Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
This is an EXCELLENT site! Fascinating to say the least.
Sui Juris
http://familyrights.us/bin/sui_juris/#Chapter 9
condensed version...
http://familyrights.us/how_to/suijuris/sui_juris.html
[above links -- got it from a cyberfriend of mine]
thanks BUDDIEE very interesting
The Rape of Eva Sydel
http://www.evasydel.info/WARNING!.html
How will Zim. compare with USA in the future -
http://lebed.biz/endofliberty.html
Zim. is very rich in old Gold And Silver Mines -
Queen Shepa did she got the gold to
King Solomon from Zim -
Zim. currency Au vs. fiat$ -
http://www.caledoniamining.com/blanket3.php
The Rape of Eva Sydel
http://www.evasydel.info/WARNING!.html
Bob, I need to read everything but from what all this appears is not good, not good in any fashion and no doubt NOT American and we won't allow this to happen to America!!
Thank you for all the web links now it will be my turn move against all this crap that these NON Americans are doing to
Bob welcome,
I would go to the nearest HR Block or tax prep. office and
ask the questions, they do have the latest red rules regul.
and most often answer your Q's without a charge!
God Bless
btw. please, pass it along >>>>>>>>>>>
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=53423279
IF you own a Home, read this. It will make you SICK!
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Henry Waxman are reaching out to the following House Republicans for their support on Waxman-Markey, according to Carbon Control News:
Tim Johnson (IL)
Vernon Ehlers (MI)
Todd Platts (PA)
Jim Gerlach (PA)
Mary Bono Mack (CA)
Mike Castle (DE)
Frank LoBiondo (NJ)
Tom Petri (WI)
Peter King (NY)
Mark Kirk (IL)
Leonard Lance (NJ)
Don't want to be bothered with "Political stuff?" You'd better read this one.
It will come as a huge shock to you if you aren't informed as to what Obama is up
to, and apparently it has already passed one hurdle. It will take very little
now to put it into actual law!! YOU'D BETTER WAKE UP AMERICA ! So you think you
live in a free country, boy have you got a surprise coming.
A License Required for your HOUSE?
If you own your home you really need to check this out. At the end of this email
is the Google link to verify. If the country thinks the housing market is
depressed now, wait until everyone sees this; no one will be buying homes in the
future.
We encourage you to read the provisions of the Cap and Trade Bill that has
passed the House of Representatives and being considered by the Senate. We are
ready to join the next march on Washington ! This Congress and whoever on their
staffs that write this junk are truly out to destroy the middle class of the
U.S.A ...
A License will be required for your house...no longer just for cars and mobile
homes....Thinking about selling your house. Take a look at H.R. 2454 (Cap and
Trade bill). This is unbelievable! Only the beginning from this administration!
Home owners take note & tell your friends and relatives who are home owners!
Beginning 1 year after enactment of the Cap and Trade Act, you won't be able to
sell your home unless you retrofit it to comply with the energy and water
efficiency standards of this Act. H.R. 2454, the "Cap & Trade" bill passed by
the House of Representatives, if it is also passed by the Senate, will be the
largest tax increase any of us has ever experienced.
The Congressional Budget Office CBO (supposedly non-partisan) estimates that in
just a few years the average cost to every family of four will be $6,800 per
year. No one is excluded. However, once the lower classes feel the pinch in
their wallets, you can be sure these voters get a tax refund (even if they pay
no taxes at all) to offset this new cost. Thus, you Mr. And Mrs. Middle Class
have to pay even more since additional tax dollars will be needed to bail out
everyone else..
But wait. This awful bill (that no one in Congress has actually read) has many
more surprises in it. Probably the worst one is this: A year from now you won't
be able to sell your house. Yes, you read that right.
The caveat is (there always is a caveat) that if you have enough money to make
required major upgrades to your home, then you can sell it. But, if not, then
forget it. Even pre-fabricated homes ("mobile homes") are included. In effect,
this bill prevents you from selling your home without the permission of the EPA
administrator.
To get this permission, you will have to have the energy efficiency of your home
measured. Then the government will tell you what your new energy efficiency
requirement is and you will be forced to make modifications to your home under
the retrofit provisions of this Act to comply with the new energy and water
efficiency requirements.
Then you will have to get your home measured again and get a license (called a
"label" in the Act) that must be posted on your property to show what your
efficiency rating is; sort of like the Energy Star efficiency rating label on
your refrigerator or air conditioner. If you don't get a high enough rating, you
can't sell.
And, the EPA administrator is authorized to raise the standards every year, even
above the automatic energy efficiency increases built into the Act. The EPA
administrator, appointed by the President, will run the Cap & Trade program (AKA
the "American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009") and is authorized to make
any future changes to the regulations and standards he/she alone determines to
be in the government's best interest. Requirements are set low initially so the
bill will pass Congress; then the Administrator can set much tougher new
standards every year.
The Act itself contains annual required increases in energy efficiency for
private and commercial residences and buildings. However, the EPA administrator
can set higher standards at any time. Sect. 202 Building Retrofit Program
mandates a national retrofit program to increase the energy efficiency of all
existing homes across America .
Beginning 1 year after enactment of the Act, you won't be able to sell your home
unless you retrofit it to comply with the energy and water efficiency standards
of this Act. You had better sell soon, because the standards will be raised each
year and will be really hard (I.e., exspensive) to meet in a few years. Oh,
goody!
The Act allows the government to give you a grant of several thousand dollars to
comply with the retrofit program requirements IF you meet certain energy
efficiency levels. But, wait, the State can set additional requirements on who
qualifies to receive the grants. You should expect requirements such as "can't
have an income of more than $50K per year", "home selling price can't be more
than $125K", or anything else to target the upper middle class (and that's YOU)
and prevent them from qualifying for the grants.
Most of us won't get a dime and will have to pay the entire cost of the retrofit
out of our own pockets. More transfer of wealth, more "change you can believe
in." Sect. 204 Building Energy Performance Labeling Program establishes a
labeling program that for each individual residence will identify the achieved
energy efficiency performance for "at least 90 percent of the residential market
within 5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act."
This means that within 5 years 90% of all residential homes in the U.S. must be
measured and labeled. The EPA administrator will get $50M each year to enforce
the labeling program. The Secretary of the Department of Energy will get an
additional $20M each year to help enforce the labeling program. Some of this
money will, of course, be spent on coming up with tougher standards each year...
Oh, the label will be like a license for your car. You will be required to post
the label in a conspicuous location in your home and will not be allowed to sell
your home without having this label. And, just like your car license, you will
probably be required to get a new label every so often - maybe every year.
But, the government estimates the cost of measuring the energy efficiency of
your home should only cost about $200 each time. Remember what they said about
the auto smog inspections when they first started: that in California it would
only cost $15.
That was when the program started. Now the cost is about $50 for the inspection
and certificate; a 333% increase. Expect the same from the home labeling
program. Sect. 304 Greater Energy Efficiency in Building Codes establishes new
energy efficiency guidelines for the National Building Code and mandates at
304(d) that 1 year after enactment of this Act, all state and local
jurisdictions must adopt the National Building Code energy efficiency provisions
or must obtain a certification from the federal government that their state
and/or local codes have been brought into full compliance with the National
Building Code energy efficiency standards.
CHECK OUT Just a few of the sites;
Cap and Trade: A License Required for your Home
http://www.nachi.org/forum/f14/cap-and-trade-license-required-your-home-44750/
HR2454 American Clean Energy & Security Act:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454
Cap & Trade A license required for your home:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/cap-and-trade-a-license-required-for-your-home.html
Cap and trade is a license to cheat and steal:
http://www.sfexaminer.com/opinion/column....-45371937.h tml
Cap and Trade: A License Required for your Home:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2393940/posts
Thinking about selling you House? Look at HR 2454:
http://www.federalobserver.com/2009/10/0....and-trade-bill/
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sourc....=Google__Search
This is bad.....real bad....these guys MUST be stopped, stopped now, and stopped
HARD!!!!
Pass this on to everyone on your e-mail list pass it across America !
Some how this group must be stopped they will do more damage until we can elect
new people to replace them. You must remember all this next time you vote.
Cap and Trade: A License Required for your Home
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/131195
#### ####
http://www.888c.com
God Bless
Have question referencing a ROTH account actual situation of mine.
I am 60 years old and have carried the ROTH account for years through Etrade and other brokerage firms. Now I may need to phone a brokerage firm but thought I would touch on this subject here first?
OK, I am 60 and everything is satisfied as to my ability to dump all of my stock that is in a ROTH account at Etrade. I am under no taxation consideration by means of this roth. Now let's say another public company comes along and buys the company and give me their stock and not money and what happens if that company should give me just money or stock and money is the stock and or money given in the buyout still protected by the ROTH law within the entitlement of my first situation.
TIA, TSBob
Doctor Beter, you would be amazed the rockefeller dynasty,
the mid-east oil trick ft knox gold, all was stoled,
by the bolsheveks ...
U.S. taxpayers may be on the hook for as much as $23.7 trillion
to bolster the economy and bail out financial companies,
said Neil Barofsky, special inspector general for
the Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program -
to give to the 666banksters
http://batr.amplify.com/2010/07/26/us-rescue-may-reach-237-trillion-barofsky-says/
add the $100s trillion banksters derivatives... ?
Comp. to fiats - (illegal by the Constitution) - The real value of gold - $52,831 an ounce?
http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page33?oid=108331&sn=Detail&pid=102055
bottom lines:
For those who see this effective reduction in value of the U.S. dollar
as an actual pointer to where the gold price is going, they may be
living in cloud-cuckoo land -
perhaps in the same part of the virtual world that looks for
the gold:silver ratio to return to around 10:1.
Even so, like the current gold:silver ratio it does suggest that
current valuations for both metals are still a long way below
where they perhaps ought to be and may ultimately end up.
Yet another bullish indicator for precious metals.
Gold is the only real money smile
Debt clock expands to include state debt and world debt information.
Check it out: Debt Clock
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/139825
http://2012-survival-guide.com/?vsa=y
WSJ= Opinion= "Liberal Tax Revolt"
Some Democrats decide they prefer lower rates. Obama isn't one of them.
There's nothing like the prospect of an electoral rout to concentrate the incumbent mind, and so all of a sudden rank-and-file Democrats in Congress are saying maybe they shouldn't let the 2003 tax rates expire after all. Now if they can only persuade their Speaker of the House, the Treasury Secretary and President Obama.
The revelation that tax increases could hurt the economy has recently been heard from Senators Evan Bayh of Indiana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, and, most surprising, even from Kent Conrad of North Dakota. On a scale of unlikely events, this is like the Pope coming out against celibacy. As Senate Budget Chairman, Mr. Conrad has rarely seen a tax increase he didn't like, but this week he averred that "As a general rule, you don't want to be cutting spending or raising taxes in the midst of a downturn."
.Over in the House, Bobby Bright of Alabama even dared to defend the rich Americans who Democrats have been pounding for years. "I don't care if it's the wealthiest of the wealthy. You don't raise their taxes," he told The Hill newspaper. "In a recession you don't tax, burden and restrict." Better don the body armor on your next visit to the Speaker's office, Bobby.
Even Jerrold Nadler, a liberal from central casting, is worrying publicly that the tax hike will hit his New York constituents too hard. And he's certainly right given that the combined top state and federal income tax rate will be close to 54% in 2011 in New York City. Mr. Nadler is proposing—seriously—to adjust the income tax brackets based on regional cost of living so fewer New Yorkers pay the rates Mr. Nadler has spent a decade saying "the rich" should pay. How about if we compromise and keep rates lower for both Nebraska and New York?
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Sen. Kent Conrad
.These are hardly supply-side conversions, but they're a start. The economic recovery is far from robust, and socking it with one of the largest tax increases in history in January is not going to make anyone more eager to invest or create new jobs. Even Lord Keynes opposed raising taxes in a recession, and good Keynesian Democrats like the late economist Walter Heller persuaded JFK to cut tax rates in the 1960s. Those cuts kicked off that decade's economic boom. Only in the age of Obama have Democrats convinced themselves that the best "stimulus" is higher spending and higher taxes.
The nearby table shows how tax rates are scheduled to jump on January 1. Democratic leaders say they want to preserve the lower rates on individuals making less than $200,000, but that still means raising them on the Americans most likely to take the risks that spur economic growth. Mr. Obama and Nancy Pelosi think they can play their usual class war card to justify raising taxes on the rich, but that's risky political business with unemployment at 9.5%. Who do they think will create new jobs—people making less than $200,000 a year?
The reality is that the increase in the top marginal income tax rate to higher than 41% will hit the most profitable small businesses especially hard. That's because millions of business owners pay individual rates under Subchapter S of the tax code. Today, this means they pay the same top rate as the Fortune 500: 35%. But if the 2003 tax rates expire, they'll suddenly pay more than Goldman Sachs.
.New data from, of all places, the Democratic-run Joint Committee on Taxation show that in 2011 roughly 750,000 taxpayers with net business income will pay the highest marginal rate of 39.6% or the next highest bracket of 36% (up from 33%). About half of the roughly $1 trillion of total net business income will also be reported on those returns. In a stroke, that will make tens of billions of dollars unavailable to invest or to hire new workers.
