Plot/Conplan 2502 (Civil Disturbance Operations) http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/garden_plot.htm
Reportedly Annex A, section B of Operation Garden Plots defines tax protesters, militia groups, religious cults, and general anti-government dissenters as “Disruptive Elements. This calls for deadly force to be used against any extremist or dissident perpetrating any and all forms of civil disorder.
Now if we can presume the federal government does nothing by accident we can presume that the deployment of the 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team from Iraq to American soil is purposeful.
The Army Times http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/ reports that active duty troops have been used before (e.g. Katrina…where they reportedly confiscated guns http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=U…earch=rense.com ) but this deployment on October 1, 2008 is the first time that an active unit has been given a dedicated mission with North Com (established in 2002 to provide command and control for federal homeland defense efforts). The Army Times reports that the assignment of an active duty unit to North Com will likely become permanent after the 3rd Infantry's stint is up in a year.
Quote:They may be called on to help with civil unrest and crowd control…Training for homeland scenarios has already begun at Fort Stewart. Army TimesThe Army Times reports that they will be using a “first ever” nonlethal package in crowd and traffic control. But I don't believe it. Just look at how many deaths are caused by “non-lethal” tasers [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&domains=rense.com&sitesearch=rense.com&q=taser&start=0&sa=N]
So the question is…Is the sky falling or not?
I think the federal government thinks there's a good chance that it is. People seem to be waking up to realize the massive lies they've been fed from 9/11…WMD in Iraq…and the state of the economy requiring a huge bailout package for a few bankers. Civil 'unrest' that could produce a military response could be nothing more than a bunch of frightened angry people doing a run on a bank. I think the 3rd Infantry is not here by accident. Since they are a dedicated unit to North Com, they have a defined purpose before the fact where Katrina and other instances of civil disturbance were responses after the fact. So, it may be that the government fears events from an angry populace that might provoke martial law or they may do something proactive to steal the thunder of an angry population and invent an incident to justify martial law. I don't think this deployment of the 3rd is just some bureaucratic maneuver.
I don't remember how the Chicken Little story ends, but I'm not real hopeful about what appears will be going on as of October 1.
Franklin
Good for you…don't take it lying down.
However, committees are like paper shredders and are likely to give you the run around because no one on the committee is personally accountable to you.
Keep the honorables you mention in your original post in your sights and hold them personally accountable during campaign and election time. Politicians are basically cowards…except for one or two…so keep them aware they could lose all of their unearned perks if they don't do their job. And be sure you let them know with short notes to their fancy offices that you're 'evaluating' 😎 them whenever you talk to friends or neighbors about your issue.
Good luck.
- Quote:No one today KNOWS just what they are REALLY UP AGAINST here in AMERICA ! And this is NOT in “the future” – – it is HAPPENING AS WE SPEAK – RIGHT NOW !
In fact, it looks like Oct 1 2008 is the day when Lincoln's army returns to use deadly force against anyone that speaks out against the government….
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=jYxTzDFofZQ&feature=related
It is amazing how strong the Lincoln myth is. I could never understand how black folks could call him a “honky white man”…after all he freed the slaves didn't he? until I read “The Real Lincoln” by Thomas DiLorenzo (sp?). They knew something that I didn't know…that Lincoln's war was not about slavery. He said several times in public speeches and debates that if he could preserve the union without freeing a single slave…he would do it (of course he didn't free any slaves at all). He also wanted to deport them as he did not believe they should live among whites.
Knowing the real Lincoln has made sense out of everything that has happened since. Early on in his first administration…the decider said that Lincoln was his hero. Now we know why.
Berg's suit against NoBama alleging that NoBama is not a natural born American citizen will most likely be dismissed for lack of standing. Berg would not be able to show how he would be personally affected by NoBama's election (or rather appointment).
BobT
Thanks. I agree with all of your statements under color of making a point.
It is sad that the church leaders have the right impulse…to exercise their God-given rights to free speech in general and freedom of religious speech in particular. But don't seem to want to give up their “exemption”. They want to have their cake and eat it too (I've never really understood what that expression means but it seems appropriate here).
Even if they get 'permission' from the king to speak freely via new [unpublished] regulations while remaining under 501c3, they will have accomplished nothing permanent. The only permanent thing they could do would be to get up in the pulpit and announce they were opting out of 501c3 and going back to the Constitution. They don't understand that they are tax immune under the First Amendment.
Their unspoken presumption is that they are liable in the first place…because you can't be exempted from something unless you are required to do it in the first place.
So how do you get these pastors, whose hearts are in the right place, to get their minds in the right place?
Losing their exempt status is the best thing that could happen to them. Then they're back under the Constitution. But they seem to think that losing their irs status has some other unspecified penalty that would threaten their existence. Omagosh, what will happen to us if we lose our exemption? They presume they will have to pay taxes.
