stija
Forum Replies Created
Federal law doesn't include the Constitution. However I would expect Federal law to be Constitutional.
Source: http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocumen…amp;DocType=ARS
Quote:29. “Person” includes a corporation, company, partnership, firm, association or society, as well as a natural person. When the word “person” is used to designate the party whose property may be the subject of a criminal or public offense, the term includes the United States, this state, or any territory, state or country, or any political subdivision of this state that may lawfully own any property, or a public or private corporation, or partnership or association. When the word “person” is used to designate the violator or offender of any law, it includes corporation, partnership or any association of persons.Very telling definition. <_<
Quote:38. “State”, as applied to the different parts of the United States, includes the District of Columbia, this state and the territories.Now this is where I get confused. First they say “as applied to the different parts of the United States” implying that it is a part of the federal government (United States) but then it says that it includes this state. I mean I can see the possible inference to “this state” being a different part of the United State and therefore a federal territory of the United States located within the exterior limits of this state. But am I just seeing this because I know all that I know?? Or wishful thinking because I doubt and question everything? I don't know.
Quote:40. “United States” includes the District of Columbia and the territories.This we knew, but nice to see it again. 😛
To be cont'd.
- Quote:..the one on the left looks very attractive
Heheh 🙂
Oh c'mon now, like there is a difference between the parties.
- franklin wrote on Feb 4 2009, 11:52 AM:http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/08pdf/07-1122.pdf
Arizona v. Johnson
This is the latest development in the Terry stop. Injustice Ginsberg delivered the opinion of a unanimous court on January 26, 2009
I read this a few days ago noticing it first from an azcentral.com article. It seems to be that had Johnson objected to the unwarranted patdown the results would have been quite different. Even still, as the court said, it would have been prudent of Johnson to remain in the vehicle and refuse to get out and cooperate.
I'm actually considering making lowball offers on 2 of such properties. The only thing that is keeping me from doing it is that I'm sure things are going to get a whole lot worse.
Scary. We just need another school shooting to convince everyone that we need this bill.
- Admin wrote on Jan 14 2009, 10:58 AM:stija,
Why don't you disclose the evidence upon which you make that accusation for the enlightenment of all in these forums.
First, I am not accusing anyone of anything.
Second, it would be the OP who would need to post evidence that it did happen. You can't prove the negative, you should know that.
Third, believe what you want. I just expected that you of all people would double check the facts behind the story first.
- franklin wrote on Jan 12 2009, 09:56 AM:Ever wonder why good stuff never makes NBC, CBS, PBS, & MSNBC, CNN, or ABC news……..an 11 year old girl, properly trained, defended her home and herself……against two murderous, illegal aliens …….and she wins, she is still alive.
Because it never happened.
- franklin wrote on Nov 22 2008, 07:05 AM:http://heyokamagazine.com/heyoka.20.kennedyspeech.htm
It sounds like him but I wonder? <_<?? why this hasn't been published more by NWO critics.
It would influence many who still revere JFK.
[post=”5663″][/post]I've heard this on many different websites and movies. As a matter of fact this excerpt is from movie Zeitgeist.
This is uncut unedited 5 minutes of the speech. link
- Admin wrote on Nov 2 2008, 05:02 PM:Stija,
The links in section 6 of the Property and Privacy Protection page do have books you can go and check out. The best is the “Drafting California Irrevocable Trusts”, which is what the lawyers themselves use in preparing trusts.
Other links there are online books on the subject from none other than Standford Law library. If that doesn't qualify as a “good read”, you need to have your head examined, especially considering that it is free.
So once again, the links provided DO directly address your question, if you would have looked at them. Please do your homework before pointing fingers.
[post=”5529″][/post]Thank you.
Again, I apologize for not specifically saying good books to read in my original post.
- 'Admin' wrote on 'Nov:You are NOT allowed to inquire on these forums about “asset protection”. This is prohibited by section 12 of our About Us page, which lists prohibitied activities. The name of this forum is “Private (not public) PROPERTY Protection” not “asset protection”. Asset protection generally connotes PUBLIC property connected to the “trade or business” franchise that is therefore subject to tax and is PUBLIC rather than private. You really mean PRIVATE property protection, not asset protection. Please choose your words carefully so you don't invite busy government bees to this otherwise safe haven for freedom lovers.
My assets are hardly public property. Maybe in some statute or act but in my post they are not redefined and hence serve the common meaning of the term: my (private) property. If confused, you could always ask what I really meant. Assuming doesn't always work.
Quote:If you were paying attention and you cared, you would have referenced the “Welcome” post that started the “Privacy and Private Property Protection” forum here, which links you to exactly what you are looking for.I didn't read the welcome as I probably should have. But then again I also didn't mean to ask for links on this website but books I could go out and purchase. I guess I should have been more specific. I apologize for that.
Quote:All of our forums are structured the same. They begin with a Welcome link that points to all the relevant resources on the website that deal with the subject of the forum. Among those links in this forum is section 6 of the Privacy and Property Protection page.Thanks. You do know how to be helpful.
Quote:We don't have anything to add to those links.? Everything you need is on that page and we can't babysit you. We found those items by digging and searching and not asking anyone, and you can be just as dilligent by finding additional resources and posting them to these forums as you find them.Thanks for doing your homework and exercising due dilligence before you make your problems into other people's problems by posting them on these forums. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
I did not ask to be baby sit. Please re-read my post. I asked for someone's advice on a good read. I guess that could have created the confusion. I meant to ask for someone to recommend a book I could go out and purchase and read to educate my self.
Also the protected activities say this:
Quote:Creating or administering asset protection vehicles for users, such as trusts or corporations soles.I hardly ask for a 'good read' on the subject, not that you create me one.