As for the budget deficit, a new analysis by the Senate Republicans on the Finance Committee finds that even if all the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts are made permanent, the share of national output that goes toward federal income taxes will in every year stay well above the post-World War II average of 8.2%. Income tax receipts will rise gradually to 10% of GDP, even with the current tax rates intact, because as the economy grows the progressive tax code takes a larger share. If tax increases weaken the economy, revenues won't increase as fast as Democrats hope and the deficit won't fall by as much in any case.
Which brings us back to the Speaker, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Mr. Obama, who remain prisoners of their spend-and-tax dogma. Even as the Democratic tax revolt broke into the open yesterday morning, the White House rolled out Mr. Geithner to declare that the tax increases will arrive as scheduled. So the same Mr. Geithner who says the economy is weak enough that we must have new spending "stimulus" says it is strong enough to endure a huge tax increase.
If enough Democrats are serious about their tax revolt, they can roll their leaders and insist on keeping the current rates. Republicans will help them do it, and it would deny the GOP a great election issue. If Democrats on Capitol Hill won't go that far, we trust they'll express their gratitude to Mr. Obama and Mrs. Pelosi for helping to end so many of their political careers in November.
Gold coin sellers angered by new tax law -
Submitted by cpowell on Thu, 2010-07-22 05:18.
Section: Daily Dispatches
Amendment Slipped Into Health Care Legislation Would Track, Tax Coin and Bullion Transactions
By Rich Blake
ABC News, New York
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/gold-coin-dealers-decry-tax-law/story?id=11211611&page=1
Buddiee e.g. 666 taxes -
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=52503568
Buddiee thanks in advance for any help
to Rush Limbaugh is the MAN!
the CRA in Canada, also -- buttt...do the lawmakers aka LAW SOCIETY -- the RELIGION -- do they give a fiddler's f.uck ?? HELLL NO!!!!
MAJORITY of the people ARE M.E.N.T.A.L. midgets !!
the LAW SOCIETY & its members have CONTRACTED with the RCMP and cops to SERVE & PROTECT the ILLUSION of a WALL aka LAW -- and they got guns and the rest of the people got BIRD brains.
soooo you see ? it's each man/woman for themselves and FUCK THE REST - they NOT worth saving them @ all. MENTAL midgets begat MENTAL midgets and so on and so on.
$300,000 Income Tax Reward -
http://www.livefreenow.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6&Itemid=76
Freedom Law School is offering $100,000 to the first person who can demonstrate any of the three propositions listed below.
The winner can collect up to $300,000 if he or she can prove all of the propositions below.
1. Show what statute written by the Congress of the United States that requiring Americans to file an income tax “CONFESSION” (return) and pay an income tax.
2. Show how Americans can file an income tax “CONFESSION” (return) without giving up their 5th amendment right to not give any information to the government that may be used to prosecute them.
3. Prove that the 16th amendment to the United States Constitution, which, according to the IRS and modern American courts permitted the income tax to exist was lawfully added to the United States Constitution.
Freedom Law School declares:
* There is no statute that makes any American Citizen who works and lives in the United States of America liable or responsible to pay an income tax. Individuals only become liable to pay the income tax when they "VOLUNTARILY" file a tax return and the IRS follows their assessment procedures as outlined in the Internal Revenue Code.
* If there were a statute, which clearly and unequivocally required the filing of such tax returns, such a statute would be unconstitutional under the present income tax system to the extent that it would require individuals to give the government information which could be used against them to prosecute them criminally. Although the IRS and the modern American courts claim that the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution permitted the income tax to be imposed on the compensation for labor of the average working man, the 16th Amendment was not properly added to the United States Constitution.
See
http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com
for documentation of this issue.
* The IRS, under the United States Constitution, cannot legally require information on 1040 returns from individuals. This is the reason the IRS continually refers to the income tax as "voluntary."
For more information, you may want to investigate the resources listed below:
http://www.freedomabovefortune.com
This is the site of Joe Banister, the former gun-carrying IRS Criminal Investigation Agent, who resigned from his prestigious job with the IRS because his superiors would not answer his findings of fraud within the IRS. (See this page.) Mr. Banister's report on the IRS confirms our opinions about the Federal Income Tax in great detail.
http://www.givemeliberty.org
Bob Schulz, founder of We The People Foundation, has attempted several times with Joe Banister and many other intelligent Americans, to debate the legality of the income tax system with high ranking government officials. Each time, no government official ever showed up to debate! Any intelligent American would think the government would be more than happy to show up and answer a few questions to set the record straight once and for all, wouldn't you…? Or does the government have something to hide…? Do your own research and decide if the government is hiding something. See this page.
Also see the DVD "America Freedom to Fascism" at
http://www.freedomtofascism.com
IRS fails to show Income Tax Law -
http://www.livefreenow.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=82
it's ALLLL about CON.trol and ILLUSION.
majority of people are MENTAL midgets thinking that DEATH + TAXES is a given.
Why an Income Tax is Not Necessary to Fund the U.S. Government
http://www.devvy.com/notax.html
How You Can Say GOODBYE to the IRS
How to protect yourself from an organization who doesn't want
to follow the law and put you in jail for giving them
too much information.
http://www.livefreenow.org/
A Banana Republic Ripe For A Coup D'etat
http://batr.org/gulag/071110.html
http://batr.org/gulag/071110.html
Too Rich to Live?
The estate tax is set to come roaring back in January.
That sets the stage for a perverse calculus:
End it all—or leave a massive bill for your heirs to deal with.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703609004575355572928371574.html
this is how the bolsheviks rob the people and
give it all to the khazar elite banksters -
if not in bail outs, tarps then it be
to be liabel for the bankster derivative naked
sold PM's gold, silver etc. Bill Murphy at Gata
said it has to be for more than 30 trillion and that
was about 10 yrs ago -
Ron Paul think its 700 trillion about about a year ago
and bho signed over the debt to the people? to make
the 666 banksters real happy with their puppy?
the bolsheviks have lots of training from how they
robbed great Russia and Eastern Europe now they want
US and EURO to be the next gulag and to rob and murder
100 million+ people again ? -
copycat their relatives of trotsky, lenin commissars -
of super red ussr to make nwo & owg for their
next robberies and slave the people to death?
In fewer than six months, Americans will face their biggest tax hikes in history. ~ Bob Bauman ~ Sovereign Society’s Offshore A-Letter
As of Jan. 1, 2011, no matter what your tax bracket, you can expect a hike. The lowest, 10% bracket will rise to 15%. On the high end 35% will rise to 39.6%. And everything in between…
The 25% bracket will rise to 28%.
The 28% bracket will rise to 31%.
The 33% bracket will rise to 36%.
If you’re married, expect to pay more.
That’s right — the “marriage penalty” is back.
Kids? The child tax credit is slashed from $1,000 to $500 per child. (Not that you could raise a kid on $1,000 a year anyway.)
I know that you’re not thinking about dying soon. But you may want to adjust your assets accordingly in the next six months…
… Because the Death Tax returns in 2011!
That’s right — if you die this year, no death tax. But 6 months from now, expect a whopping 55% (on estates over $1 million).
i no longer fight for any cause EXCEPT MY OWN.
don't care for pac-man mentality.
Buddie, the Communism's True Believers Won't Give Up -
http://www.henrymakow.com/communisms_useful_idiots_wont.html
fwd: Criminals on the Bench
Justice Verhooofen (sic) screws Freedom – following on the heels of Judge Sinclair
Justice Ver-hoooof-en supports and applies Judicial Terrorism
Justice Verhoeven unlawfully has re-wrote and re-defined established Canadian law. Making corrupt law from the Bench - now known as:
"Canadian Junk law"
I had hoped to write an article in a better frame of mind, and indeed a more positive article, but please accept my apologies if a bit of Scottish anger seems to flow from a judgment that, even with my knowledge of the corruption, surprised me.
I sat for the past 2 months wondering, not if they would screw us on the “person” and Coronation Oath issues, which I somewhat saw coming, (though continuing to hope otherwise), but how they would screw me on trial Judge Sinclair’s admission that at least 2 other people interfered with the independence of the judiciary by ordering him to terminate the trial prematurely.
Yesterday, after another hour in jail, I found out how.
Verhooofen, an employment law lawyer (sure, he knows constitutional, criminal and taxation law?? – then he claims there should be a presumption that all judges know all the law – which he admittedly has never studied nor researched) simply ruled that: “There is no basis for the suggestion that in so doing he was improperly influenced by anyone.” Whoooaa. Whether or not this was “improper” is of no relevance – it is the interference itself and alone that the SCC held is a violation of the law. Verhooofen also said that that my position on this matter was “without any foundation” because Sinclair failed to say who it was that gave the orders! Isn’t that how extortion works – no one being extorted upon is going to reveal who is doing the extorting for fear of obvious results.
Then Ver-hooof-en the SOB said that the admission by Sinclair that “those higher up the food chain” was not intended literally – who is Verhooofen to say how the judge intended this to be interpreted - especially with nothing quoted to support him? How does he know this – did he call Sinclair and ask him off the record? The fact is the words speak for themselves - at least two other people ordered Sinclair to terminate the trial after he had promised at the previous hearing to hear my constitutional issues and then never did. This is a real cover up by another criminal judge
But, disappointing as this is, should we expect anything less?
I will not, however, give in. My leave application is already done and will be filed within 30 days. I will take this to the Court of Appeal and the SCC if necessary.
Verhoofen did indicate in his reasons what I and many others have been saying all along – that they will never let us win because of the effects of our position. This was truly amazing – read this quote:
“If accepted, Mr. Lindsay’s arguments would call into question the legitimacy and authority of Canada’s constitution and government including its courts. I could be without authority to make the very decisions sought by Mr. Lindsay on this appeal.”
In short, as I directly told him, no judge can hear this matter because they would all be out of a job and I can never obtain a fair and impartial hearing. Only a jury can so do. This after Sinclair refused to permit me to put evidence on the record of how the corrupt usury monetary system works to illustrate that the system will not collapse and that income tax is not required to run the country. Now Verhoofen claims that because if income tax is removed, the system will collapse. Therefore the law of necessity kicks in and they simply will not permit this. Yet in the Manitoba Language Reference Case, the Man. Court of Queen’s Bench, Kopstein J. held, confirmed by the SCC, that all laws of Manitoba were void for failure to translate into French. He then said that they must remain in effect for 2 years to permit translation.
So indeed, the income tax act could be declared unlawful, but, if necessary (and I don’t agree that it is), could remain for 1 year to permit Parliament to begin to issue its own monetary and credit needs interest free and without the need for taxation at all. I could live with this temporary illegality.
Despite my dozens of authorities including from Justice Dowdall K.C. where he admits that a “person” and a man are indeed separate and distinct, Verhooofen simply agreed with the trial judge and refused to go into any detailed analysis of my supporting material – he simply ignored all of it under the guise that I was re-arguing my trial position, as opposed to showing where Sinclair erred at law. My material is so detailed, accurate and correct, that neither Verhooofen nor Sinclair are able to address it by showing where I erred – they simply claim that a “person” is a man and will not look at anything else.
Ver-hoof-en applied what is known as the "modern principle" where words are given their general meaning. However this only came into effect in 1984 - the ITA in 1948. It is a judicially created 'law' and has no retroactivity. Further, it only applies where the word is not a technical term or one used in the vernacular of a particular trade. For example - the word 'body' in law means an artificial person. The word 'chose' in law means a type of action - not a choice as used in regular parlance. I could go on but the point is made and I am correct that this did not apply, especially after the authorities I had which admitted that a "person" is a term of law.
All Verhooofen could claim was that a “person” included a man. But it is more than that – a “person” surely is a man – but it is a man with the capacity (power) for rights and duties. That is the legal definition for 1000 years and I had the judicial proof to support me. Moreover, all the material I have today, and I do mean all, was never before the Court in Canadian history anywhere – including in the Kennedy case Verhooofen references because I was Tom’s agent in that case.
Verhooofen then went on to agree that a comment that was off the cuff, (obiter per incuriam – a comment on something not before the court and which is not binding) so to speak by a Court of Appeal justice, without any supporting arguments and which was not even before that Court, was still binding upon him and he was going to follow it.
Anyway, it was a massive cover up including a Crown Prosecutor who admitted that he had no authorities nor law to counter my position – NONE. Clearly Burnett the prosecutor was given insider information not to put any effort into this case because the judiciary would take care of it.
All of this to say nothing about the willful misquotes and errors of fact which the judges do on purpose to ensure that no one can appeal on issues of fact to a higher court. Only issues of law. That’s fine – I’ll word it correctly.
Verhoofen quoted the test required to have appeals granted. I’m wholly familiar with this test and met it. Verhooofen applied a much too strict a standard on this appeal. He begins by re-defining the word legal term “person”, to use a legal term in ordinary language, and then of course saying there was lots of evidence that I was a “person”. He also claims I incriminated myself in my affidavits but fails to state where I did so. The trial judge only claimed that I evidenced I reside in Canada, which is bullshit too as I expressly said I “live in the geographical area known as British Columbia” and further evidenced expressly that I do not “reside” in Canada nor anywhere else. It is no longer sufficient to ‘read in’ law, now the judges are ‘reading in’ evidence that didn’t exist.
