[Masthead] Fair ~ 80°F  
High: 95°F ~ Low: 72°F
Friday, Aug. 22, 2014

Getting the most from this T-G blog.

Posted Thursday, June 7, 2012, at 6:26 AM

Based on a few comments I have had recently, I thought it might be good to remind everyone that all you see on the main "Home" page is the very last blog topic post that we writers have started.

It does not mean that our other entries have disappeared or that they are not being discussed by your fellow readers.

Just click on any of the bloggers names and you will see five of their most recent entries on the right hand column under "hot topics". (below our name/bio and an advertisement)

These should be in the order of those entries just made or those just commented upon by a reader or the writer. If you are looking for a topic that has been up for a little while, click on "Archives" right under our lovely faces.

That will bring you to a list of blog entries in chronological order all the way back to our start with the T-G blog. If you comment on an older subject, that brings it up to the top of "hot topics" so others will know there was new activity.


Comments
Showing comments in chronological order
[Show most recent comments first]

Why would the editor or publisher or the newsroom janitor not contact someone in the TN Department of Transportation and ask hem WHY the HELL they striped the asphalt off US 231 North and made it a single lane highway on the very same weekend as the Bonnaroo Festival? US 231 was designated as an alternate route to Chattanooga from Murfreesboro around the Bonnaroo Traveling routes of I-24 and 41.

Why in God's name would the idiots in charge of the TN DOT wait until the weekend of the Bonneroo Festival to resurface North US 231 after declaring it an alternate route for people not wanting to go to the Bonnaroo.

Why would the publisher print a color photo of the alternate route in Bedford County when the DOT has destroyed the highway during the exact same weekend without making some kind of an attempt to find out why the DOT would do something this STUPID! This is something like what King Obama or Eric Holder would do to show their intelligence.

Does the TN DOT hate Bedford County that much that it wanted to send thousands of travelers to Shelbyville by way of a one lane Highway.

I guess it was more important to fraudulently use up the money in the highway budget on a highway that was perfectly good than to keep the highway open as a two lane divided highway for an alternate route.

I just don't understand why a newspaper man or woman wouldn't be on top of that story to help their readers understand what was going on in the minds of the DOT Officials.

Our leaders are going NUTS! They are ALL doing Stupid things. There can be no wonder why our Country is going to hell.

-- Posted by Unique-Lies on Thu, Jun 7, 2012, at 12:18 PM

My first reaction to your comment, Unique-Lies, was that the "alternate route" really doesn't create that much additional traffic through Shelbyville, and so it really wouldn't affect or be affected by the paving project one way or another. I confirmed that with B.J. Doughty, a spokesperson for TDOT, and here's what she e-mailed me:

"We have been closely monitoring both interstate and detour route traffic -- and were prepared to halt the work in Shelbyville if we were seeing more than normal volumes/back-up.

"By nature, daytime paving operations are going to cause some congestion. It's not ideal to have that work going on at the same time as Bonnaroo, but we felt we had a great traffic plan this year. I-24 has been free flowing yesterday and all day today. We've seen no traffic jams anywhere around the festival site.

"Our project supervisor in Shelbyville will continue to keep us posted on the situation there so that we can take action if necessary."

That's the end of the quote from TDOT.

As for the paving itself, from everything I've seen, it's standard procedure. The state paves and repaves highways, to try to head off damage, and occasionally there's enough built-up pavement that some of it needs to be scraped away before you apply a new layer. You use the term "fraudulent," but paving is part of what the transportation department is supposed to be doing. There would be a lot more complaints if they didn't re-pave and that resulted in potholes on a heavily-traveled route like 231.

I'm not privy to how they schedule what segments to do when, or how often, but I haven't seen any evidence that the work taking place on 231 is outside the norm.

-- Posted by jcarney on Thu, Jun 7, 2012, at 6:03 PM

Thanks John. At first blush it would seem like questionable timing but they seem to be on top of it.