Psychologically this is called being on the horns of a dilemma. In any dilemma there are only two alternatives…1) pay taxes or 2) apply for exemption [from non-required taxes] and then complain about the rules governing the exemption.
But by definition dilemmas can exist when there are only two alternatives. So any dilemma can be resolved simply by adding a third alternative (any more than that and you have paralysis by analysis).
Here's what resolving a dilemma looks like: 1) assume church is taxable; 2) seek irs exemption under 501c3; 3) reject 1) and 2) and seek the real law under the First Commandment and the First Amendment [Commandment] of the Constitution.
(McCain just demonstrated resolving a dilemma by bypassing the two top establishment-approved candidates for VP and chose Palin; and this third option struck fear into the hearts (??) of the democratic machine and moved him up ten points in the polls).
When the church I mentioned above was taken by the US marshals, there was no outrage on the part of the church, they simply gave in to the ruling of a territorial court that said, in effect, your church belongs to the politicians in Congress and the executive in the white house…let's have the keys. There was no outrage because the public at large tends to cling to the presumption a court is right in its rulings (with the possible exception of the highly publicized Roe v. Wade) even when the court is stealing a church for its boss.
I'm reminded of Robert Dole, when he ran against Billary for the presidency, asking “Where's the outrage…where's the outrage??” And outrage seems to be one of the underlying themes of your post BobT. Hopefully it'll catch on and spread like a virus.
Franklin
I think they're making a big mistake, like another church did a few years ago. (I have it in my records somewhere on an old computer so I'm going from memory here.) They stopped withholding from the paychecks of the members who worked directly for the church…on the grounds that they, the church elders, were not agents of the state but agents of God. The members paid the taxes due to the tune of a few million dollars over a period of years. The IRS refused to validate the payments, sent them back, and said the employer had to withhold the money and submit it, not the employee. The IRS threatened to seize the church building.
The elders went to court…with the argument that they were not agents of the state but agents of God. They lost in court and they lost the church. I think they lost by default because essentially they made no legal defense. How can a USDC entertain and rule on an assertion that the defendant is an agent of God?
I wasn't a member of FG then, but I wrote the pastor an email and suggested he have his attorney review the law which makes withholding voluntary for both employer and employee so as at least to make an argument that the court could act on one way or the other. He thanked me but didn't think it would help.
Then there was the Baptist Home For Children, at about the same time, who fired a lesbian counselor. (Going on memory again, record on a floppy disk somewhere.) She sued and they responded that her lifestyle offended their religious beliefs and as a private religious organization they were within their rights to dismiss her. The court disagreed and they had to rehire her in violation of their sexual moral values. Seems they were taking Social Security payments for one or two of the children…and that was enough to require the home to comply with all federal statutes and regulations relating to employment…church or no church…morals or no morals.
This present church challenge to the IRS is really a contradiction…both religious and legal. Seems the pastors want their 501c3 exemption, they just want the rules changed in their favor. But they've been warned not to mess with the king…
Quote:He will tithe your crops and your vineyards, and give the revenue to his eunuchs and his slaves…He will tithe your flocks and you yourselves will become his slaves…When this takes place, you will complain against the king whom you have chosen, but on that day the LORD will not answer you. (I Samuel 8:15-18)I think they're going to lose…getting self-righteous with the king usually gets nowhere.
I wonder if an invitation to the attorney and church elders to read the material on this site about 501c3 churches would be well received? I'm not sure because my experience is that people who live easily with contradictions are almost impossible to get focused.
I think its a fine idea to use the fed gov's own words against it. It's especially pleasurable to shove their own words back down the lying throats of hypocrites (the only sinners that really sent Jesus' patience over the edge — think “brood of vipers”).
Quote:I tell you on the day of judgment people will render an account for every careless [“incorrect”] word they speak. By your words you will be acquitted and by your words you will be condemned. (Mt 12:36-37)Whew! I think I'll shut up now.
Welcome
Quote:I guess I am asking if you can access these records and how? Can you just 'browse' through them or search them?From my experience…anything in the county recorder's office can be 'browsed' (except the county recorder herself!).
Sometimes might does make right! 😆
Welcome to the forums.
Quote:Both honorable Kyl and Shaddegg have stated Congress has no jurisdiction to interfere with Judicial mattersThis statement is false. And you should probably write them a letter educating them to that fact…and then reiterate your demand that they do something…and if they don't…tell them that you will do something to help get them unelected or recalled and then get busy firing them…for not knowing their jurisdiction and responsibility…or for denying it as a dereliction of duty. Either way they're incompetent.