On the Coronation Oath issue. Verhooofen said that he does not have to enforce the Oath of the Queen, even though the Ontario Court of Appeal said it is part of our Constitution. He claims it is “non-justiciable” however that was in relation to an application by someone attempting to change the Constitution – that was why it was non-justiciable. I am simply demanding that the Constitution be upheld and applied – and he refused to do this. I have never heard of any part of our Constitution as being not applicable to be relied upon by the people – especially the very foundation for which it began.
If the Queen’s oath is not enforced or enforceable, then neither can any alleged Oath of Allegiance of the people to the Queen.
On the issue of the fact that the Queen swore out an “illegal” oath – Verhoeven remained conspicuously silent. Not a word said.
It is amazing, for those who have seen my presentation and the incredible amount of supporting law that I have, that this judge simply refused to apply or even quote any of it. That the Crown had no law to support him clearly illustrates that the justice was on a witch hunt to strike down and change the fundamental law of this land.
Unfortunately, he also changed the sentencing. Now instead of having to pay a $5 000 fine by November 2012, I have 90 days!!! Yeah, money sure grows on trees doesn’t it. Likely, as per usual policy, the Crown won’t object to this while under appeal.
The Crown had another charge laid for failing to comply with the original court order to file from the trial judge about 2 months ago. Verhooofen now ordered me to file in 60 days. Thus the present warrant that has been outstanding for 40 days or so is abandoned and once I have not filed again in 60 days, the Crown will lay another charge, try to serve me, claim evasion of service, and seek another warrant for my arrest. Here we go again.
Then they will prosecute again for refusing to succumb to judicial terrorism.
Anyway, enough venting for now. Another appeal is being filed and we will go from here. As we are advocating in our Person Solution Tour Part 2 – Cooperative Activist Resistance – the only solution will be massive civil refusal to comply with their bullshit and unconstitutional laws. That is the only solution – and it is peaceful. When we truly know the law – all their fabrications and word magic falls upon deaf ears.
Success has been delayed – but it is still to come.
Thanks so much to all those who came out today to watch the corruption and support me, including those who came as far away as Vancouver.
We even had a little freedom activist come with pappy to learn first hand what his future holds if we are not successful. His future, as with your children, will rest on a refusal to support corruption – not by ongoing discussions and talk. But by action – and the only action is to stop filing en masse.
Thanks to Gord Watson who recently noted in his email:
“Junk science is defined as ‘ ... when scientific facts are distorted, risk is exaggerated and the science adapted and warped by politics and ideology to serve another agenda.’ ”
Verhooofen’s judgment is “junk law” – “when constitutional principles and laws are distorted, risk is exaggerated and the science of law adapted and warped by politics and judges, and ideology to serve another agenda.”
In freedom I remain and will remain!
David-Kevin: Lindsay
Support US, not THEM!
I'd also like to assist with the cost of research, court costs and commitment to freedom. Here is my donation of $_______.
As with all endeavours of this magnitude, we gratefully rely upon donations to cover our costs. The Court of Appeal is extremely expensive due to the volume of copying involved. Legal costs even on your own are extremely expensive. All assistance would be very much appreciated and can be sent to either:
2929 Coleman St., Penticton, B.C., V2N 7C9, or
Suite 432 113-437 Martin St. Penticton, B.C. V2A 5L1
Cash or money order/cheque is fine.
Thank you.
fwd: R v Lindsay appeal judgment at 2 pm tomorrow?
From: Dave Lindsay
Sent: Wed 6/16/10 8:34 PM
Hi everyone. Due to serious internet restrictions the past week, this email is
a tad late. My apologies.
Tomorrow at 2 pm in Kelowna B.C., is the appeal judgment in the income tax case I was involved
in for 5 counts of failing to file against the 'non-person' David Kevin Lindsay.
As I told the appeal justice, there was no 'person' to charge - they charged a non-person.
Crown has already admitted that the original 5 month jail time (30 days consecutive)
was far too excessive (admitting that no one has ever gone to jail for first offence
of failing to file before) and that 30 days concurrent on all counts should have been the
time. If no one has ever gone to jail, then why me???? What makes little ol' me so special?
The Crown admitted in court at the hearing of the appeal that it had no case law, no
authorities, no statute law, no common law, no equity law, absolutely nothing to show that I am
incorrect on my position. Admittedly, this is the first time I have ever seen the Crown
come to court with nothing to support their position. The Crown only argued that a
notice was served, I didn't file and the CRA official TRACY TODD couldn't find one.
The primary issues were ignored completely.
I remain optimistic that we will win on the merits of my position on personhood and on
the Coronation Oath. As I discuss in our seminar, however, I retain a semblance of
reality of whom we are dealing with. A loss does not imply we are incorrect, only that the
judges are verified to be completely compromised. I do not expect to lose though.
I see the judge either ordering a new trial or dismissing the charges on the basis that the
trial judge admitted on record that at least 2 people interfered with the independence of the
judiciary. Then ruling that he doesn't have to deal with the remaining issues.
That's OK. I have a surprise waiting for this outcome.
Should a new trial be ordered, as in the case of my friend out here Pat Pugsley, whom we
won on his appeal last year with a new trial ordered, it is doubtful that the Crown will proceed -
they did not in Pat's case.
Alternatively, the judge may still rule on these issues and either corrupt decided law, or rule
in our favour. Hopefully the latter of course. If the former, then leave to the Court of Appeal
will be forthcoming despite winning the case on a technicality.
I will send everyone notice tomorrow night of what happened and keep you all in the loop.
This is the most important tax case in Canadian history. There has never been this detailed
and accurate information put to the court and it will be interesting to see what Justice Verhoeven
does with it - does he uphold his own Oaths or break them?
NOTE: Interestingly, Lizzy the Lizard herself is coming out to Canada this month. Hmmm. Maybe
a time to put her under citizens arrest for ongoing fraud???!!!
Give Lizzy a real Canada Day fireworks celebration in jail. Serious points to ponder.
in freedom I remain
David-Kevin: Lindsay
re CLASS ACTIONS suits
To certify a "class" you need a well-defined group of people
all sharing common interests and common concerns
Mr Justice Smith in Sutherland v. B.C. outlines 7 criteria
for groups who want to be certified as a class...
For example:
a well-defined group of approximately 600,000 people in Canada
share the same identifiable stigma, the same Mark of Cain-like stain,
the same concerns about carrying around 'a criminal record'
related to some 'pot' crime...
this well-defined, isolated, idiocyncratic group can apply to be certified as a class
naming a representative plaintiff - a spokesman or a spokeswoman -
the group can easily identify the common interest and the common effect
of having been declared 'criminals' even though they have not committed any
'crime'
for the word 'crime' does not lend itself so elastically to be extended to those
who at first possessed, or grew, or cultivated pot plants... those who took the
word 'crime' from its original context in Papers Concerning British Columbia
1858 - and applied it to 'victimless' crimes - acted outside their power to write laws...
the BNA Act, 1867 allows Provinces and Parliament to write laws... each has their
little crib, their little playpen and inside that playpen they can write laws... but
not every law they write will be acceptable... the Constitutional Question Act and
the Judicial Review Procedure Act and B.C.Supreme Court Rule 31 form a triumverate
of ways people can lodge their claims against policy and policing and discretion and indiscretion by politicians or those holding public office
those who attack Income Tax Laws... can easily manouever their arguments and the judges
into a new way of seeing by isolating the separate and distinct law making powers distributed between Parliament and Provinces
the BNA Act, 1867 calls all Provinces, Sovereign
yet it says The Queen [i.e. a Province] may make laws...
yes it does... it says the Province or Parliament may make laws
subject to this Act
the 'right' to make laws declaring pot possession, growing, cultivation a 'crime'
does not come to Parliament via the BNA Act, 1867... that Act clearly
isolates what constitutes a 'crime' = a felony [bodily harm] a property crime or attaintment of treason, so says section 31
The Papers Concerning British Columbia 1858 form the prenuptual agreement - the conditions on which B.C. entered a confederation of Sovereigns... each with exclusive law making power over Administration of Justice...
Each province can apply principle of equity, recognizing the Queen's Oath on the 1611 King James Bible and the principles that recognize the existence of God, entail using Scripture to
support any case against taxation, i.e. usury
'd'
['d' is karl-heintz eisbrenner -- a lawyer from British Columbia, Canada. he died tragically a couple of years ago]
$15,000,000 lien for sale, asking price $600,000 Canadian; price is negotiable.
Lien has been perfected against East Side Marios ?115 Hamilton Street North, Waterdown, ON L0R 2H6 Canada,
Ilona Skeba of 1303 Shaver Rd Ancaster, ON L9G 3L1 Canada,
Hillside Park Residence 35 Arkledun Avenue Hamilton Ontario L8N 2H8, Canada and
CSH WILLOWGROVE RE INC. Subsidiary of Chartwell Seniors Housing Reit of 100 MILVERTON DRIVE SUITE 700 MISSASSAGA ONTARIO for the admission of guilt for crimes against Ivor Barens Of Hamilton, Ontario and Norris Barens of Vancouver, B.C.. Crimes enumerated below.
For further information please contact Norris Barens at norrisbarens@inbox.com
Common law distress on third parties has been filed with PPSA Ontario,UCC New York State and with various financial institutions to the amount of $15,000,000 against
East Side Marios 115 Hamilton Street North, Waterdown, ON L0R 2H6 Canada,
Ilona Skeba of 1303 Shaver Rd Ancaster, ON L9G 3L1 Canada,
Hillside Park Residence 35 Arkledun Avenue Hamilton Ontario L8N 2H8, Canada and
CSH WILLOWGROVE RE INC. Subsidiary of Chartwell Seniors Housing Reit of 100 MILVERTON DRIVE SUITE 700 MISSASSAGA ONTARIO for the admission of guilt for crimes against Ivor Barens Of Hamilton and Norris Barens of vancouver B.C.
(I) NOTICE OF ADMISSIONS BY DEFAULT
IN THE MATTER OF: breach of trust, unjust enrichment, tort of deceit, negligence, breach of duty of care, conspiracy to breach trust, conspiracy to unjustly enrich, conspiracy to deceive, and, conspiracy to neglect.
Between:
Norris Barens
Claimant
and
Ilona Skeba, a.k.a. Lony Skeba
HILLSIDE PARK, A.K.A. CENTRAL PARK LODGE HAMILTON, and
THE WILLOWGROVE, jointly and severally.
Respondent(s)
“Ejus est non nolle, qui potest velle”
Let it be know that Ilona Skeba, a resident of Hamilton, in the province of Ontario, and a Respondent in this matter, knowingly and willingly, jointly and severally, personally and corporately, by her consent, has admitted by Common Law Default process to the following:
1.) She is the daughter of Ivor Barens.
2.) She has committed breach of trust in this matter with regard to lack of information and accuracy of information provided to the claimant regarding my father’s estate.
3.) She has committed breach of trust in this matter with regard to the distribution and liquidation of assets owned by my father and in his estate, and have done such to the detriment of my brother Norris Barens.
4.) By her actions, admitted to herein, she has unjustly enriched herself.
5.) By her actions, admitted to herein, she has deceived the Claimant.
6.) By her actions, admitted to herein, she has breached her duty of care.
7.) By her actions, admitted to herein, she has conspired to breach a trust.
8.) By her actions, admitted to herein, she has conspired to unjustly enrich herself.
9.) By her actions, admitted to herein, she has conspired to deceive the Claimant.
10.) By her action, admitted to herein, she has conspired to commit neglect.
(b.) Let it be known that HILLSIDE PARK, A.K.A. CENTRAL PARK LODGE HAMILTON, of Hamilton, in the Province of Ontario, and a Respondent in this matter, knowingly and willingly, jointly and severally, personally and corporately, by it’s consent, has admitted to following:
1.) To have conspired to interfere with contact between the Claimant and his father, Ivor Barens, to the detriment of the Claimant.
2.) To have obstructed justice by lying about not receiving a power of attorney faxed to us.
(c.) Let it be known that THE WILLOWGROVE, of Ancaster, in the Province of Ontario, and a Respondent in this matter, knowingly and willingly, jointly and severally, personally and corporately, by it’s consent, has admitted to the following:
3.) To have conspired to interfere with contact between the Claimant and his father, Ivor Barens, to the detriment of the Claimant.
(II) OPPORTUNITY TO DENY and REMEDY
1.) Having been given ample opportunity to respond and seek remedy and resolution in this matter with a point by point denial of the assertions/claims enumerated herein in the form of a sworn affidavit with supporting exhibits attached. The Respondent(s) and each of them, have failed to rebut any or all assertions/claims of the Claimant.
2.) Having failed to respond in the time and manner provided for herein meansl invocation of the Doctrine of Acquiescence, tacit consent, Doctrine of Necessity, and is an admission by the Respondent(s) and each of them to, inter alia, the claims of the Claimant and furthermore, and thus has admitted, judgment nihil dicit, to the Claimant’s right to recover in commerce, in any jurisdiction, for damages caused by the Respondent(s) and each of them, including, but not limited to, penalties and costs as outlined herein or as may be determined by any subsequent judicial proceeding.
