mackler,
you are on the computer, look it it up yourself
then tell me just how mythical it is, exactly how did the US corp come into being?
[quote author=cerberil link=topic=4846.msg51268#msg51268 date=1300991308]
mackler,
you are on the computer, look it it up yourself
then tell me just how mythical it is, exactly how did the US corp come into being?
[/quote]
The US corp came into being when Alexander Hamilton decided it would be great if he could borrow money and not be responsible for paying it back. It happened in the eighteenth century. Your 1871 fantasy is a mythical conspiracy theory.
Cerberil- I'm not buying into the blog you posted because I have a few problems with the thinking and word play.
One of the word play issues that stuck out was their 'fact' that travel is now a privilege. That is not the case whatsoever. You can grab your suitcase and walk from one end of the country to the other - no one will stop you. You do not need to notify anyone, get special permission, or sign a waiver, you can just do it. The idea that 'travel' is a privilege is nonsense, but the fact you need the privilege of a license to DRIVE on the road is a fact. Obviously, their statement goes overboard and spreads disinfo.
I don't like the notion they advocate with people needing to 'know all the laws.' NO ONE can be aware of all the horseshit laws and violations that vary from state to state and town to town. What people should know however are the basic moral laws, and most of the assumed statutory laws- ie murder, robbery, theft, and speed limits, 'illegal' drug use, and the like. MOST towns will notify travelers of commonly broken or special local ordinance via signs.
I don't need to know all the laws to keep myself out of trouble, but it is assumed I know enough to not get myself into a situation where the law is iffy. For example, I know that fucking a cow is probably illegal in my town, so even if I had the urge to, I wouldn't do it.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg51275#msg51275 date=1301014755]I don't need to know all the laws to keep myself out of trouble, but it is assumed I know enough to not get myself into a situation where the law is iffy. For example, I know that fucking a cow is probably illegal in my town, so even if I had the urge to, I wouldn't do it.[/quote]
So, the only reason he doesn't beat up someone who annoys him in traffic, is because it's illegal.
And that's also, apparently, the reason he doesn't commit bestiality.
Odd, but I have other reasons why I don't have sex with cows. And other reasons why I don't assault strangers, for that matter.
Joe
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg51275#msg51275 date=1301014755]
Cerberil- I'm not buying into the blog you posted because I have a few problems with the thinking and word play.
One of the word play issues that stuck out was their 'fact' that travel is now a privilege. That is not the case whatsoever. You can grab your suitcase and walk from one end of the country to the other - no one will stop you. You do not need to notify anyone, get special permission, or sign a waiver, you can just do it. The idea that 'travel' is a privilege is nonsense, but the fact you need the privilege of a license to DRIVE on the road is a fact. Obviously, their statement goes overboard and spreads disinfo.
I don't like the notion they advocate with people needing to 'know all the laws.' NO ONE can be aware of all the horseshit laws and violations that vary from state to state and town to town. What people should know however are the basic moral laws, and most of the assumed statutory laws- ie murder, robbery, theft, and speed limits, 'illegal' drug use, and the like. MOST towns will notify travelers of commonly broken or special local ordinance via signs.
I don't need to know all the laws to keep myself out of trouble, but it is assumed I know enough to not get myself into a situation where the law is iffy. For example, I know that fucking a cow is probably illegal in my town, so even if I had the urge to, I wouldn't do it.
[/quote]
Know enough to not get myself into a situation where the law is iffy?
Like walking down the street with a suitcase?
No one will stop me???
This is a really sad case. He can't keep his answers straight from post to post much less sentence to sentence.
Children beware: this is your brain on bullshit. Any Questions?
[quote author=cerberil link=topic=4846.msg51270#msg51270 date=1300999330]
mackler and all who seek the truth,
www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm
[/quote]
Oh wow. A link to an internet webpage. I forgot that you believe that anything on an internet webpage is true.
Instead of reading some disinformation off a conspiracy site, why don't you read the actual act? You obviously have not, or you would know that it doesn't say anything about UNITED STATES changing from something into a corporation.
Here's a link to it:
Link to Act of Congress that has nothing to do with incorporating the UNITED STATES
This conspiracy theory has been debunked by others before me, for example here.
If you think I'm wrong, go ahead and try to prove it. Quote the language from that act of 1871 that supposedly replaces the US government. You won't do it, because you can't do it, and you can't do it because your conspiracy theory is false, and all the links to all the conspiracy websites on the Intenet won't change that false to true.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg51275#msg51275 date=1301014755]
I don't like the notion they advocate with people needing to 'know all the laws.' NO ONE can be aware of all the horseshit laws and violations that vary from state to state and town to town. What people should know however are the basic moral laws, and most of the assumed statutory laws- ie murder, robbery, theft, and speed limits, 'illegal' drug use, and the like. MOST towns will notify travelers of commonly broken or special local ordinance via signs.
I don't need to know all the laws to keep myself out of trouble, but it is assumed I know enough to not get myself into a situation where the law is iffy.
[/quote]
Oooh… common sense is enough to keep one within the law?
So it's common sense that kids aren't allowed to open a lemonade stand?