Read the Constitution and start your education of the rascals with Congress's ability to control the docket of the Supreme Court (except for those highly specific areas where the SC has original jurisdiction). The “honorables” create and control Article I courts and Article IV courts. They would not be able to control Article III courts and so they haven't created any Article III district courts.
Then, as another example of their ignorance or incompetency, find for your “honorable” reps, the federal statute where Congress has prohibited the US District Courts from hearing constitutional arguments about income taxation.
The only courts they wouldn't be able to control are Article III courts with judicial power. That's why they haven't created them (see next sentence).
Go to SEDM.org, spring for the donation, and order the “What Happened to Justice CD” then let the “honorable” rascals know they are lying when they say they can do nothing to interfere with the “judiciary”. And cite chapter and verse to prove it.
Educate yourself and pay it forward by getting locally active to help inform others about your servants' refusal to abide by the rules you have set for them through the legislature.
Good luck
BTW “What Happened to Justice” is a page turner…so expect to be surprised that it's already 2 a.m. after you start reading it.
This executive order about the use of biometric data to prevent “terrorism” appears to cancel it's own objectives:
Quote:3)? This directive provides a Federal framework for applying existing and emerging biometric technologies to the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of data in identification and screening processes employed by agencies to enhance national security, consistent with applicable law, including information privacy and other legal rights under United States law. (emphasis added).(5)? This directive does not impose requirements on State, local, or tribal authorities or on the private sector.? It does not provide new authority to agencies for collection, retention, or dissemination of information or for identification and screening activities (emphasis added).
What does this EO do if it doesn't impose requirements on State, local or tribal authorities or the private sector? And if it does not provide new authority for any of the activities it wants to implement?
These people probably drank fluoridated water.
Bing
You're right about rhetoric not being enough. But I don't think a consensus about timetables for major changes is feasible. There has to be daily activity to influence others by the sovereigns–just like you see in these forums, in the GIRSH book, in the WHTJ book.
For example, as a result of WHTJ I've begun to FOIA the land records of a district court located in an independent city. They came within days plus an update on a court case where the gov is in dispute with the city over land. Next comes FOIA to the clerk of court and the governor for the notification to the Governor that the US has accepted jurisdiction over the land on which the court house sits..and all other federal land within the city. To a request for info about whether the court was Article III or IV, the clerk responded that the extent of the court's jurisdiction is found in Title 28 USC. etc.
And when I have that info, I'll post it for others to use or add to so they can do the same with their local district court and decide how to act if they are 'summoned' into a court with no jurisdiction.
The point is I don't think that we can have a meeting of minds about timetables (who would organize the meeting and facilitate it? Who would be invited?). Everyone at such a meeting would be too busy to agree on a timetable. I think each sovereign has to determine the time table for their activities. I cannot imagine the Rothschilds coming to a meeting about the best way to dissolve the Fed and give up their power and profit. And personally I wouldn't be interested in their needs or demands. And if negotiating with the lawless IRS is impossible for most people, the actual bankers for whom they work would be moreso.
But, I have seen people taking sovereign action in this local area as a result of gov mismanagement by responding to high food prices and less abundance on supermarket shelves because truckers cannot afford to transport groceries. Tiny farms have sprung up all over the local area and groceries–most of it organic stuff–can be had at reasonable prices. Some people pay with FR notes, some swap fresh picked silver queen corn for vine ripened tomatoes pound for pound–some trade organic free range eggs–which everyone should have a chance to try, they're incredible–for homemade bread…some are making their own biodiesel fuel from used and discarded restaurant fat.etc. Not to mention the good relationships that spring up when people give each other value for value.
The point is that people will find a way to trade when, and as soon as, fiat money becomes untenable as an economic player. It seems to me that to think in more ceremonious terms about timetables and the special interests of people negotiating to give up their power can easily stifle the urge to free and effective daily action which is the basis of sovereignty.
Power it seems is rarely yielded…usually it can only be taken…either by force or circumstance. If heaven smited the Fed tonight…people would be picking up the pieces and getting on with life tomorrow. It's my observation that catastrophes…hurricanes, floods, a child fallen into a well, truckers who've had to quit hauling because a tank of gas that cost $450 last year now costs $950, all bring out the best resources in Americans. And I think that would happen if the Fed were to disappear overnight. And it could disappear in a very short time as people stop using credit cards and refinancing mortgages…and curb impulse buying in malls (which seem to have a good share of stores for rent) all of which are central to the financial “health” of a fiat economy.
While rhetoric is not enough to bring about needed changes, negotiating over timetables can cause the delays it is meant to change (remember how long it took the colonists to negotiate with the king and those negotiations failed…or in the first Nixon administration how long it took to decide on the shape of the negotiating table before negotiations about the Viet Nam war itself could begin).
Lots of daily informed and focused activity by sovereigns creates ripples that create waves that can become Tsunamis. Then we can all surf the sovereign tsunami.