3.) The Respondent(s) have failed to respond to the Claimants Claim, they are now stipulations between the parties and furthermore, this instrument is now, inter alia, a Bill of Exchange pursuant to the Bills of Exchange Act, R.S., c. B-5, UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE and UNCITRAL CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL BILLS OF EXCHANGE AND INTERNATIONAL PROMISSORY NOTES, 1988©, UNITED NATIONS.
4.) This document is actual and constructive notice of DEFAULT NOTICE, PUBLIC NOTICE, DISTRESS ON A BANK, and/or a claim on bond(s)/insurance, and such notice has now been given on an international basis all concerned third parties, including, but not limited to the following:
a. Financial institutions, including:
i. Banks,
ii. Credit Unions,
iii. Merchant banks,
iv. Private lenders, and
v. Corporate lenders,
b. Credit reporting agencies,
c. Government licencing agencies,
d. Bonding agencies, and
e. Insurance companies.
(III) COMMERCIAL GRACE
The Respondent(s) have failed to respond to the Claimant’s Claim and is thus now liable in the full amount of this claim.
“Necessitas inducit privilialegium quod jura privata”
(IV) NOTICE OF NON-JUDICIAL CLAIM IN PERSONAM and IN REM
1.) Failing to respond to the Claimant’s Claim in the time and manner prescribed has been willful disregard and dishonour of the Claimant’s Claim commercial instrument and the Claimant’s Claim, has resulted in perfection of a NON-JUDICIAL COMMON LAW LIEN and CLAIM OF RIGHT, judgment by nihil dicit[1], in favour of the Claimant and against the Respondent(s) and each of them, and in each of their equity in all collateral described herein in the sum certain of $15,000,000.00 (five million dollars, Canadian currency or its equivalent) and all presumptions have been made in favour of the Claimant and against the Respondent(s) in the nature of equitable estoppel[2] and Distress Infinite.
“Necissitas facit licitum quod alisas known set licitum”
(V) FINANCING STATEMENT
1.) The Claimant hereby lays claim to the Respondent’s and each of their assets as recorded in this Financing Statement which covers all present and after acquired personal and real property, including, but not limited to the following types of collateral regardless of jurisdiction or situs:
a. all corporate and personal judgments,
b. all corporate and personal licences,
c. all certificates(s), bonds and insurance,
d. all private and public trusts,
e. all bank accounts,
f. all credit union accounts,
g. all trust accounts,
h. all saving accounts,
i. all current accounts,
j. all personal property,
k. all real property,
l. all vehicles, including cars, trucks, vehicles, boats, aircraft,
m. all land, real estates and buildings,
n. all tools, jigs, fixtures, building structures, trailers, workshops,
o. all stocks, bonds, certificates of deposit, plus assignments of same,
p. all personal signatures,
q. all tangible and intangible property,
r. all authorship rights,
s. all works of art,
t. all inventory,
u. all retirement accounts,
v. all interests in trust(s)[3],
w. all inheritance, presently or after acquired,
x. all accounts receivable,
y. all works of art
z. all trademarks,
aa. all copyright to works of art,
bb. all intellectual property,
cc. all rights to intellectual property,
dd. all franchises,
ee. all franchise agreements, and
ff. all inheritance, present and after acquired,
until satisfaction and accord has been made by the Secured Party pursuant to the facts asserted herein and the claims perfected herein.
(VIII) POUNDBREACH/FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE
Upon perfection, a Claim of Lien exists in and upon the property of the Respondent(s) and each of them. However, if the Respondent(s) commit poundbreach by a sale, transfer, or assignment of any encumbered property, commercial liability attaches to a third party and said transfer/transaction is reversible, being by its nature, a fraudulent/fictitious conveyance.
(IX) ASSIGNMENT/NEGOTIATION
Upon perfection, this instrument may be sold, assigned, negotiated, hypothecated, pledge or otherwise, in any commercial transaction and in any jurisdiction.
I, Norris Barens, of Vancouver B.C. mailing address: Centrapoint P.O. Box 19594 Vancouver B.C. V5T- 4E7, make oath and say as follows:
1.I am the Claimant herein and as such have personal knowledge of the facts hereinafter deposed to, except where same are stated to be made upon information, and where so stated I believe such matters to be true.
2.On, or about, (put date hear) I cause to be served a Non-Judicial Common Law Lien and Claim of Right upon (Fill in name here) See attached Exhibit (A).
3.To date I have received no communication from any of the aforementioned Respondents denying my claims.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] HOKE v. EDWARDS AND OTHERS, 46 N.C. 532 (1854) 2 S.E. 70 “Upon a default or a nihil dicit, on an action of debt, in a Justice’s judgment, the plaintiff is entitled to a final judgment, at the time when the default is made, and need not execute an inquiry before a jury.”
[2] WESTON v. LUMBER CO., 162 N.C. 165 (1913) 77 S.E. 430 “It is, therefore, not necessary, says a great law writer on this subject, that the judgment should have been awarded upon the decision of an issue, for where it is given for a want of a plea, which is judgment by nihil dicit, or were it one by non sum informatus, or by confession, or by default, the conclusiveness of it is the same as if the fact has been actually (203) contested by plea or traverse.”
fwd:$15,000,000 for sale for $600,000
This is a link to a $15,000,000 Bill of Exchange I have for sale on Ebay. I have successfully put a lien on four entities for various crimes.
The perpetrators of these crimes have tried unsuccessfully to have me remove the liens with about 10 lawyers (I know this because my notary’s phone is ringing off the hook) and I was personally asked by one lawyer to remove the lien.
I will let anyone who is interested in my progress on this matter know the results if they get back to me.
Norris
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=320536062826&ssPageName=ADME:L:LCA:US:1123
fwd: History in the Making for a NEW America
To All:
Are you paying income taxes and/or having taxes taken out of your pay check? Would you like to have this practice stopped? Do you own property? Do you pay property taxes? Would you like to not pay these taxes any longer? Do you own a home/condo? Do you have a mortgage? Would you like to have it forgiven? Do you get “traffic” tickets? Would you like to not receive these tickets any longer? Would you like to be left alone from those who work in governmental jobs? Are you of the opinion this could never happen?
I am sending you this email because the 2nd American “Revolution” has begun, which is called the “Restore America Plan”. Below are two web sites for you to review as to what has happened and is occurring right now that you may not have known is taking place. Please read the first web site to get an understanding as to what has and is transpiring. More will be done besides what was described above as explained in this web site. Also read the pages in the drop down menu titled “About” located under the top banner.
http://www.guardiansofthefreerepublics.com/front-page.html
The above site explains what you will read in the below site, which is the Declaration submitted to every governor of every state:
http://www.americandreampreservation.com/
If you support this peaceful undertaking to Restore America to what it was and should be, please click on the “HERE” in the box marked “Affirm the Declaration” to add your name with the others who have already added their support for this worthy cause.
Should you have any questions, feel free to email me. I will do my best to answer them.
Please pass this on to everyone in your email address list.
Thank you for your support,
Sal: Celauro, Junior
Member New York de jure Grand Jury
From: SALJRKJMN@aol.com
Sent: Mon 5/17/10 6:44 AM
To:
fwd: Jean-Serge Freedom of Speech
Jean-Serge, a great friend, a former councilor and who C.L.E.A.R. has promoted to speak out here in Western Canada, began refusing to collect sales taxes at his business some 15 years ago, on the basis that it constitutes slavery. He is still doing so today, and others are now realizing the precedent that Serge has laid out for us!
Here are his comments on free speech.
David-Kevin: Lindsay
fw: Cop in a Box
From: Jack Harper (jack.harperxxxxxx.com)
Sent: Mon 5/03/10 12:07 PM
To: policeservice (PoliceService@saskatoon.ca)
Cop in a Box
by JackieG » May 3rd, 2010, 11:35 am
Cop in a Box
and Lawful Excuse.
I’m trying to visualize what takes place when a cop is appointed to the streets.
I’m sure they teach them a bit about the law…..maybe just enough to get him into and out of sticky situations.
Do you think they tell him a two edged sword can often change hands in the blink of an eye?
A cop is given the Highway Traffic Act to uphold and issue tickets which places him into a tight box.
The lawyers for the Crown expand the box a bit with some other acts, statutes and rules which may stand over or under, the Highway Traffic Act.
To what length can one take the cop in defining the statute he is attempting to uphold?
How far can one test the cop’s knowledge of the law on the spot???
To what length can one take the cop in defining the statute that stands above the the one he is attempting to enforce??
What are the accepted boundaries in attempting to define where, one is indeed, bound by the statutes he is attempting to enforce?
Are cops not aware that the Criminal Code of Canada trumps the provincial Highway Traffic Act 100% of the time?
How far is a person legally authorized to enter into negotiations with a cop?
Can a person take it to the limit where, the cop goes ballistic and loses his mind.
Does one need a claim of right in order to proceed on such an adventure?
Is that not lawful excuse?Or, do they have a licence for that?
Would anyone within the entire government know????????
Obama tax increases are raining everywhere -
Gee, did Obama forget his bold promises about not raising taxes?
What a shock folks but just like Obama likes to explore new types
of abortion to fund he also is finding new taxes to
sneak into our lives.
Some attempts aren’t even sneaky.
They just arrogantly slam through the front door and make Obama,
yet again an obvious and arrogant liar about not raising taxes......
http://www.newswithviews.com/Roth/laurie211.htm
by Laurie Roth
Property and Taxation -
We have just survived another tax year and paid homage to the almighty
government beast we affectionately call the IRS.
To some, a minority I would think, this is a time of feeling a part
of the grand scheme that we call “American life”.
To others it is a maddening, burdensome time filled with dread and
anger of having taken from them the fruits of their labor.
So just what is this “fruit of our labor” and to whom does it belong?....
http://www.newswithviews.com/LeMieux/michael123.htm
by Michael LeMieux
FW: Why we stand for the judge in court, and what it means to testify
http://billstclair.com/blog/stories/suijurisfreeman.html
OK, like I said Judge Sanderson ordered my release on November 8, 1994, without me signing any bond form. This was my whole point of remaining in jail for 28 days, I didn't want to give the court jurisdiction! On November 10, 1994 I had a number of motions scheduled to be heard by Judge Sanderson, the courtroom was packed, the bailiff entered the courtroom and said, "All rise", I and five others refused to stand, the bailiff looks at me and said, "ALL RISE" I and 5 others still refuse to stand, Judge Sanderson wheels in mid-step on his way to the bench and stormed out of the courtroom! The bailiff came out a few minutes later and announces that court is cancelled the rest of the day, it was only 9:30 am! ( I just know that when Judge Sanderson went home that night, he kept mumbling, "They wouldn't rise, they wouldn't rise .....) The reason that I didn't stand was because after being unlawfully held in the Hillsdale County jail for 28 days by order of Judge Donald Sanderson solely because I refused to first post bond, then just sign the bond, when he could have let me out on day one! After all, after 28 days he ordered my release without posting or signing any bond, he could have done so on day one! Of course all my motions were denied, but hey, it really didn't matter, I had made my point! And by the way there is no law that required me to stand when Judge Sanderson entered the courtroom, it's just a courtesy. The custom of rising began when the judge used to enter the courtroom carrying a Bible, the people were to stand out of respect for the Bible. I certainly didn't feel very courteous towards Judge Sanderson after being kept in jail for 28 days when I could have been let go on day one! Anyway a "jury trial" date was set for January 10, 1995 at 9:30 am. I filed my legal paperwork stating why I was under no legal obligation to appear for their trial and in fact did not show up for it! The following is a certified court transcript of that 2 minute trial:
An interesting tidbit about the court "requirement" of taking an oath follows. While doing some more of my research 7-8 years ago I came across this little goodie. The word "testify and/or "testimony" comes from the same root Greek word as testicles, why is this? In the ancient world the male's gentials were considered sacred, therefore when swearing an oath they placed their hand on the private parts and took their oathes! I'm quite serious, this is a historical fact! Check out the Old Testament's account of Abraham sending one of his servants to find a wife for his son. Abraham had his servant place his hand "on his inter thight" as the King James Version puts it! But if you check out the original Hebrew, it was Abraham's gentials where the servant placed his hand. This is not in any way meant to be disrespectful towards the Bible, it's just a historical fact! If I were ever asked by a judge to raise my right hand and take an oath I'd say, "You want me to do what?"
Doug Christie Takes Powerful Free Speech Message to the University of Ottawa
http://www.radicalpress.com/?p=1212
Doug Christie Takes Powerful Free Speech Message to the University of Ottawa
Doug Christie Takes Powerful Free Speech Message to the University of Ottawa
[Paul Fromm of the Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFE) writes: Just 10 days after a rowdy mob of protesters, egged on by a university administration that admonished the controversial U.S. Ann Coulter against “inappropriate” or hateful speech, won the University of Ottawa, unaffectionately known as the U of Zero, a reputation for censorship, when Ottawa Police advised that the appearance be canceled rather than they preserve law and order and free speech, Canada’s foremost free speech lawyer, Doug Christie made a successful appearance before a packed standing room only meeting of 150. The meeting was organized by a number of free speech supporters and partially funded by the Canadian Association for Free Expression. Afterward, the audience listened with rapt attention and engaged the Battling Barrister in a lively discussion.]