And it's common sense that girl scouts shouldn't be allowed to sell cookies?
And it's common sense that -in both cases- cops WILL come to arrest or shut down LITTLE KIDS for selling food without proper permits when they attempt to open a lemonade stand and sell cookies?
If you think I'm wrong, go ahead and try to prove it. Quote the language from that act of 1871 that supposedly replaces the US government. You won't do it, because you can't do it, and you can't do it because your conspiracy theory is false, and all the links to all the conspiracy websites on the Internet won't change that false to true.
mackler,
"created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by which name is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes, and may contract and be contracted with"
your use of the word "replace" is incorrect, as the ten mile square area had no government to "replace" to start with
the ten mile square area was supposed to be a neutral meeting ground where the separate states could hash out their concerns, it was never meant to have a "government" of its' own
show in the constitution where the power to do so was given to congress
this is just more fancy footwork to confuse the masses
mackler,
I just came to the realization that it is my use of the word "replace" that is incorrect
what was replaced was the original constitution
however I still standby my contention that the act of 1871 is one of the major mechanisms put in place to rob the people of their constitutional republic
and as for information on the internet being incorrect, I agree that one must use discernment here, but where would you suggest that we seek the truth? perhaps the public fool system? no if it were not for the internet I would still be in the dark
[quote author=Ishtar link=topic=4846.msg51284#msg51284 date=1301026170]
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg51275#msg51275 date=1301014755]
I don't like the notion they advocate with people needing to 'know all the laws.' NO ONE can be aware of all the horseshit laws and violations that vary from state to state and town to town. What people should know however are the basic moral laws, and most of the assumed statutory laws- ie murder, robbery, theft, and speed limits, 'illegal' drug use, and the like. MOST towns will notify travelers of commonly broken or special local ordinance via signs.
I don't need to know all the laws to keep myself out of trouble, but it is assumed I know enough to not get myself into a situation where the law is iffy.
[/quote]
Oooh… common sense is enough to keep one within the law?
So it's common sense that kids aren't allowed to open a lemonade stand?
And it's common sense that girl scouts shouldn't be allowed to sell cookies?
And it's common sense that -in both cases- cops WILL come to arrest or shut down LITTLE KIDS for selling food without proper permits when they attempt to open a lemonade stand and sell cookies?
[/quote]
What's your point? Can you read? Did you not see "NO ONE can be aware of all the horseshit laws and violations?"
Try again.
[quote author=cerberil link=topic=4846.msg51286#msg51286 date=1301050207]
mackler,
I just came to the realization that it is my use of the word "replace" that is incorrect
what was replaced was the original constitution
however I still standby my contention that the act of 1871 is one of the major mechanisms put in place to rob the people of their constitutional republic
and as for information on the internet being incorrect, I agree that one must use discernment here, but where would you suggest that we seek the truth? perhaps the public fool system? no if it were not for the internet I would still be in the dark
[/quote]
What has robbed us are corporations and the Federal Reserve banking system scam. THAT'S the conspiracy that leads to most others. Just about every conspiracy theory is tied to money- Lincoln's assassination, Kennedy's assassination, the moon landing hoax, 9/11, the repeal of the Glass Steagal act, Pearl Harbor, GMO foods, ALL of them have something to do with money from war profiteering or the Federal Reserve.
^^^ Mr. NJ Cop…you correctly identified SOME of the things that have robbed us. I'll add a few for you though.
Judges, prosecutors, bureaucrats both elected and unelected and cops have to take some of the blame too.
When cops continue to arrest people despite knowing some (most?) of the laws are "horse shit" how can they not be responsible? What magical leap causes one human being to "not be responsible" for their actions?
[quote author=cerberil link=topic=4846.msg51285#msg51285 date=1301049304]
"created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by which name is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes, and may contract and be contracted with"
[/quote]
Nice try. I notice you conveniently left out the beginning of the sentence. Now let's read it again with the part you're trying ignore:
[quote][size=10pt]Be it enacted by [Congress] that all that part of the territory of the United States [color=brown]included within the limits of the District of Columbia[/color] be…created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by which name it is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes…[/size][/quote]
See that?
The subject of that sentence is "all that part of the territory of the United States included [color=brown]within the limits of the District of Columbia[/color]." Can you understand what that means? Do you have access to a map of the District of Columbia? Do you know what municipal means? Do you understand that DC is a city, and the US of A is something more than just that one city? Do you understand that anything that is not included within the limits of that one city is excluded from the subject of the sentence you quoted?
If you answered no to any of these questions, then you are not qualified to be interpreting the written acts of Congress.
If you answered yes to all those questions, then you must either admit that your claim that this language reconstituted the US government is wrong or else acknowledge that you are intentionally providing disinformation by persisting in that false claim.
