Becraft gets just enough things right to be credible. Then he uses that credibility to promulgate errors — like governments are not corporations.

Thanks for providing these legal docs.

They raise ideas that can be developed for other state/federal gov. issues that are as immediately pressing.

E.g., The TSA procedures at airports, and now at bus and train stations, arenas, etc.

At issue would be the usurpation of the police power of the state by DHS and its subsidiary TSA.

The TSA has no police power to order compliance with its procedures, and must call on local law enforcement to arrest someone who is opting out of TSA procedures but not disturbing the peace.

The TSA enactments statutes call for 'deputizing' (empowering one person to act for another) local law enforcement. If the DHS and TSA have no police power under the 10th Amendment…how does a TSA agent issue a command and declare a $10,000 penalty for non-compliance, which is a police power of the state, or empower a local peace officer, without any power to delegate arrest power to the local officer, to arrest someone for not disturbing the peace or not complying with an agency regulation that anyone can opt out of.

Or how does A TSA agent 'empower' a local peace officer to remove a passenger from an air terminal and thereby tortiously interfere in a contract (the ticket) between the passenger and the airline?

Just as is the case with health insurance, The TSA DHS smoke and mirrors operation appears to be a 10th Amendment issue.

In the health care issue Va. Attorney General Cuccinelli cites Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 US 243, 270 (2006)which says…

It might be prudent for some passenger in every state to get the State Attorney General's opinion on the matter as a first step.

Interesting information and opinion, however it is not persuasive.

There are corporations without stockholders.

Every politician since Elizabeth I has known the fabulous wealth they can accrue though being corporate employees instead of public servants. Every politician knows that the East India Company was not governed by Magna Carta, just as P3l0s1, R3id, et al, know that the Consitution does not control corporations and their activities.

While governments are established by constitutions, governments can and do set up corporations and act through them…which is an excellent way to bypass the liability clauses of the constitution and shield the government personnel from liability.

Governments make laws, not 'public policy'. Corporations make policy and do not have the same separation of powers requirements that a constitution might have. Corporations are not required to provide due process of law — they may only be able to enforce policy. [Several people are successfully citing organic law to TSA agents who insist that everyone must follow their “policy”. See post today in gov. corruption forum re young man reentering the country and citing law to TSA agents as a basis for not being groped and TSA agent escorting him out of airport without screening and telling the young man to “have a nice day”. When organic law meets corporate policy law wins.] The evidence of policy making government corporations is everywhere.

To be persuasive Becraft would have to explain why D&B does a credit report on the U.S. Supreme Court, which it notes is “ALSO TRADING AS SUPREME COURT”, or what credit report would be relevant to “Office of President” at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, D.C. Michelle's servants are paid out of the public treasury, not by private contractors at her expense. What credit report is Becraft referring to? Whoever, heard of Wal-Mart providing due process of law. It can only follow its own policies.

In lawyerly fashion, Becraft sets up a straw man to knock down.

However, he presents his conclusion with very skinny premises to support them. His conclusion that the de facto 'government' is not corporate does not necessarily follow from his incomplete definition of corporations.

Typical of lawyers, Becraft's opinions in this matter, do not bear close scrutiny and do not rise to the level of logical argument (i.e., premise 1 + premise 2 = necessary conclusion). That means his opinions are not debatable because the rules of debate depend on logical exposition to support conclusions.

Had Becraft made a well reasoned, well documented logical argument, he might have contributed to this forum.

And such indifferent pastors have been given reasonable notice about what will happen to them in Matthew 7:21ff…they are called “evildoers” because evil can only happen, as they say, when good men do nothing.

The First Commandment requires us to renounce slavery for two reasons…

• As slaves we must worship false gods and believe in their empty promises.[*]Only a free person can enter into a binding contract or covenant with God.

And this means that pastors MUST be involved in politics, at the very least as commentators.

The Founders forbid the government from interfering with churches.

But there is nothing that forbids churches from interfering in government. So pastors get around the requirement to be free by seeking to be enslaved by the 501c3 license much as the Israelites argued for slavery instead of liberation (Exodus 14:11ff)…

There is indeed a wall of separation between church and state, but the wall has a door that can only be opened from the church side of the wall. The government side of the wall shows a sign on the door that says “No Trespassing! Do Not Enter!”.

Here is Dr. Edwin Viera's analysis of how a one world currency will allow the demonic bankers and politician's to not only continue, but increase their power over the people of the world. He brings special attention to the ruse that a one-world currency will be backed by gold.

Prollins

Good job. 🙂

Doesn't matter that the info was already organized at SEDM because…each of us needs to verify everything anyway.

Now you can read those SEDM docs with sharpened understanding because you've made the information your own before reading other people's work.