Notes for Doug Christie’s Speech
University of Ottawa, April 8, 2010
I’m here to talk about free speech. I’m not here to practice it.
Unlike Ann Coulter, I don’t need a warning from the provost. I am a Canadian, trained by law in the way of silence, sullen silence, and code language. I have been trained by the Supreme Court not to engage in hate speech, even though no one can define it in advance, so I can avoid it.
There are general taboo topics which I must avoid or tread lightly around, like race, religion, ethnic origin, sex, sexual orientation, mental or physical disability or mental status. Then there are peripheral taboo topics like multiculturalism, immigration, affirmative action programs and a host of other ill-defined topics.
I have been trained to remain very sensitive to the broad political implications of these topics lest I face a very expensive lesson from the Human Rights Tribunal.
What the Supreme Court taught me when I appeared in Taylor and Zundel and Keegstra was that free speech has its limits in “hate” which means “extreme dislike.” So presumably I must like all races, religions, ethnic origins, etc. equally or at least dislike them only moderately. Or at least pretend to, which is more Canadian. I cannot denounce any one as evil.
The Law Society, through its decision of Harvey Strosberg taught me that if I speak in public, “law students” may tape some but not all of my words, and the Chairman of the Discipline Committee can issue a statement to the media condemning me as “identifying with a lunatic fringe,” even in the very act where he decides not to give me the benefit of a hearing where I could answer the allegation with evidence where both sides could be heard.
I learned in McAleer and Malcolm Ross, both of which went to the Supreme Court of Canada, that expressing your religious beliefs on your own time, is no defence and placing the messages in the United States where it is legal, is no defence if you mention where you can get the message to someone in Canada.
I learned that our parliamentarians of all parties love free speech so much that they banned someone from the precincts of Parliament who wanted to rent the parliamentary press gallery, a place anyone can rent for a press conference.
What was the press conference about? That the Human Rights Tribunal had ruled in Zundel’s case that “Truth was no defence,” and the truth of the statement could not be proven by any evidence. I know because that someone was me, the only lawyer in Canadian history to be banned by all party agreement from the precincts of parliament. Because in Canada truth is no defence. Orwell was right about double speak. Randy White a so-called Reform MP said he did not want me in his work place. Orwell was right about a lot of things.
I have learned and been carefully taught to avoid the taboo topics, to measure every word lest a tape recorder in the audience be taken to the Human Rights Commission, the police, the Law Society, or someone likes to complain to the Human Rights Commission.
I have learned to talk about free speech but never practice it. Never say anything like Ann Coulter would say, coming from a free society. And being in a university setting is all the more reason to be very careful about how you choose your words. The left-wing political giants who run most universities are able to let loose the mob with a wink and the students know their success with many professors depends on how successfully they can entrap a political foe.
Universities are the most dangerous place to practice free speech. Even topics like abortion which you would not normally think involve a taboo topic can quickly be spun into forbidden territory and sexism can result in expulsion or criminal charges. The civility of universities is accorded to those who can mobilize the largest screaming mob. No one listens.
I have to even be careful how I speak about Freedom of Speech.
So let me just speak about freedom of speech. I have come here to praise freedom of speech, not to bury it. I do not want to be cynical or bitter. But since 1984 when I took up the cause of freedom, I have become aware of the price to be paid for this precious legacy of freedom.
My office has been vandalized, repeatedly; my name has been defamed in the press; I have been the target of spurious complaints to law societies, I have been banned from the precincts of parliament. The very press who today became the target of complaints themselves because they post on the internet, who have come late to the battle, because of their money and power, are turning the tide. They were not long ago in the forefront of the mob, vilifying my clients and myself, since it was not their ox that was gored. Irony, thy name is Canada.
1984, the year Orwell entitled his most famous work was actually the year I got involved in the defence of James Keegstra. From that moment on, the lawyer who had defended successfully all manner of criminal cases from drugs to rape to murder and with no ill effects to his reputation other than professional jealousy became in the eyes of many, through the window of the media, a hated nazi-lawyer. This title, I have worn to this day, at first reluctantly and gradually resigned myself to it, knowing as “Human Rights” law tells us, “Truth is no defence.”
I would never be elected anywhere to anything. Any party would expel me, the right of left for fear of the media. I was warned this would happen. “Better alone than in the company of hypocrites,” I reasoned. There is one hope and that is that truth cannot be buried forever, and people will tell it come what may, even about race, religion, or ethnicity. There are some truths to be told on that score. They are the building blocks of culture and even the government of Quebec is recognizing this, even though they wrap it in convoluted language. Oops! I almost practiced free speech!
The best indication of what is the true value of free speech is provided by what happens when it is taken away. The thinking people become “bush league.” The first reaction to a controversial idea is not to hear the person about whom you heard, but to adopt the mob-mind view.
Left-wing, multicultural, tolerant, good. Right wing, xenophobic, intolerant, bad. A few code words and the mob takes the argument to the streets. The psychological guillotine cuts off debate and civility like the real guillotine cut off heads in Paris in the revolution till there were no heads to cut off. Everybody was at the same low level of passive, intellectual obedience to the omnipotent state. Then a forceful tyrant like Napoleon can impose his will with very little difficulty. Do we really have to go through these cycles of oppression, revolution, depression? Have we no intellect to listen for ourselves, evaluate for ourselves, accept or reject an idea with a civil attitude of tolerance? Do we need to have a hysterical violent reaction to every idea of a different perspective?
The Roman maxim: “Audi Alteram Partem” was over the door of the law library at McGill University where I once spoke. I entered through that doorway to face a hostile screaming mob, much like Ann Coulter faced. They had never met me. They could never hear me. Why did they reject me before hearing me? Why not hear both sides? Sometimes all sides need to be heard. Until they are, how can you really form an intelligent and informed opinion?
I believe the truth is that the idea of tolerance has been used as an Orwellian doublespeak smoke screen for intolerance and is really about narrowing the scope of debate before the debate begins. This is consistent with Marxism, but it is not consistent with liberalism or of constitutional principles of free speech. Certain topics cannot be discussed.
We don’t absolutely make it illegal to talk about certain subjects, we just make it so dangerous, with so many obscure and complex rules that no one dares to go there. Somewhat like gun laws. We don’t overtly ban all fire arms. No, we would find too much resistance and rational criticism. The hypocritical Canadian way is simply to regulate them out of existence, gradually, just like controversial speech. Hate laws mean whatever we say they mean. We will only tell you after you say something if you have offended. This is the process of gradual Marxism. The state gradually disarms the citizen of their weapons and their free speech by slow degrees so that absolute control both physical and mental will be with the state.
The other side of this equation is the enforcers, state agents, professional complainers, the enablers of state power. The people who go from politicians to judge or from politician to president of a University. They create a network of willing and compliant officials who can be counted on to cleverly manipulate and manage the progress from freedom, which they call “anarchy,” to the tyranny they call a “benevolent oligarchy.”
Thus they acquire through a system of servants and paid enforcers, through Human Rights Commissions and police forces the only persons authorized by law to break into your house, seize your computer, examine your files, your books, your speeches, your appearances and even your surreptitiously recorded comments as in the case of David Ahenakew.
They can ruin you. They can prosecute you. They can and will vilify you in the press. As was done to David Ahenakew and then even if you win, you still lose. You go through court for four years of stress and when you are finally acquitted, no one says “sorry” or pays your costs. On the contrary, they repeat in the media around the world the words of the judge condemning you in the very act of acquitting you.
And the state has all the guns, police, sheriffs, jails, probation officers, all paid by the state which you support with your taxes. If you want to be a paid bully, there’s a job for you. If you want to shoot people, just don’t say so, join the RCMP. If you want to taser people like Dziekanski, if you want to shoot teenagers like Ian Bush, or misfits like Jess Hughes, and never be charges, join the RCMP.
Just be sure you don’t admit what you did and the establishment will protect you. You are after all, protecting them. We are paying for our own enslavement. Only a few really know where we are going. The rest are following along for the ride, and the free lunch.
(Oops! Too much free speech!)
So if you want to carry on down the road to tyranny, just shout me down. If you want to go quietly into the night of tyranny, just ignore what I have said. Put it out of your mind and never think of it again. The legitimate function of the state is to preserve and maximize the freedom of the conscience, belief and opinion of the individual. It is not to enforce a social model of artificial cultural stew, enforced by law. We have inherent rights to survive as a free people only to the extent we articulate, manifest with rigorous debate and listen to all criticism with an enlightened and critical mind. Let us not presume we are possessed of all knowledge before the discussion starts, and set a limited agenda for social and acceptable speech.
Where once sex was a taboo topic, it has now become an obsession. Speech about race, if suppressed, becomes an obsession and if further suppressed, leads to violence. Let’s get debate out of the closet on all matters. Let’s use it, or we’ll lose it.
I have not said anything. More than anything, I have been allowed to speak here without interruption on the belief I would be ineffectual and secondly I would make the administration look better than the last speaker who was cancelled. I realized this at the beginning, but it is an opportunity to make the point that the redemption of an individual like me, or a society like your university, or of a country like Canada, is only possible if we listen to each other and talk openly about all of our serious and sensitive issues. Unless this really happens, Canada isn’t worth saving and neither is this university.
I will leave here knowing more than anyone in this room about the battles for free speech that have gone on in this country in the last thirty years. I see only minor changes occurring. This is your chance to ask what you need to know to make a difference.
_______________________________________________
R v Lindsay hearing appeal - updates
From: Dave Lindsay (xxxxx@gmail.com)
Sent: Wed 3/31/10 8:24 AM
Hi everyone. I would like to thank everyone who came out yesterday and witnessed my presentation to the
judge - and to the Crown in action, or lack thereof to be more precise!
An interesting day for sure.
I began by providing some new material to the judge that I had discoverred on the "person" issue from the
U of T. This was an article where a superior court judge in England admitted that this word had at least
4 different uses - theology, psychology, general use and LAW! Each was different from the other and he
described their unique history and meanings for each use.
I then proceeded into completing my position to Judge Verhoeven.
This began with proving that we have a constitutional right to own, possess, use and dispose of our property.
Then defining exactly what property is - it is a claim to something and you can have a claim to tangibles such
as a car, chattels, land etc., or you can have a claim to an obligation, such as in a contract. Here, the claim
is also against the Queen in her Coronation Oath promises to me to protect our property and uphold the laws
of God.
Then I proceeded into describing this Coronation Oath, the procedures involved, the wording used, and how the
Courts in Canada have agreed that this Oath forms part of our Constitution and is "non-justiciable" meaning that
the Courts must apply it. One constitutional provision cannot override another so that the Charter for example
cannot be used to defeat this Oath. The Income Tax Act, being a mere statute, must be declared of no force and
effect, at least insofar as it is claimed to be mandatory, as being contrary to this Coronation Oath. Which is another
reason why the word "person" must be interpreted as being voluntary.
I proceeded to further show how the Coronation Oath wording was changed "illegally" according to D.A. Scales and
others in 1937 and 1953. The words added, to govern according to the laws of Canada, were not in the original oath.
To change the wording of the oath, requires consent from all provinces, Canada, all members of the Commonwealth,
and must be passed through Parliament in England. It was rushed through only by cabinet, such that even the London
Times had to recognize that the Archishop was breaking the law at the very time he was swearing in the Queen to
promise to uphold the law.
In any event, written constitutions are a mere reflection of what the existing constitution already is (Dicey). The fact
that this illegal oath was taken does not take away the existence of the true oath which is still binding. Moreover, the
Queen still swore to maintain and protect the laws of God and protect our property.
Then the Crown spoke for 45 minutes or so. His argument simply was stating his support for the trial judge. He claimed
that a "person" must be taken for its general meaning not its legal meaning, with no authorities or law to support him.
He claimed that the 'new words' in the Coronation Oath compelled the Queen to govern according to the laws of Canada
including the ITA, as Judge Sinclair had ruled, and then argued the merits of the case that I had not filed as required.
That was it. Clarke Burnett had absolutely no law to support his position. None. I told the judge I was somewhat insulted
that the Crown would have nothing to back him up.
Everyone at court witnessed the puny little written argument filed by the Crown, to my 250 pages of law and 5 huge Books
of Authorities to back me up on every point I have made in this case. No one could believe the Crown could respond with,
well basically nothing!
My position - either the Crown really has nothing and doesn't know the issues - or he has been told not to bother putting
any effort into the case because the judiciary is already compromised and has been told to screw us anyway. Or both.
This is certainly realistic in the context of Judge Hogan admitted to Nelson here last year that no judge is going to rule that the
ITA is invalid! And Judge Sinclair's decision in my case where he stated that at least 2 other people interfered with the
independence of the judiciary by ordering him to terminate this case.