My wife and I were talking a day or two ago about the condition of the road and why it would need repaving, but we certainly did not get out and inspect it up close. And if we complain, they can find ways to make us regret it, so....

There are numerous places around the country I have wondered why roads were being repaved, but I am not an expert, so hopefully they have a good reason.

-- Posted by stevemills on Fri, Jun 8, 2012, at 10:21 AM

I don't know what TDoT does with the milled asphalt, but some states re-use it on secondary highways, and others use it to re-build shoulders. So, in most cases, it doesn't go to waste.

-- Posted by Tyger on Sat, Jun 9, 2012, at 7:36 PM

If they need ideas, I can think of a driveway that would be very appreciative :-)

-- Posted by stevemills on Sun, Jun 10, 2012, at 7:02 AM

Your comment, Steve, reminds me of something else we sometimes get calls about. Of course, neither TDOT nor the local highway department is supposed to be working on private property. But the county highway department does, fairly frequently, push back fence rows if asked to do so by the landowner. The work takes place on the public right-of-way, making it legal, and the reason the highway department is happy to do it is because it improves visibility for drivers at intersections and in curves. But we'll invariably get a call telling us that the highway department is working on so-and-so's property.

-- Posted by jcarney on Mon, Jun 11, 2012, at 8:18 AM

Made me think if I had any fences I needed reworked but I'm just farming deer, turkey and anything else that shows up so.... guess I don't need it.

-- Posted by stevemills on Mon, Jun 11, 2012, at 10:06 AM

jcarney, You Did GOOD! A follow up like that is appreciated by all, even myself, although I just got around to reading it.

-- Posted by Unique-Lies on Fri, Jun 22, 2012, at 10:34 AM

Here is a follow up by Unique-Lies: Of course it is a follow up on National news.

The F & F Gun Smuggling Topic makes no sense.

The Gun Smuggling was started by Pres. Bush. So here is the problem:

There was no problem when it was done by the Bush Administration, so, if it was successful, why did King Obama feel like it needed to be done again during his Administration? Was it not successful after all?

And if it wasn't successful during the Bush Administration, why on earth would King Obama want to try something that was not a success by the Bush Administration.

Now for the exciting part!

King Obama claims he didn't know anything about it! Our home grown Traitor, Eric Holder, claims he didn't know anything about it! So MY QUESTION IS; Well, then who is running our country if our leaders don't know what their employees are doing?

If you remember, The Military leaders had to get permission from King Obama before they could go in and kill, the #1 wanted dead or alive Terrorist, Osama Bin Laden. But now all of a sudden, no one needs to ask Obama's permission to smuggle guns into Mexico to the enemy of the United States, the Drug Lords to use against us?

Not even Holder was told? What are we paying the Home Land Security for if they don't know what the leaders are doing in this country to help the enemy. That is treason the last time I looked.

I personally think that President Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder and the Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano should be locked up in Guantanamo Bay Naval Base (also called Gitmo or GTMO) as Home grown terrorists and water boarded to see just what they do know about this treasonous act against the American people.

It wouldn't hurt any to put congress down there too, long enough for them to grow a back bone to empeach the useless growth we call our leaders.

And yet another report that we may be going into a double recession? How many double recession are we in now? We have never come out of the first recession yet.

I told everyone last year we will never come out of this recession. You will just have to learn to live with it. I also said Obama would be re-elected for a 2nd term and would be the last President. I know that didn't make any sense to anyone BUT... Look what just happened in Egypt this week. They had a FREE Election by the people, but the army is not going to reveal the winner of the election, and if they do, the winner will only hold the title of office with no power at all.

Could that happen in Our Country? It's not Our Country anymore. It is being run by a bunch of idiots!