(Say…I think that's a slogan 🙄 …To “Surf the Sovereign Tsunami”…call Ed at 555-5555)
Mr. Wallace is long on what should be done, but short on who is going to do it and how it is going to get done. The many things he wants undone are the effects of a fiew things that were done or left undone. For example…
The federal government is out of control in a large measure because the states lost their power in the senate when the 17th Amendment was ratified [probably not]. If the Senate were functioning the way the founders intended, great pressure could be brought to bear on the federal government to influence how it operated and did not operate.
The state governors lobbying each other to recall their senators, or form a voting block, or prevent them from sitting, or threatening them with recall if need be, could prevent a quorum, or determine how a vote went; and all of this lobbying and politicking keeps the separation of power intact (though it's a contradiction to speak of keeping the power fractured and intact at the same time). But there would always be the threat to the federal government that a properly seated senate–through the state legislatures–could pull the plug on the deciders in DC whenever the state legislatures wished.
Step number 1…unratify the probably unratified 17th Amendment by lobbying state legislatures to refuse to recognize the popularly elected senators and senatorixes.
Step number 2…As Hansen and Rivera have made plain as day…many of the ills Mr. Wallace sees as needing correction come about because the federal district courts can and do subvert justice. Solution = Appropriate number of Article III courts and judges accessible from any place the Constitution holds sway.
Step number 3…Congress's Constitutional authority to borrow money–Art I Sec 8– is rescinded by Amendment. They must use the direct taxing power to tax the states…who would have control of the Senate…and the people elect the state legislatures. Good bye SSA…Good bye interminable undeclared wars. Good bye Federal Reserve.
Step number 4…Congress can only coin real gold and silver money. If people want to use paper money…they can do it by private contract and promissory notes backed by the real thing.
Hmm…tighten a few screws here and there and the leaks, squeaks and fire hazards start to disappear.
With a few changes brought about by hammering at local and state politicians, and a few good slogans printed even on men's room walls “Have your day in court and wind up in jail — Stay free — for more info call Ed at 555-5555”.
Slogans are great influencers…they go directly to the heart. Nobody asks what they mean though they feel very meaningful. Look at how far Nobama got with “Change you can live with”. Look at the evil that “Making the world safe for democracy” has done and continues to do. Look at how “I am the way the truth and the light” has created great devotion for millenia. And Ghandi's slogan was simply “NO” and millions were inspired to throw out their oppressors.
Mr. Wallace's list would require an enormous bureaucracy and significant fire power. But, a few free people, hammering away at pliticians and highly focused issues, like getting state legislators to refuse to recognize any senator not appointed by them, can make many problems disappear.
Got slogan? 🙂
I once met my favorite actress, Zoe Caldwell, ten years after she created the character of Jean Brodie (The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie) on Broadway. At that meeting I told her it may be too late but I wanted to tell her that I never have to see another actress play the part…hers was so definitive.
She listened intently to my compliment…put her hand flat against my chest…looked earnestly into my face and said “Darling…a compliment like that is never too late.”
I know this is an aged thread…but I don't think it's too late to add my gratitude to that of the others for The Great IRS Hoax (and the many things I have studied on this site and SEDM…especially What Happened to Justice? which complements the Hoax book seamlessly).
Like reading any important work be it Shakespeare, George Eliot, Chaucer in Middle English, Homer, the reader has to engage the mind by “getting lost” in the substance…in the genius of it all. And the typos do not keep that from happening with the Hoax book. It is a tour de force of knowledge that leads to truth. Thank you for all of it, typos, long sentences, all of it.
There is something, a technique, that might help to make the book more widely influential. It was used to great advantage by Griffith in The Creature
From Jekyll Island. At the end of each chapter…it would also work at the beginning…he gives a short inviting narrative summary of each point or event covered in the chapter.
His recommendation is to read the summaries through first and then go back and read the chapters.
I've been trying to get a friend of mine to read the book for over a year now. She just wasn't interested in the evil nature of the Federal Reserve.
Yesterday she had to wait all day at an airport to get a standby flight across the country. I gave her my copy of the book and told her just to read the
chapter summaries. With nothing better to do, she read them all and called this morning to say she arrived safely and was so excited “by the story”
that she was now on chapter 2 and found the book to be “a page turner.”
She doesn't know it yet but she will soon be watching the FG video and exploring this site (I told her I had other things she might be interested in reading. “Great,” she said).
I think a short non technical summary of each chapter (or section in very long chapters) would help the average television watcher organize and understand the material as she read the actual chapter.
Hosea's people (all of them) need the knowledge in The Hoax and a preview to each chapter would be like the clips that show what is attractive about a movie that makes you want to watch the whole thing.
Just a suggestion.