Speaking of this - interesting how the Crown did not even address this issue. It is an admitted constitutional violation
stated on the record and in the transcripts by the trial judge. Yet the Crown did not even mention it. I pointed this out
to the judge in final submissions and that this constituted the Crown's admission that I was right on this point and the
charges should be quashed for want of jurisdiction, on all grounds I have put forth.
Time was a premium and my presentation was rushed again - much of the authorities I wanted to show the judge never
got on the record as a result and I told him this. He tried to put the blame on me claiming I estimated 2 days for the
hearing - as if no lawyer has ever erred on such a question. I'm not good at estimating time and it simply required that a
full day should have been set aside to hear me. However, the judge should not have rushed this case, which I told him
would be the most important case he ever rules upon.
So now we wait. A date was set for Monday April 26. There is no guarantee that the judgment will be out this day, only
that I have to appear and if there is no judgment yet, than bail will be continued. Yup, I have to continue, as I have for
most of my life, to keep the peace and be of good behaviour. Interesting I raised this issue at the last hearing when the
Crown, Clarke Burnett had to leave for a family emergency and a substitute lawyer took his place, and Judge Verhoeven
told me he couldn't do anything about this bail issue. Now the Crown raises it yesterday, and suddenly Verhoeven is only
too glad to assist him.
Anyway, more interesting times are a' comin'. It is my belief that the judge will rule on all the issues. Whether he upholds
the law and my Constitutional Challenge I filed this time around, is speculative of course. We all know the corrupt nature of
the judiciary. BTW, I noticed a distinct look of disapproval when I mentioned to the judge that I knew he was formerly a QC,
or Queen's Counsel, meaning he was 'learned in the law'. This means he knows the Coronation Oath principles and must
uphold them. He obviously wondered not only how I learned this, but realized that I had done some homework on this guy
prior to court. He was likely wondering what else I know about him too.
Success in this case on any grounds, means the charges are to be quashed and the failing to appear appeal will be successful.
If on the issue of the definition of "person" - then the Crown's case fails as there is no evidence on this essential element of the offence.
This also requires that being a "person" is voluntary - meaning true voluntary taxation as our law has always so been.
As with every statute except the Criminal Code.
If on the issue of the Coronation Oath - it means that all statutes cannot contradict God's laws. Any statute that does, as was
admitted as being a principle of our law by Blackstone, Broom, Coke and others, is of no force and effect.
The appeal judge must also decide on Judge Sinclair's refusal to provide his oaths as I demanded. Success means we will all,
at least once, be able to exercise our rights to demand production of these oaths. Once they have been provided on the record,
I'm not sure it is necessary to permit it to be produced every court appearance. But other issues may remain if the judge's
understanding of the nature and operation of these oaths is put into question.
Again, thanks to everyone who came out.
in freedom I remain,
David-Kevin: Lindsay
PS
The costs for this case have been, as can be expected, quite substantial.
Donations at this time to help with these costs for this case would be greatly appreciated! Thank you.
Suite 432 113-437 Martin St. Penticon, B.C. V2A 5L1. (cash is best as I don't have a bank account!)
R v Lindsay hearing appeal - addendum
From: Dave Lindsay (dklfree@gmail.com)
Sent: Wed 3/31/10 8:30 AM
Hi. I forgot to mention my apprecation to all those who called and emailed me with their support. The wonderful comments
and support has been incredibly inspirational. I was unable this time to respond to every email because of the
volume and time preparing for court, so I would really like to take this opportunity to say how much I really appreciated
the support from everyone around the country.
And a special thanks to all those who have assisted me to prepare for court - locally and around the country. The
transportation friends have provided, the assistance before, during and after court, research and other areas without which
I could not be doing my successful efforts.
Thanks.
David
--------
Re: Rev Scam v Lindsay hearing appeal - updates?
From: Jack P... (xxxxx@persona.ca)
Sent: Wed 3/31/10 11:17 AM
Thanks Dave for this up date.
I wanted to be there. Yet, I got caught up in trading my labor, for bankster debt dollars.
I was actually hoping to be there with a hidden camera to record the procceedings. Put it on uTube. (Yuk, yuk.)
Then as I research this idea. I quickly discovered how serious these Crown Agents are to cover up the fraud that they are committing.
Then I thought that perhaps it might compromise your presentation and irrefutable evidence that you have brought forward.
I tend to agree with you that the Crown Liars are so pathetic that they really expect the Judge to cover their sorry backsides.
The only hiccup is that you have given the judicary a summary judgement position. Verhoven can simply ignore, all the facts.
I have seen these supposed impartial DE FACTO COMMERICAL JUDGES do this many times.
I know that this case represents one of the most important issues of the day.
If the people only understood that they have become slaves to a protection racket of robbery, deciet and fraud created by the robber barons.
Anyway, I put a small donation, into a envelope for you this morning.
And I have forwared this response to many in my address book.
Warmest regards,
Jack P...
Osoyoos, B.C.
ps. If you are reading this. Please throw a little support Dave's way.........He deserves it!............Thanks
(His address is to found below.)
pps. While most flail away in the branches..................Only a few cut at the roots.
Terrifying Video: "I Don't Need a Warrant, Ma'am, Under Federal Law"
By Rob Kall (about the author) Page 1 of 1 page(s)
opednews.com Permalink
For OpEdNews: Rob Kall - Writer
Six law officers enter and search a woman's Bakersfield CA home without a warrant, saying federal law allows it. The action starts about 45 seconds into the video. Try not to be outraged.
All across America, law officers are grabbing powers they never had before, that are not theirs to grab-- bullying, arresting, abusing citizens. At least this woman video taped the perpetrators. If she finds a good lawyer, she should be able to sue.
Update:
Sheriff's department launches internal investigation after deputies enter woman's home
From 17KGET.com:
Attorney H.A. Sala says based on the video evidence, the Sheriff's Department could have a lawsuit on its hands because of the way they forced into the home without any knowledge of the wanted person being in the home. "They have to knock, state a purpose, say they have a warrant and give time for the person to surrender," Sala said.
Sheriff Donny Youngblood confirmed the deputies in the video are from the Kern County Sheriff's Department, but he said he can't comment because an internal affairs investigation is being launched.
Rob Kall is executive editor, publisher and site architect of OpEdNews.com, Host of the Rob Kall Bottom Up Radio Show (WNJC 1360 AM), President of Futurehealth, Inc, (more...)
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Terrifying-Video--I-Don-t-by-Rob-Kall-100404-260.html
EDIT:
Sheriff's department launches internal investigation after deputies enter woman's home
Last Update: 4/01 8:58 pm
Print Story | ShareThis
17 News discovered a youtube video of Kern County Sheriff's Deputies and a bail bonds enforcement officer entering a local woman's home after she told them they couldn't come in without a warrant and her consent. With the evidence she caught on tape, the law seems to be on her side.
"I don't need a warrant," the bondsman said as he appeared to enter on his own into the home from a back door on the youtube video.
There were also sheriff's deputies at the front door. Deputies and bail bond enforcement officials have different laws but a local bail bondsman not affiliate with this case said what happened in this case was against the law.
"If you see the person go in, you can go in," Glenn Pierce, the owner of Gotta Go Bail Bonds said. "But you just can't go in randomly."
The woman who lived at the home told 17 News her name is Star. She said she is in hiding because threats were made against her. She also said deputies and the bail bondsman violated her rights by forcing entry into her home after she stated she was the only one there.
Attorney H.A. Sala says based on the video evidence, the Sheriff's Department could have a lawsuit on its hands because of the way they forced into the home without any knowledge of the wanted person being in the home. "They have to knock, state a purpose, say they have a warrant and give time for the person to surrender," Sala said.
Authorities were looking for Joseph Baker who was arrested for battery on a peace officer in September. They were also looking for a man named Alan Gjurovich because he co-signed on Baker's bail bond which Baker forfeited by not showing up in court. Gjurovich is in hiding but spoke to 17 News by phone. He said the sheriff's department is trying to stop him from filing a lawsuit against the county that could damage county judge and clerks' credibility.
"They're trying to scare us out of town and out of the county," Gjurovich said. "The message I was getting, they were giving us a 48 hour ultimatum--give them what they want on Joe Baker or they will personally come down and arrest me."
Sheriff Donny Youngblood confirmed the deputies in the video are from the Kern County Sheriff's Department, but he said he can't comment because an internal affairs investigation is being launched.
http://www.kget.com/mostpopular/story/Sheriffs-department-launches-internal/V6wT6LFFpke93tb_h6XCLg.cspx
HARVARD
LAW R EVI EW.
VOL. XXVII. DECEMBER, I9I3, Nc. z.
THE EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION II/ REM
TO COMPEL PAYMENT OF A DEBT.
fN a previousa rticlel the jurisdictiono f courtso ver foreignp er-
I ,o.r has been examined. It remains to consider the power of
a court to compel an absent defendant, through jurisdiction over
propertyb elongingt o him, to dischargeh is obligations.
Jurisdiction in rem depends solely on the physical control of
the res by the sovereign exercising jurisdiction.2 A few exceptions
to this general statement are to be sure established; thus where
property is carried into a foreign territory without the coiiperation
or consent of the owner jurisdiction cannot be exercised.3 These
exceptionsh ave no bearing on the generald iscussiona nd will be
no further instanced or considered. The typical example of
jurisdiction in rern is the jurisdiction of the Court of Admiralty
over any vesselw ithin the territorial waters of its sovereign.aB ut
jurisdiction in rem is by no means confined to admiralty jurisdiction.
Although in admiralty the subject of jurisdiction is personified
and made a defendant, this is not necessary to the exercise of
jurisdiction; a sovereign may subject a thing to the jurisdiction
r z6 H,tnv. L. Rav. ry3, z8j.
2 The Belgenland, r 14 U. S. 355 (1885) ; Castrique a' Imrie, L. R. + H. L. +r+ (r8Zo);
Story, Confl. Laws, $ 59u.
3 See e. g. Cockburn, C. J., in the course of the argument in Cammell l. Sewell,
5 H. & N. 728 (186o); Edgerly o. Bush, 8r N. Y. r99 (r88o).
{ The Belgenland, rr4 U. S. SSS (r88S); The Bee, r Ware 336, 3 Fed. Cas. No.
r,rr9 (r836).
TOE HARVARD LAII' REVIE'Y.
of his courts by ,ther forms <-rfp rocess.b For instance, while a
court of equity h's, generally speaking, no juriscli ction in rem
without the aid of st.tute. it ma1' be gi'en by st.tute juriscliction
<iver rights in lanrl; ancl in tirat case it may exercise its juris-
<liction t. <letcrmi'c the title of all rand rvithin the territorv.'.r
.thcrrvise to tleal rvith the lantr,z although the claimants are
abroatl. ,\nrl this power is .ot crinfinetl tr juriscriction over land. 'I'he
courts of a sovereign may a.lso be emlioiverecl to determine
thc t i t l e to chattels,8.r t. f,recLrs. liens'r scttle acco'nts,e
.lth.ugh the rxvner of the chattcl or the trustce of the estate is
abrrail. The jurisdiction in rczad epenclsu pon control of the thing
at the tirne litigirti.n is bcgun. If thc juris<lictirn is once exercised
over a thing rvithin the territ'r1' the subsccluent removal of the
thing out of the territ.ry pencli'g the iitigation cl.es not or.rst the
c.urt of juristliction,l0 althor.rghi f a.vthi'g clsc is substituted for
the thing, as for instance if the thing, r,vhether movable or imm.'"'.
ble, is taken out .f the c.urt upon rI boncl being substituted
in its place, the jtrrsicliction over thc thing ceases .ncl cannot
aftcrrvards be cxerciscd unless it is again brought within the
p()wcr of the court on snbscquent proccerciings.ll
_______________________________________________________________
5 I lolmes, ( ' . J. , in' fyl t r a. ( 'our t of l {cgist rat ion, r75 Nlass.i r , 76, .S.5 N. D. grz
( rqoo).
6 A r n r l t r , . ( l r i g g s , r 3 4U. S . 3 r 6 ( r g q o ) ; Orms b y a .Ot tmi r n , gl.r5e d . 4 g z , z qC.C. A .
0.; (r8e8); McLaughlin z'. Mc(.rory, 55 Ark. 44:, r8 S. \I. fOz (rS9r);
'Lotiza
a.
Suprer iort l our t ,8.5 ( lal . r r , z4pac.7o7 ( r89o) ; I lol lcnbi r t :ka . poston,34 Ind. A14r.
43t , 73 N. E. r6: ( rqo.5) ; [ , -clchr r .l l txr l rcr , r rq ] [ass. sz ( r ,S;s) ; Shor l 2, .( _,al r l rvel l ,
r.55 llass. q7, z8 N. I i ) . rr:4 (r89r); Kirlcl r. N. H..Irlction Co., 7.2 N. II. 27.3,.56
At l . 465 ( roor ) ; I lar t ly z' .I l t 'at1. ,8 4 fcx. .56: , rq S. W. 7 775,. 3r, \m. St . Rcp. t io ( rEqz) . lLeconvc-vl tnceL:: L' l robe i r . I I l ryrvar r l ,L r l , ' la. rgo ( r l i6q) . [ )or t i t i r r . r , \Vil]i"-r r .