-- Posted by Unique-Lies on Fri, Jun 22, 2012, at 11:24 AM

*Our government and nation has gone to you-know-where quicker with Obama than with any other president. We are so deep in debt, that there is no way out. The US government is so concerned about trying to rule other countries, that it tends to forget that there are millions of Americans who are looking at them for help; but the SOS is clearly not being heard. They are more concerned on getting votes and legalizing all of the illegals/terrorist.

*Everyone knows that Obama, Holder, and others knew what was going on. If they didn't, then they wouldn't restrict the papers on the "mission". They will do whatever they can to save their own hides and throw everyone else under the bus. In the eyes of the government - it's the American way.

*The election in Egypt, they did announce the new president, which is Mohamed Morsi a leader in the Muslim Brotherhood. If you know how to play chess, then you will see that this is a very strategic move. You try to position all of the pieces at certain areas so when it comes time, they you can overpower the Queen. The Queen in the Muslim's game is the takeover of the US and the world. Just like those in the past (Stalin, Hitler, and so on).

*Everyone knows that Obama is going to win a second term. Even though, he clearly stated when he ran the first time, that he would be a one-term president. It doesn't matter if no one shows up at the poles to vote - he will continue to reign.

*This country is no longer "our country". Americans are so distant to each other, that they time that they come together is in the eye of destruction. But even then, there will always be separation. The government sees us as dollar signs and numbers. We are no longer concerns to them, unless it is election time. If, American people would grow a backbone and get people into Congress, Senate, and the House who are REAL people and not politicians, then we may be able to save the US. Politicians do not care about their constituents - just the contributions. There are a few out there that are trying to fight for the American people. But there are sadly outnumbered by the ones who are just looking to line their pockets.

-- Posted by -Beth- on Sun, Jun 24, 2012, at 11:53 PM

You are so right -Beth-!

Here is the thing. We the people are the Sovereignty in this country. We gave the governments power and authority, but not our Sovereignty.

Look at it like a business owner. He or she give power to the store manager to run the store, but that doesn't give the store to the manager. Only the authority that the owner gives to the manager is all the power the manager has. The owner still owns the store and can take back control of the store anytime and even fire the manager.

The people OWN These United States of America, not the US nor the United States nor the United States Government. We the people own the states as well. We only gave power to the states in certain matters, but we own the states and can take back all powers given to the states.

The US Constitution, the Tennessee State Constitution and the supreme court have ruled that we the people are the sovereignty, not the government nor the states.

The states are not living human beings so they don't have inalienable rights like people do. States are created by Human Beings so they are artificial entities and have no power over the sovereignty. They do have power over the artificial entities that they create in the state, but no power over human beings. That would be like the servant ordering the master to do things for the servant.

Why people let the public servants order them around is beyond me. We are suppose to tell the public servants what we want them to do or take their job away from them.

We the People need to start acting like the Sovereignty and demanding the public servant to obey us.

-- Posted by Unique-Lies on Mon, Jun 25, 2012, at 2:55 PM

I hope those of you who voted for the King, are happy since his ObamaCare was approved by the Supreme Court today. Now, my family and I will have to figure out how exactly we are suppose to afford this new illegal mandate.

I hope that all of the Obama followers are happy that families will now have to figure out if they are going to pay for food, rent, utilities or insurance. If they chose not to pay for the insurance, then they will have to figure out how to pay for all of the fines and penalties that they will receive from our socialist government.

For us, we have cut everything that we can anyways to save money. We are down to the bare minimal of everything. The only thing left, in order to afford the new illegal insurance mandate, is to cut our utilities and our cable/phone/net service. If we cut all of these, then we will save almost enough to pay for the amount that we will have to pay each month.

But what about the 2million+ families who cannot cut anything else? Those who are unemployed currently and are fighting to keep food on the table and a roof over their heads? Which obsessed fan of Obama will pick up their tabs?

-- Posted by -Beth- on Thu, Jun 28, 2012, at 1:51 PM

Not to worry, Just don't pay it. They claim 50% of the Americans don't pay taxes so what are they going to do? All we can do is Vote Obama out.