OhCrapItsTheCops,
if you think that all of those events are just about the money, you really don't have any idea of what is really going on, but I would expect that from someone who sought a career in "law" enforcement, that is not meant as a putdown because I was once like you, I was an army officer
if I had known then, what I know now, no way would I have joined the military and I suspect most with the exception of psychopaths on powertrips, would feel the same
basically you have to throw out most of what you have been taught and believe in, if you are to really grasp what is happening, it is not an undertaking that can be accomplished in a few hours, as such it is a journey that you must undertake on your own
to put it in a nutshell, there are those in this world who believe that they have a god given right to rule over others, they believe that it is the duty of those that below them to serve them
a sacred symbol for this gaggle of inbred psychopaths is the beehive, because the worker bees live relatively short lives toiling away to the day they die and sustain themselves on the least nutritious food
while the queen bee lives a very long life compared to the workers, is fed the best food and has her every need tended to by the worker bees
mackler,
you really need to stop throwing around the words mythical and conspiracy theory, most people can see that you are attempting to discredit me and make me look foolish
while the creation of a government for the district of columbia may not have been called the act of 1871, a government was created for the district of columbia, that is not a myth
as far as,"included within the limits of the district of columbia" goes, this government extends to all of its' territories, I suspect that you are familiar with the concepts of time, space, place and plane
well a plane is an overlay of the land, if you recognize a plane that the district of columbia claims to have jurisdiction over, then you are under the jurisdiction of the district of columbia
for instance the current defacto STATES are a plane, they are territories of the district of columbia, after all to vote in these STATES, you have to claim to be a US citizen, US citizens are citizens of the district of columbia, so much for within the limits of the district of columbia, this can also be cited why the claim of being US citizen and a citizen of the state where you reside is a bunch of bs, it is just rhetoric to confuse, all the current de facto STATES are nothing more than sub corporation of the federal one
zip codes are another federal overlay, claim to live in one of these zip code zones and bamm you be a slave
the district of columbia is the UNITED STATES
the UNITED STATES is not the united states of America
[quote author=cerberil link=topic=4846.msg51299#msg51299 date=1301083213]
mackler,
you really need to stop throwing around the words mythical and conspiracy theory, most people can see that you are attempting to discredit me and make me look foolish
while the creation of a government for the district of columbia may not have been called the act of 1871, a government was created for the district of columbia, that is not a myth
as far as,"included within the limits of the district of columbia" goes, this government extends to all of its' territories, I suspect that you are familiar with the concepts of time, space, place and plane
well a plane is an overlay of the land, if you recognize a plane that the district of columbia claims to have jurisdiction over, then you are under the jurisdiction of the district of columbia
for instance the current defacto STATES are a plane, they are territories of the district of columbia, after all to vote in these STATES, you have to claim to be a US citizen, US citizens are citizens of the district of columbia, so much for within the limits of the district of columbia, this can also be cited why the claim of being US citizen and a citizen of the state where you reside is a bunch of bs, it is just rhetoric to confuse, all the current de facto STATES are nothing more than sub corporation of the federal one
zip codes are another federal overlay, claim to live in one of these zip code zones and bamm you be a slave
the district of columbia is the UNITED STATES
the UNITED STATES is not the united states of America
[/quote]
Your post is 100% B.S. except that DC formed a city government in 1871.
The reason it seems confusing is because you are confused.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg51288#msg51288 date=1301065160]
[quote author=Ishtar link=topic=4846.msg51284#msg51284 date=1301026170]
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg51275#msg51275 date=1301014755]
I don't like the notion they advocate with people needing to 'know all the laws.' NO ONE can be aware of all the horseshit laws and violations that vary from state to state and town to town. What people should know however are the basic moral laws, and most of the assumed statutory laws- ie murder, robbery, theft, and speed limits, 'illegal' drug use, and the like. MOST towns will notify travelers of commonly broken or special local ordinance via signs.
I don't need to know all the laws to keep myself out of trouble, but it is assumed I know enough to not get myself into a situation where the law is iffy.
[/quote]
Oooh… common sense is enough to keep one within the law?
So it's common sense that kids aren't allowed to open a lemonade stand?
And it's common sense that girl scouts shouldn't be allowed to sell cookies?
And it's common sense that -in both cases- cops WILL come to arrest or shut down LITTLE KIDS for selling food without proper permits when they attempt to open a lemonade stand and sell cookies?
[/quote]
What's your point? Can you read? Did you not see "NO ONE can be aware of all the horseshit laws and violations?"
[/quote]
Can you deduct arguments that logically follow from premisses?
I wasn't responding to "NO ONE can be aware of all the horseshit laws and violations?"
I was responding to your absolute bullshit claim that one doesn't need to know all the laws to keep out of trouble because it's assumed one knows enough to keep from getting into situations where the law is iffy.
If people know enough to keep themselves out of situations where the law is iffy, then why are little kids harassed for opening lemonade stands?
Your arguments that being aware of moralistic law is enough is absolute bullshit… because YOU will still go around and arrest them and write them tickets for breaking statue law.
Either that or beat them up… which ever one you can most easily get away with.
mackler,
just saying that something is bs does not make it so
show me point by point what is bs
I am man enough to admit when I am wrong
but you have to do better than just saying bs
otherwise you are the one full of bs
I have to agree with cerberil on this one. Although I have much, much more research to do before I could even try to back you up with any "authority"…
http://www.teamlaw.org/
Patriot Mythology, specifically Myth 22, pertains to the argument at hand.