\ \ : i l l iams ,z z r 111. .54r ,7)7, ' . F) .92s (19o6) . Injunc i i , ,ni rgains tt . rns fer : Tomson u.
Tt tmson,3i N. . I . I . ,c1. .16(4r l l7g) Foreckrsure: Cook 2, . \ \ :eiglel - ,6g N. J. Iiq.4l3o,
.59A t l . ro:9 ( roos) . Spcci l i r :p cr formance: ( i lem a. ( i rvcn, ro6 \ .a. r4.5,5.5S . t i . ( rqo7) . I islahl ishmc. t 5( r7 of r^rst : I ) . r ter L. & \ \ ' . ( i r . r . fJaskin.4r t , 'e, r . -3: .3( r s, )o) ;
I )enni .gt .n a. Smi th, 69 l , i .d. rgg ( rgg5) ; Reevcsr , . pierce,6 4 Kan. .5o.2, 67 I ,urc.r rog
( r o o 2 ) .
E \\:ilson rr. (lrirham,4 Wash. (t. (.. 5J,.1o Iicd. (las. No. r7, go4 (rg:r) (box); Loaiza
t , . S r r p e r i . r ( ' r . r t , 8 . 5 ( ' i r l . r r , : 4 p a c . 7 o 7 ( r n . n e y ) ( r g g o()i ;a s s e r t r . S t r . n g , 3 S l f o r r t .
tS, qS I rar ' .4r17( t . rst i . st .ck) ( rgog) ; . [ i rms.n
z,..f.ms.n,3r N.J. Ec1.46q(m.ney)
(IS7g); \\'rrrrl u. Arrt:tlrnd., Ifupk. .213, r4 Am. Dec. 543 (tleed) (rgu4); Monroe o.
I)ouglas, 4 Sandf. (lh. rz6 (cstatt:) (r546).
e Osrv:rld r. Kampmann, zS l;ccl. S6 (13g6).
]:
The Rio Grant lc, . :3 \ t r -al l .r t ' . S. ) .1.5Sz, 3 L. cd. r5g (1874) ; Wilsonr. Graham,
4Wash. ( ' . C. .53, .3oF ed.C as .N o. r7,8o4 ( rSur ) .
r r Shiel r l s2 , .C , r l r .munr.; ; [ ' . S. r r , l r r,Seq/.
The Peasants are revolting
The Landless Peasant Party is a new political party representing the views and aspirations of Landless Peasants in the UK.
The UK is not our nation , we do not own it, the land of the nation is not held for our benefit nor on our behalf.
From the day we are born we are Peasants, with no right to the very essence of our nation.
Yet we are extolled to work, pay tax, fight and if necessary die to defend it.
We are liable for the debts of our nation, we are the mass of people from whom business extracts its profits.
We live in the 24 million homes on 7% of the land, unable to live by our own means.
We have little choice but to take part in economic slavery.
Our basic need for shelter must be provided by market forces supplying our homes to us for as much profit as the market can bear. These homes are not built for you to “live” in ,they are built for you to sleep in after work. They have no means to make energy, there is little or no facility to grow your food. Instead our food is flown in from around the world, manufactured on an industrial scale using the cheap labour of other Peasants in other lands. Our energy is suppllied by hugely profitable multinationals at great expense to us and the Earth. Even the supply of water makes vast profits. Our lives have been reduced to a collection of utility bills and what we do to earn money.
We are educated to take part not to be self reliant, there are no classes in building your home, growing your food, dealing with your waste, making your own energy. Even though these things can be done simply and effectively. We are kept like livestock, wholly dependent on our owners supplying our needs. Our laws and institutions are run by and for the few families who do own the land. 6000 people own 70% of all the land in our nation. Until recently (1914) these were the only people allowed to vote, wield power or hold office.
Our “Democracy” allows us to have a representative in the house of commons, we are still called commoners, we are still Peasants, we might as well be pets. The economy is held up as the pivotal centerpiece of our lives. The economy must grow and we must consume or calamity will befall us, because without its support our lives as Peasants will become all to apparent. What If the banks did fail and business collapsed, what will happen to us?
We will starve like Peasants always have, we will be made to labour for the Lords, as we always have, we will live on the margins of the Land, while those who took it for themselves emerge again as our masters.
To remedy these iniquities Peasants must escape the treadmill of work ,tax and exploitation. It is for this purpose that the LPP exists. To take back the land, to give people the right to live on and from it. To remove the need to “work” for our lives and replace it with a right to have a life. A life where we look after ourselves , provide for ourselves and have no need of masters Lords or owners.
http://landlesspeasants.org/
Any time the government 'gives' you something they have to 'steal' it
from someone else. Hence thousands of new IRS to do the stealing.
That gets to the crux of the matter. When the state TAKES BY FORCE from someone, then the state is immoral.
They take by force even though the claim the income tax is voluntary. Ha! That's rich.
An executive order amending the bill? An outrage! It's not constitutional!
Moral problem: You have a right to life and liberty. NOT medical care.
Any time the government 'gives' you something they have to 'steal' it
from someone else. Hence thousands of new IRS to do the stealing.
Devvy Kid nails it. The IRS is not an agency of the US Government. It's the brute-force arm of the Federal Reserve and is international in nature.
America is now a land of lies. Not laws.
LEARN THE L.E.G.A.L.E.S.E. language and how the lawmakers DUPE you, the humans in B.E.L.I.E.V.I.N.G. that you have to pay income taxes !! ONLY c.o.r.p.s.e.s. aka corporation do -- and are you, the human, a CORPORATION ???
go to Eldon Warman's site and get educated:
http://www.detaxcanada.org -- pertains to both the corporations called "USA" and "Canada"
Now the IRS will grow in size so they can seize more money from people who don't go along with the government tyranny--forced 'health care.'
Get ready for the nanny state to tax people based on 'health.' Will the overweight pay extra taxes until they're thin? Smokers pay more? Will chefs who put salt on their dishes get fined? Oh--they're already talking about that in New York!
Everyone needs to read '1984' again!
Joe Stack SHOULD HAVE TAKEN OUT MORE AGENTS @ THE_IRS
IRS Goes After Man For 4-Cent Tax Bill
The IRS (Internal Revenue Service) can be heartless when trying to collect taxes as many taxpayers know. If you owe them money they will relentlessly pursue you, at home or at your place of business.
Federal IRS agents recently tracked down a car wash owner in Sacramento California, who owed back taxes. Agents actually visited his place of business to present the bill. The individual was overdue on his taxes by four cents. Keep in mind that the IRS charges penalties and interest even before the person is aware of the mistake. Fortunately, not much interest and penalties can accrue on this amount. Or can it? The total bill came to over $200.
Aaron Zeff, the car wash owner will be celebrating the event by offering 4 cent car washes on April 15th. This is the well known deadline for filing taxes. He asked the agents how much money was wasted in collecting this debt. The agents had no response.
Mr. Zeff claimed that he received no warning on the taxes that were owed for over four years. However, he did take the whole incident in stride. Mr. Zeff owns other business and might very well be checking, if he is up to date on his taxes with these businesses.
http://www.ecanadanow.com/curiosity/2010/03/18/irs-goes-after-man-for-4-cent-tax-bill/
RE:
The People Spoke and CAFR1 Listened
Inbox X
ARCHIVED AT - http://CAFR1.com/Trailer.html
Walter is not telling you everything.
Actually he is telling you nothing.
Here is the real McCoy....
One may also ask:
How are these banks financing the hundreds of trillions in derivatives floating around out there?
What are they holding as assets on their books to float these bets on the derivative exchange?
I propose that the banks are holding all original blue ink signed stock certificates, mortgages, credit card contracts, loans and even government treaties as bearer bonds or bearer instruments.
Upon these legal instruments, they have placed their bets.
How else would a little known company in the U.S. (a derivative of the federal reserve) called DTCC claim right on their home site, as holding in excess of $21,000,000,000,000.00 in assets ????????????????
http://www.dtcc.com/
http://ming.tv/flemming2.php/__show_...010-000923.htm
http://ming.tv/flemming2.php/__show_...010-000999.htm
http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/dtc2003...sfer030603.txt
http://theporch.net/kblog/archives/2...26990736127330
I was a little off...
DTCC's depository provides custody and asset servicing for 3.5 million securities issues from the United States and 110 other countries and territories, valued at $28 trillion. In 2008, DTCC settled more than $1.88 quadrillion in securities transactions.
http://www.dtcc.com/about/business/
Sorry about that I was waaaayyyyy off...
DTCC's subsidiary, The Depository Trust Company (DTC), established in 1973, was created to reduce costs and provide clearing and settlement efficiencies by immobilizing securities and making "book-entry" changes to ownership of the securities. DTC provides securities movements for NSCC's net settlements, and settlement for institutional trades (which typically involve money and securities transfers between custodian banks and broker/dealers), as well as money market instruments.
In 2009, DTC settled transactions worth more than $299 trillion, and processed 299.5 million book-entry deliveries. In addition to settlement services, DTC brings efficiency to the securities industry by retaining custody of more than 3.5 million securities issues worth almost $34 trillion, including securities issued in the US and more than 120 foreign countries and territories.
http://www.dtcc.com/about/subs/dtc.php
"He who physically holds the original blue ink signed legal instrument is the registered legal title holder-in-due-course owner of everything listed on the said instrument."
And thats the way its been for well over a 1000 years.
This is the "stuff" that David Icke, Alex Jones, Jeff Rense, etc will not touch with a mile long pole.
And neither will Walter.
No balls eh.
JackieG
(Jackie G = Jack Harper -- kissin`cousin of Canada`s Prime Minister Stephen Harper)
fwd: Paul Fromm to speak in Regina March 11, 2010
The Canadian Association for Free Expression Presents
Paul Fromm
Director, Canadian Association for Free Expression
Stripped of his Ontario teaching certificate for politically incorrect views
Who Invented “Political Correctness” & How We Can Use Pride & Facts to Defeat It
REGINA. Thursday, March 11, 2020. Ramada Inn, (Broad & Victoria Streets) Cossack Room. 8:00 p.m.
* Sorry, I can't attend. Please send me the audiotape of the Mr. Fromm's talk. $6.00
* I'd also like to assist with the cost of this meeting. Here is my donation of $_______.
Name:____________________________________Address:__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
C-FAR, P.O. Box 332, Rexdale, ON., M9W 5L3, Canada
On March 10, 11 & 12, Douglas Christie will be appearing at the Provincial Court in Regina in defence of Terry Tremaine charged under Sec. 319 (1):
Public Incitement of hatred. Court opens at 9:30 A.M.
ARCHIVED AT - http://CAFR1.com/Trailer.html
__________________________________________
The People Spoke and CAFR1 Listened
by Walter Burien
03/06/10
Well, the People Spoke and CAFR1 listened and followed their recommendations..
The three minute trailer that CAFR1 released for "The Only Game in Town - The Way Our Government Can Be" I was told by many was to short and not adequate to get the point across. So, today I released a new trailer on YouTube that can be viewed at the following link:
This is so members can ask each other about tax questions..ex..