-- Posted by Unique-Lies on Thu, Jun 28, 2012, at 6:36 PM

-Beth-

If you are like me, and make less than a quarter of a million dollars a year, you won't have to pay anything and your payment (now a tax) will be nothing.

You will get free health care. The Government will furnish you with free health care like food stamps etc..

It is the Middle Class who will have to pay extra to help cover the cost for the poor.

This is what the Democrats will have to live with from now on. They approved the Health care for everyone, but put the price tag on the Middle Class.

Even the rich can purchase health care from private insurance companies and pay for their own.

It's all the other things the government can make you buy now with this new law of calling something a (Tax). This will come back and bite the Democrats on their A$$.

The Democrats will have to face their friends and neighbors who are in the Middle Class who will be paying for everything.

Soon the Middle Class will join the ranks of the poor class at this rate.

Obama just spent another Trillion dollars on the debt and raised the cost of everything, not just insurance, but lowered the value of our dollar even more. The recession will continue without any recovery coming any time soon. Food will cost more as well.

-- Posted by Unique-Lies on Thu, Jun 28, 2012, at 7:26 PM

It is interesting how the Constitution says ONLY Congress can lay and collect Taxes, yet Obama did just that with his Obamasnare health plan.

Or did he?

Even Obama said it was not a Tax and he supposedly studied Constitutional Law.

Only one Justice on the Supreme Court said it was a Tax. That would be 1-8 it is a Tax and 8-1 it wasn't a Tax. So it should have been re-voted on to see if it was a tax or not instead of taking one Justice's opinion.

Since Congress is the one sovereign organization that can lay and collect taxes why didn't they know it was a Tax?

Oh that's right, congress never read Obama's healthcare package.

Next thing is... what kind of a Tax is it? A Direct Tax is a tax on Property and is unconstitutional.

An Indirect Tax is a Tax on a Privilege or Benefit. What Benefit or Privilege is given in exchange for the Tax?

We the People of the States have Inalienable Rights so the government can not take away our rights and exchange them for lesser rights or privileges, so They can't Tax the Sovereignty of this country - We the People.

This Healthcare "Tax" seems to be a straight across the board tax that everyone must pay regardless of their ability to pay it.

That makes it a Capitalization Tax and is not allowed according to the US Constitution.

Why didn't the Supreme Court Justices catch that little Supreme Law?

Next some say "Everyone will not have to pay anything".

Even Obama said the Middle Class won't have to pay a dime in Taxes... so, what is this mandatory tax that everyone doesn't have to pay?

The constitution allows for two classes of taxes. A Direct Tax that everyone must pay the same amount (apportionment) and an Indirect Tax where everyone must pay the same Percentage (Uniform thoughout the states).

Since this Healthcare TAX doesn't have to be paid by the poor and the Middle class doesn't have to pay a dime, LOL, (just another Unique-Obama-Lie), this tax is not equally apportioned nor Uniform among the states, so, it is not a constitutional tax - (UNLESS IT IS INVOKED IN WASHINGTON, DC and on the 14th Amendment Citizens)

14th Amendment Citizens are Subject to the exclusive juridiction of the Central Government described in Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution.

See why the President wants aliens to stay in our country? They can be taxed and have to obey all federal and state laws.

SO we see that thye Obama healthcare tax can be constitutional if applied to the right "persons".

?Person" is a legal term that applies to an artificial individual or corporation.

-- Posted by Unique-Lies on Fri, Jul 6, 2012, at 8:52 PM

Unique, Okay, I'm interested, but not convinced. I have a few questions.

1. How can every individual be sovereign within a republic? Do we not relinquish our sovereignty to our representatives, and exercise our sovereignty through the act of voting?

2. If artificial entities (like corporations or governments) were ever devoid of rights, did they not achieve them through a legal framework, which was ultimately (or at least theoretically) affirmed by the population, thereby conferring legitimacy?

3. If congress voted on the bill (Obamacare), does it matter if the premiums are called "taxes" or not?

4. What is a 14th amendment citizen exactly? I remember asking this before, but either I forgot or you never answered.

5. Did you know that advising people not to pay their taxes within a public forum is probably not a good idea?

6. This is the hardest for me to articulate, so please be patient. I know many examples of the word "person" being used to confer rights to entities clearly not "persons" in the traditional sense of the word, but no examples stripping a traditional "person" of that designation. In other words, I agree that an inclusive legal use of the word does exist, and does convey rights to non-people. I am, however, skeptical of an exclusive legal use that simultaneously excludes people from the tradition umbrella of the word "persons". Can you provide any examples?

-- Posted by memyselfi on Mon, Jul 9, 2012, at 4:24 AM

memyselfi,

1.) Every individual IS a Sovereign in a Republic. Only those who were born in that Republic "if their parents were not US Citizens (and under its exclusive jurisdiction)" ( See 14th Amendment). Sovereigns must Govern themselves, which you don't see today!

The Sovereign People do NOT relinquish their sovereignty to (ANYONE)! Sovereignty is like a Business Owner who gives authority to his/her store manager. The store manager runs that business as his/her own business. The Owner, however still owns the Store and full control over the store and the manager. HE/She can hire and fire anytime they want to, but the Business still remains with the owner.

Our Sovereignty is like the owner's authority to Own, hire, fire, or sell the business. It still belongs to the business owner, not the manager(s).

We give power to governments, but we keep our Sovereignty until we "knowingly and willingly" give it away "knowing full well what the circumstances and consequences are" when we sign a contract with the Government.

An example is a driver's license or Bank Account. You did not know full well that you were giving your inalienable rights away and coming under the jurisdiction of the federal/state government by signing your name to these contracts.

The People gave Sovereignty to Congress over certain matters. (See Article I, Section 8 of The US Constitution). The people retained their sovereignty and only gave certain powers to Congress. The people gave congress the Power to exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) etc. See Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 and 18 of The US Constitution).

As far as your sovereignty through the act of voting, you can hang it up. First of all, you don't have a right to vote anymore. You were given the Privilege to vote, because now everyone thinks they must get an ID with a photo on it to vote.

Voting is a right for people born in our country whose family doesn't owe its citizenship to the 14th Amendment. Since when did the servant tell the master what he/she had to do or get? We the people tell the public servants what they must do to serve us.and it doesn't include a photo ID.

Just the same, we can vote presidents and Congressmen out of office just like in local elections.

2.) Absolutely NOT! Congress did so in an illegal legislation which the Supreme Court voted on and passed. I will explain in #4.

3.) Congress voting on the bill (Obamacare), doesn't make it constitutional nor unconstitutional. The truth is, congress never completely read it so they really didn't have any right passing it to begin with.

However, Congress has exclusive legislative power in all cases whatsoever (in Washington, DC and in the US Territories according to the power the people gave congress in Article I, Section 8, Clauses 17 & 18). SO it would be constitutional for the federal citizens in the District of Columbia and the US Territories, but congress has no power to force it on the Sovereign people of the state where Congress does not have exclusive legislative power.

The US Constitution has only two classes of Taxes. A Direct Tax and an Indirect Tax and rules that apply to each class. Obamacare healthcare plan doesn't come under either of these classes of tax for the sovereignty, but could be applied to 14th Amendment citizens.

4.) Okay here is what did it all. President Lincoln freed all the slaves so congress enacted the 13th Amendment declaring freedom for the slaves. In 1871, Congress created the Civil Rights Act of 1871 to protect the blacks from the KKK.

At this time Congress only had exclusive legislative power over the District of Columbia and Naval bases, stock yards, arsenals, militias, and other federal territories. Congress did not have exclusive legislative power over a class of citizens, so in 1871, Congress created a separate Central Government for the District of Columbia

The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871, formally An Act to provide a Government for the District of Columbia, is an Act of Congress, which granted a territorial government for the District of Columbia.

This is a Second Central Government over the District of Columbia ONLY! Since then we have had two Central Governments. Both were made into Corporations and both have the same name.

NOW Congress has given itself a new class of citizens through the 14th Amendment that never existed before. The 14th Amendment citizens who are under its exclusive jurisdiction. Meaning the Corporate United States Central Government Congress created in 1871.

This also gave Congress Sovereignty over a class of Citizens, (the newly freed slaves and the citizens of the US Territories - 14th Amendment citizens). Congress never had exclusive legislation nor exclusive jurisdiction over a class of citizens before.

NOW Congress had become the Sovereignty over these Federal Citizens.

Congress created the Federal government with the consent of the people, but the people never knew about this second US Central Government that congress created. The people didn't really know the consequences of Congress creating a new class of citizens with the 14th Amendment. It created a class of people that they (Congress) had complete jurisdiction over.

In Article I, Section 8 Clauses 17 & 18, Congress was given power to legislate for these persons anyway they wanted to without constitutional limitations or restrictions, because Congress created these citizens and gave them Civil Rights. Congress can not give Inalienable Rights, only benefits and privileges.

Over the years, Congress has legislated laws for these citizens and the government employees have applied them to we the people, which are not subject to these federal laws. The people have just accepted it as a way of life and public safety.

5.) That is why I don't tell people not to pay their Taxes! I only tell people they don't have to if they are sovereign people. If you do not pay your taxes you will go to prison if you don't know your rights and how to claim them.

6.) Person is a hard legal word to explain completely. Everyone uses the term person to describe anyone who is living on earth, male or female.

Even in Legal terms, it can apply in several ways, Corporations, artificial entities or humans.The supreme court has ruled that since its usage it does not include the sovereignty and usually exclude the sovereignty from that code or statute. I have read some laws that appear to include the sovereignty.

Here is the thing: If you are a person who is an artificial entity or a corporation, business etc, then you have a contract with the government and the courts have jurisdiction over you in any case whatsoever. Our Laws are the Uniform Commercial Code. It is a Commercial law so it only has jurisdiction over other corporations or artificial entities.

The US Government and the States are Corporations created by Congress. That means they are artificial entities. Last time I looked, an artificial entity has no authority, power nor jurisdiction over a living Human Being. Artificial Entities do not create human beings. Human beings create Artificial Entities. Humans can create, destroy, sell or buy artificial entities but artificial entities can not create Human Beings nor have power over them.

Therefore the federal nor the state governments (which are artificial entities) have jurisdiction over the people of the states who are the sovereignty. However, they do have jurisdiction over artificial entities. 14th Amendment Citizens are artificial entities because they were created by congress, which is another artificial entity.

The States and any court has the right to presume you are a 14th Amendment citizen unless you know your rights and object to them in a timely and specific manner.

Here are two examples of Person not applying to people:

U.S. v. General Motors Corporation, D.C. Ill, 2 F.R.D. 528, 530:

"In common usage the word `person' does not include the sovereign, and statutes employing the word are generally construed to exclude the sovereign."

Church of Scientology v. US Department of Justice (1979) 612 F2d 417, 425:

"The word `person' in legal terminology is perceived as a general word which normally includes in its scope a variety of entities other than human beings., see e.g. 1, U.S.C. para 1."

In the first one, Person does not apply to the sovereignty, but it could apply to anyone else who would be considered an artificial entity or corporation.

In the second one, it includes a variety of entities other than human beings ( but it also mentions that it is perceived as a general word).

In the next Supreme Court Case it says the term "person" does not include the "Sovereign" and that for a Sovereign to be bound by statue the Sovereign must be "specifically named".

The Texas Penal Code clearly is law to be administered and enforced against a person(s) i.e. Texas Government Code section 311.005(2); CCP Art 17A.01(4).

However, the Penal Code fails to include the term "Sovereign." Numerous courts have held that statutes must be specific and that for a Sovereign to be bound by statue, the Sovereign must be specifically named. And without a doubt a sui juris man/woman is a Sovereign.

By way of example, the Michigan Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court concurred and made it perfectly clear that the term "person" does not include the "Sovereign" and that for a Sovereign to be bound by statue the Sovereign must be "specifically named". Will v. Michigan state Police, 105 L. Ed. 2nd 45 (1938)

In the 4th Amendment it says "The right of the people to be secure in their persons,... and the persons or things to be seized." and in the 5th Amendment it states: "No person shall be held to answer for a...", as well as the 12th, 14th, 20th, 22th, and all through out the US Constitution.

However we both know the Laws were written long after the US Constitution, lol.

Read up on the term "Sui Juris".

SUI JURIS. One who has all the rights to which a freemen is entitled; one who is not under the power of another, as a slave, a minor, and the like.

If you had the time to read all of this post, I hope it helped you understand what I have said.

-- Posted by Unique-Lies on Thu, Jul 12, 2012, at 9:01 PM

The whole thing is... The Government has taken our rights away by making us Artificial entities so the states have complete jurisdiction over us.

Since the States have a right to presume we are Artificial Entities and not natural Living Human Beings, the State has complete Jurisdiction over us.

We do not have any standing in their courts, so we can not bring up the US Constitution in our defense.

To further make sure we don't have any standing in court, the Judges force you to hire an Attorney.

No Attorney nor any solicitor can protect your Inalienable Rights. These Rights can only be claimed by the individual being charged.

So if we hire an Attorney we don't have any say in court. We must let the Attorney speak for us. He/She can not use our Inalienable Rights to protect us, so again we are at the mercy of the judge.

So if the States can Presume we are Artificial Entities or Corporations, or if we hire an attorney, the courts have complete Control over us. The Courts can take your home, Bank Account, and/or Children. We have no power once we are presumed to be a "Person"...

UNLESS...

We can inform the Courts that we are not a "Person", nor an artificial entity nor a federal citizen, nor indigent, nor have a binding contract with the States that make us an artificial entity under the complete jurisdiction of the courts.

HOW DO WE DO THAT?

That is another whole way of thinking.

Even thou some of us are the Sovereignty in this country, unless you can convince the courts you are not bound by the Corporate State Statutes, codes and unlawful laws... You can not stand on your Constitutional Rights.

Like I said before, not everyone is a part of the Sovereignty, and if you don't know your rights, you don't have any rights.

I am not teaching anyone law, nor advising anyone to do anything legally nor illegally. I am only reprinting Information that is Public Knowledge and is informational reading only.

-- Posted by Unique-Lies on Sat, Jul 14, 2012, at 2:18 PM

I appreciate you taking the time to explain. I have been seriously thinking about it for a few days. Unfortunately, unless I am missing something, I just do not see the reality of your assertions. I am not implying that you are "wrong" just that when contrasted with precedence and intent (at least as I understand it) your interpretations are questionable.

It seems as though you have become fixated upon the minutia of certain words and phrases, but neglect to appreciate the context of their use entirely. To further confuse the issue, you do not make a clear separation between natural and positive law.

I would explain why I think so, but it would take a couple of hours and likely only serve to aggravate you.

-- Posted by memyselfi on Thu, Jul 19, 2012, at 7:01 AM


Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account, enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.

Username:

Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.


Steve Mills and his wife have one daughter and live on a farm outside of Bell Buckle. They previously owned two coffee/ice cream shops, currently operate an internet sales company and teach classes, but his primary job involves the paper industry worldwide. Hobbies and interests lie in gardening, photography, recorded music and of course, their pets.