www.givemeliberty.org/research_documents.htm
Dear Fellow Conservative, I hope you join me in my firm conviction that now is the time to fight back against the out of control Federal Reserve and continued Wall Street plundering of our tax dollars. The threat isn't hard to see -- just look all around us. Our constitutional principles and freedoms are being assaulted at every turn. More bailouts, trillion dollar "stimulus" plans, huge new debt burdens for our children, simply printing money to cover our failed policies -- I could go on and on. You and I both know that President Obama is going to keep going and going unless someone puts a stop to the madness. But the good news is there is a way to fight back. And that fight starts today -- by "Auditing the Fed" and showing the American people just how the Fed has abused its power, debauched the dollar, and helped strangle our economy. Because I know you are a friend in Liberty, I wanted you to be among the first people contacted by Campaign for Liberty for the vital fight against the out of control Federal Reserve. Please read the email below from my friend and Campaign for Liberty's President, John Tate. John isn't just a friend of mine. He's also a patriot with years of experience getting things done in politics. Now he's agreed to take up the fight in a way I cannot -- by leading the fight for Liberty on the outside, while I do battle in the halls of Congress. I trust you'll find this battle to expose the out of control Fed worth your support. For Liberty, Congressman Ron Paul |
Dear Patriot, Trillions of dollars have been stolen from U.S. taxpayers. You and I, right now, are seeing the worst plundering of a country's wealth in the history of civilization, led by an out of control Federal Reserve. But you and I together CAN put a stop to it all. With your help (including completing the petition to your Representative and Senators) today, Ron Paul and Campaign for Liberty are ready to take the battle straight to the heart of the problem - the Federal Reserve itself. Last year, we came close to enacting a full Audit of the Fed. This year, with more Fed opponents put in office and the economy still reeling, we have our best chance ever. But you must act today. Just think about the scope of the problem for a minute. The massive, outrageous amount of dollars committed to the economic bailouts in recent months totals: More than the socialist New Deal... More than the entire Iraq debacle... More than the 1980's savings and loan mess... More than the Korean War... COMBINED. Where will it all end? It's time you and I put a stop to an out of control Federal Reserve. And Ron Paul has a bill before Congress to do just that. That's why it's vital you fill out your personal "Audit the Fed" petition in support of Congressman Paul's bill. This bill, introduced in the House by Congressman Ron Paul and in the Senate by Senator Rand Paul, will finally pull the lid off the FED and expose it's out of control power grabs. Now is the time to make sure your Representative and Senators feel the heat to support the Audit the Fed bill! If you and I don't act today, I'm afraid this crisis will end with the economic ruin of every man, woman, and child in the United States. Today, nearly 14 TRILLION in taxpayer dollars in bailouts and loans have been agreed to by Congress, the Bush and Obama Treasury Departments, and the out of control Fed. So is it really any wonder more and more folks are starting to realize the Washington, D.C. establishment is hurtling us toward complete economic disaster? Whether it's watching a phony "stimulus" package get rammed into law or seeing Congress pass a $700 BILLION bank "bailout," the American people are agitated and increasingly angry. You saw the result of that anger in the Tea Parties last year and then in the November elections. Statist, pro-Fed politicians were tossed out of office left and right! That means it's a perfect time to unleash the pressure of MILLIONS of outraged Americans on the out of control Fed today! So please agree to complete your petition urging your Representative and Senators to cosponsor and seek roll call votes on Ron Paul's Audit the Fed Bill - the first step toward ENDING THE FEDERAL RESERVE once and for all! As I know you're aware, the Federal Reserve is shrouded in secrecy. Its meetings are off-limits to the public. Its inner-workings are off-limits to the public. Fed leaders know coming clean with Congress and the American people on how they create money out of thin air would result in an anti-Fed firestorm. So can you imagine the impact of a full-scale audit? You and I will finally be able to show the American people that the Federal Reserve System leads to: *** Constant economic crises - the housing crisis and the resulting chaos is just one example of an economic bubble created by centrally-planned interest rates and money manipulation; *** The destruction of the middle class - as fuel, food, housing, medical care and education costs soar, everyone who is NOT on the government dole is forced to make do with less as the value of their money slowly decreases; *** Currency destruction - history shows us that riots, violence, and full-scale police states can result when people finally realize fiat money isn't worth the paper it's printed on and REFUSE to accept it. And unless you and I do end the madness in Washington, D.C., we may be closer than we'd like to think to learning that history lesson firsthand, right here on the streets of our towns and cities. That's why your commitment to helping pass the Audit the Fed Bill - and helping Campaign for Liberty fight this battle - is so vital. Just a few years ago, there was no chance of passing any legislation like Ron Paul's Audit the Fed Bill. So I guess there has been one "CHANGE." You see, with the piling up of trillions of dollars in out of control "bailouts" of Wall Street and international bankers, even many politicians in Washington, D.C. want to show you they're "being responsible". What better way for Congress to do this than by auditing the Federal Reserve to account for the trillions stolen from U.S. taxpayers? More and more Congressmen are already feeling the pressure and are signing up to support this bill. I've even received word Audit the Fed could move in the coming weeks in the U.S. House. When that happens, you and I must be ready to fight. There will be many battles you and I must wage over the coming months to take back our country. But this one is set to rage in Congress in just a few short weeks. And, it's both a bill we CAN pass and one that is vital to exposing the massive corruption and downright evil at the Federal Reserve. You see, after regulating, taxing, spending, borrowing, and printing us into what looks like the worst recession in decades, establishment politicians and power brokers are assuring us they're working hard to "fix" our economic woes. What is their solution? You guessed it. More of the same! I'm convinced that if you and others will insist on Congress passing Audit the Fed, the votes will be there. Then the question is whether Barack Obama will sign it. But here's the thing: even if Ron Paul's Audit the Fed Bill is vetoed by Obama, just forcing him to do it is a win/win situation. Can you imagine how it will look in the 2012 election when you and I tell the American people President Obama refused to even LOOK for the trillions of dollars stolen from the taxpayers? Now, we just need to show Congress the American people demand action on Ron Paul's Audit the Fed Bill. Here's how we plan to do that. First, we're already busy contacting up to five million activists nationwide through mail, phones, and email to generate petitions to the U.S. Congress demanding action on Ron Paul's "Audit the Fed" Bill. But that's just the beginning. We'll work the talk radio stations and grant local media interviews to further turn up the pressure on Congress. And a few days before the vote, if we have the resources, we'd also like to run hard-hitting targeted radio, TV, and newspaper ads. This entire program is designed to send this one, CLEAR message to Congress - Any politician who votes against the Federal Reserve Audit should look for another job. But such a massive effort won't be easy - or cheap. So, in addition to your signed petitions, I also hope you'll agree to chip in a contribution of $10 to Campaign for Liberty. If we don't take action, the America we see in just a few years could look far worse than even the one we see today. Can I count on you to join the fight to AUDIT THE FED by filling out the Petition and chipping in a quick $10 contribution right now? In Liberty, John Tate President P.S. Please complete your petition DEMANDING your Representative and Senators cosponsor and seek roll call votes on the Audit the Fed Bill TODAY! With federal spending at record levels, and TRILLIONS of new dollars flying off the printing presses, it's never been more important the Federal Reserve's abuses are exposed to the American people once and for all. So along with your signed petition, please chip in a contribution of $10, $25, or even $50, to Campaign for Liberty TODAY! |
The first National Tea Party Convention!!!
http://www.nationalteapartyconvention.com/home.aspx
"The truth is that Americans are still losing jobs, the Fed
is still inflating, and more regulations are in the works
that will prevent jobs and productivity from coming back.....
The Federal Reserve is a government-sanctioned banking cartel
that has held far too much power
for far too long and is in the end stages
of running the dollar into the ground,
and our economy along with it."
Ron Paul
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul634.html
According To The Annual "Index On Economic Freedom,"
produced by
The Heritage Foundation,
the United States now ranks 8th,
just behind Canada.
That's a drop of two full points since last year, and the largest drop of all nations -
in overall economic freedom.
Socialism does not work.
It robs the fruits of labor from one citizen to fill the pockets of another.
It kills incentive.
It demoralizes industrious people.
And it leads to misery.
Socialism combined with Fascist Corporatism
(as in the current trend toward Public/Private Partnerships)
creates government-sanctioned monopolies,
giving the corporations the reins of power over government
at the expense of the people.
That is the model America has now chosen to follow.
The United States is on a path to destruction.
In one year it's dropped two more points toward totalitarianism.
The people feel the pain and are furious about it.
And yet, the Obama Administration still thinks the anger and protests are just false products of the Republicans and Fox News.
Astonishing.
See the complete Economic Freedom Index here.
by Tom DeWeese is president of the American Policy Center
and Editor of The DeWeese Report ,
70 Main Street, Suite 23,
Warrenton Virginia.
(540) 341-8911
E-Mail: ampolicycenter@hotmail.com
Website: www.americanpolicy.org
http://www.newswithviews.com/DeWeese/tom159.htm
More nwo neofascism?
http://america-hijacked.com/2010/02/07/will-obama-opt-for-war-on-iran/
THE POWER ELITE AND THE SECRET NAZI PLAN
http://www.newswithviews.com/Cuddy/dennis174.htm
FYS. Don't forget the truth......
http://www.reformation.org/adolf-hitler.html
E.g.,
Late Night Listening: Alex Jones Interviews Naomi Wolf -
"Lord I have no plans of my own save those you shall reveal to me. ... beginning of the end for the power elite (neocons, globalists, etc. ...
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/11129
American Tent Cities Proliferate as Second Great Depression ...
You are witnessing the wealthy elite buying up everything in site
for ... Yes, a Nazi leaning bozo who, despite being here for 40 years,
... and Arnold admits he has plans as a global leader. ....
"This has been a dirty little secret, ... like the power of hope
and the heretofore untapped power of ...
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/110817
Celente: The Revolution is Coming | Ron Paul 2012 | Campaign for ...
The elite at the very top ... the financiers . ... The facist/nazi/socialist/communist labels are so frequently tossed ... Lousy odds for them, unless they have a sly and redundant plan to do us ... In other words, they had the power to make us or break us. .....
Bill Moyers: The Secret Government ...
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/103326
The Devaluation of the Dollar -
Mr. Glenn Beck's Presentation -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9_d4fm3MYM
An Open Letter to the US House of Representatives -
Submit the information below to sign the petition and join the Audit the Fed coalition. Copies will be sent to your representatives in Congress:
http://www.auditthefed.com/
We Want America Back -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeYscnFpEyA
God Bless us
www.ronpaullibrary.org/topic.php
www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/wake_up_america.html
www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/
www.bullnotbull.com/bull/index.php
http://dnn501.startbutton.com/Portals/23/Skins/taxfree/images/skin_03.png); background-repeat: repeat-y;">
http://dnn501.startbutton.com/Portals/23/Skins/taxfree/images/skin_02.png); height: 34px;"> Home| Action Plan| Educate!| Prepare Yourselves!| Links| Contact Us | ||
|
Is taxation legal? Necessary? Watch and decide...
James Duane explains why innocent people should never
talk to the police....
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4097602514885833865&hl=en
http://www.detaxcanada.org/
www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php
www.republicmagazine.com/magazines/issue10/#/2/
America Freedom to Fascism -
As We Slept somebody stole America.
www.maxexchange.com/ybj/chapter_1.htm
Communism's True Believers Won't Give Up -
http://www.henrymakow.com/communisms_useful_idiots_wont.html
Where all the money goes....
www.brasschecktv.com/page/512.html
Or, ever been audited? Share your nightmare here.
Regarding OBAMA that he is NOT "NATURAL BORN" and therefore NOT constitutionally QUALIFIED to be PRESIDENT-
www.oilforimmigration.org/facts/
Don't Talk to the Police" by Professor James Duane - 27:25 -
bolshevikz gov. 666clownz - ? -
May 21, 2008 -
Ex..
James Duane explains why innocent people should never
talk to the police....
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4097602514885833865&hl=en
Ex..
Obama Deficit Roars past Bush 8-year Total in Just 38 Days -
10:14 am CST - February 27, 2009
Posted under The Scoop
(WASHINGTON, DC) - President Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats
today surpassed the eight-year federal deficit total of the Bush Administration
in just a little more than one month after taking control
of all three branches of the federal government.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=36322330
Army slams door on Obama details
Lt. Col. Lakin hearing: 'Items pertaining to president's credentials are not relevant'
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=161961
http://www.eutimes.net/?s=9%2F11
http://www.texemarrs.com/
Useful PM related sites:
http://www.24hgold.com/
http://www.jsmineset.com/
http://www.marketwatch.com/
http://www.mineweb.com/
http://www.gold-eagle.com/
http://www.kitco.com/
http://www.usagold.com/
http://www.usagold.com/amk/usagoldmarketupdate.html
http://www.GoldSeek.com/
http://www.GoldReview.com/
http://www.capitalupdates.com/
http://www.dailyreckoning.com/
http://www.goldenbar.com/
http://www.silver-investor.com/
http://www.thebulliondesk.com/
http://www.sharelynx.com/
http://www.mininglife.com/
http://www.financialsense.com/
http://www.fgmr.com/
http://www.goldensextant.com/
http://www.goldismoney.info/index.html
http://www.howestreet.com/
http://www.depression2.tv/
http://www.un-debt.net/
http://www.minersmanual.com/minernews.html
http://www.a1-guide-to-gold-investments.com/euro-vs-dollar.html
http://www.goldcolony.com/
http://www.miningstocks.com/
http://www.mineralstox.com/
http://www.freemarketnews.com/
http://www.321gold.com/
http://www.silverseek.com/
http://www.investmentrarities.com/
http://www.kereport.com/ (Korelin Business Report -- audio)
http://www.plata.com.mx/plata/home.htm (in Spanish)
http://www.plata.com.mx/plata/plata/english.htm (in English)
http://www.resourceinvestor.com/
http://www.miningmx.com/
http://www.prudentbear.com/
http://www.dollarcollapse.com/
http://www.kitcocasey.com/
http://000999.forumactif.com/
http://www.golddrivers.com/
http://www.goldpennystocks.com/
http://www.oroyfinanzas.com/
http://www.goldcore.com/
http://coininfo.com/
http://www.insidegold.com/
http://www.goldmau.com/
http://www.milesfranklin.com/
http://www.silverminers.com/
http://www.gold-speculator.com/
http://bullion.nwtmint.com/
http://www.preciousmetalsmonthly.com/
http://www.silverstockreport.com/
http://www.longwavegroup.com/
http://theaureport.com/
Subscription sites:
http://www.lemetropolecafe.com/
http://www.marketforceanalysis.com/
http://www.hsletter.com/
http://www.interventionalanalysis.com/
http://www.investmentindicators.com/
http://www.caseyresearch.com/
http://www.deepcaster.com/
http://www.vrtrader.net/
Eagle Ranch discussion site:
http://os2eagle.net/SSL/phpentry.php
Ted Butler silver commentary archive:
http://www.investmentrarities.com/
Conspiracy World: A Truthteller's Compendium of Eye-Opening Revelations and Forbidden Knowledge
How The Khazar Rothschilds Devoured Europe
The Criminal Rothschilds - Vid
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |