Tweet
Originally posted by dutchdivco
View Post
Al
-
Beijing Television Cultural Center fire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Al -
Originally posted by dutchdivco View PostThere are a couple of possible approaches to your stated 'dillema', depending on what you are really 'bugged' by, and what your real goal is.
During the recent gun control debate, it was pointed out that Obummers Injustice Dept. has been enforcing the Federal law prohibiting ex-cons from possesing firearms. Something like 48 convictions/year??
IF you are arrested by a local cop, for carrying/possesing a gun, (as a convicted felon), they (the local police) have learned that when they notify the fedreal prosecutors, that said prosecutors elect not to prosecute, and so after 24 or 48 hours, (IF that ise only reason the local cops have for holding you) you would be released, but they wouldn't give you back your gun.
IF your off parole, (so you couldn't be sent back for a 'parole violation') I THINK that would be the end of it. Asssuming you didn't use the gun in the commision of a crime, of have 'other' charges, such as drugs, etc.
As I posted earlier, you could TRY to petition the court, to have your rights 'restored'. If succesful, you could then legally own a gun, and VOTE!
But, I get the impression your not just bugged that you can't (legally) own a gun, but with the IDEA that THEY are telling you you can't own a gun.
In which case, you could try this 'last' approach, of legally contesting in court the authority to prohibit you from owning one.
THAT gets 'tricky'; in order to have a court case, you would have to attempt to purchase a gun, and be refused; that refusal would then give you a 'cause of action'. Problem is, (I believe) the law says that for you to even ATTEMPT to purchase a gun is illegal. I SUSPECT that you could go to a Federally licenced firearms dealer, and tell them you didn't want to buy a gun, but JUST wanted them to put your info into the Federal check system, (and pay the $20 or so that they charge for that), and when it comes back negative, (maybe) use THAT for your cause of action?
It also gets 'tricky' in another way, that MAY become an issue; as i understand it, it is your local or state Government that decides what the criterion is, for what names are submitted to the federal I.D. check system; so each local jurisdiction decides who THEY don't want to have guns.
The Feds just 'maintain' and operate the system, and so they would say (I suspect) "Hey, its not on US! Your issue is with your state, which submitted your name to us."
And, as pointed out, you would have to become a 'jail house lawyer', and really do a LOT of research. In addition, you have another problem with this issue; MOST people, corporations, lawyers, ACLU, etc. probably generally support the notion that 'We don't want violent criminals legally owning guns",
so, you might not find a lot of support, is all I'm saying. Jim
Yes I do have a real problem with authority these days as I find it hypocritical, corrupt, and repressive. I'd love nothing more to the entire DC area go up with a giant mushroom cloud while at the same time many of the LEOs out there who have gotten away with criminal behavior and murder to dragged into the streets and executed in public by mobs out for justice.
I have no problems with small local governments and limited taxes but I sure the heck have an issue paying a s*itload of taxes to see it go to Israel or other places such as Iraq, Afghanistan or other sh*tholes when it's needed more in the USA. That and the fact who does the USA think they are to try to be the police of the world.
So in one regard yes I am totally upset the government is trying to regulate my life with so many laws and BS and all masked in the greater good for the public. The public needs a healthy dose of Darwinism (Culling) because if people are really too stupid to look out for themselves then too bad!
As for it being an uphill battle trying to win the support of anyone because I'm a criminal and I want a gun, well screew those people. They are the same self righteous people that are described in the parable of the indifferent populace that goes something like this,
When the authorities came for the criminals I didn't say anything because I was not a criminal, when they came for the illegal immigrants I didn't say anything because I was not an Illegal, when they came for the Jews I didn't stand up and say anything because I was not a Jew, when they came for my neighbor I didn't stand up and say anything because I was sure my neighbor had done something wrong, but when they finally came for me there was nobody else to help me...
That's how I look at things in generalComment
-
thank you and I will look over that site... I did see the bottom of it and like most of these places or groups / organizations they all claim freedom and standing up to the man yet they don't practice what they preach and then say if they did stand up to the man they would be shut down and their goal is to get the message out...Originally posted by zapzap View Post
in this one they have this at the bottom
WE ARE NOT TAX EXEMPT
Your gifts to our work are not tax-deductible. Our efforts are bound by conscience and goodwill, not government regulation or political privilege. We refuse to be numbered or supervised by any government agency.
Support Us
See the conflicting message of them having to pay taxes yet in the same time saying they refused to be numbered or supervised by any government agency ...
but again thanks for the link and I will read over itComment
-
Hold it, a minute,...!!!?
If the Gov't. is 'really' a 'for profit corporation', doesn't it file for income taxes?
And giving the recent spending binge, how can it possibly be deemed to be making a 'profit'? And I seem to recall hearing that a company, (or Corporation) can only file taxes and show no profit for so many years,...7, I think? How would one go about SEEING such a tax 'filing'? JimComment
-
Chapter 5:Originally posted by dutchdivco View Post
What State Are You In?
Answer:
Mostly liquid, some solid, and occasional gas!
Nevertheless, despite a clarity that was rare, author Lori Jacques has
found good reasons to dispute even this statement. In a private
communication, she explained that the Office of the Federal Register has
issued a statement indicating that Treasury Department Orders ("TDO") 150-10 and
150-37 (regarding taxation) were not published in the Federal Register.
Evidently, there are still no published orders from the Secretary of the
Treasury giving the Commissioner of Internal Revenue the requisite authority
to enforce the Internal Revenue Code within the 50 States of the Union.
Furthermore, under Title 3, Section 103, the President of the United States, by means of Presidential Executive Order, has not delegated authority to enforce the IRC within the 50 States of the Union. Treasury Department Order No. 150-10 can be found in Commerce Clearinghouse Publication 6585(an unofficial publication). Section 5 reads as follows:
U.S. Territories and Insular Possessions. The Commissioner shall, to the extent of authority otherwise vested in him, provide for the administration of the United States internal revenue laws in the U.S. Territories and insular possessions and other authorized areas of the world.
Thus, the available evidence indicates that the only authority
delegated to the Internal Revenue Service is to enforce tax treaties with
foreign territories, U.S. territories and possessions, and Puerto Rico. To
be consistent with the law, Treasury Department Orders, particularly TDO's
150-10 and 150-37, needed to be published in the Federal Register. Thus,
given the absence of published authority delegations within the 50 States,
the obvious conclusion is that the various Treasury Department orders found
at Internal Revenue Manual 1229 have absolutely no legal bearing, force, or
effect on sovereign Citizens of the 50 States. Awesome, yes? Our hats are
off, once again, to Lori Jacques for her superb legal research.
AlComment
-
R R Dobson, Jr.
This will be of interest to readers of this thread, even though it was posted in an unrelated thread.
There is a reason why science has been successful and technology is widespread. Don't be afraid to do the math and apply the laws of physics.Comment
-
Started reading
the thread, but unfortunately, (as so often happens) it quickly devolved into a p*ssing contest, with members insulting each other, calling each other dis-info agents, etc.
HUMAN nature, rearing its ugly head, I fear.
2015's going to be interesting, to see what happens. My wife and I will qualify for the penalty, (for NOT getting AFA mandated Insurance), so we changed how we do things, so we won't get a Fed. income tax return, we will end up owing; as I have heard that the 'penalty' can only be imposed by withholding it from your return; no return, no way for IRS to impose the tax. Don't know if thats true, but will find out. In the mean time, am 'banking' the tax that would formerly have gone to IRS, so will have the $ to pay when April 15th, 2015 rolls around. By then the ACA should be well into its 'death spiral', and so the whole thing MAY have gone 'blewy'.
Old chinese curse "May you live in INTERESTING times!" Certainly seems like we are 'cursed', huh? Jim
5150; on 'our tx $'s going overseas, (to places like Israel, Aphganistan, etc.) no reason to get upset; they AREN'T 'OUR' tax dollars; they are 'debt instruments' of the federal reserve; thats what Federal Reserve Notes are.
So, its NOT 'our $', nor our 'tax dollars', or anything of the kind. Nor do 'we' owe anything, for the 'money' being printed and distributed by the U.S. Corporation, which is acting as our Federal Gov't. So, that at least is one less thing for you to get all steamed up about.
In fact, instead of getting angry, about all these things, (Obummer and obummercare, foriegn 'aid', and even the greater and greater encroachment of our liberties) you could CHEER;
Every one of these things moves us closer to the day of reconing, (sp?) when the biggest problem will be a shortage of rope, or not enough lamposts.
After all, we can't really do anything about the actions of others; the ONLY person who's behavior we can control is our own. Much healthier to laugh and cheer, than to fester with anger. THEY, whoever you choose to think of as THEY, WILL get their 'just deserts'. JimComment
-
Originally posted by Ufopolitics View PostHey Duncan,
What a "perfect" demolition man!!
Watch this video analysis it seem nobody noticed...til now.
Flight 175 rare video- proof of 9 11 no plane hoax - YouTube
The Second Plane left wing goes behind a further away building (according to my Architecture Studies and 3D Interaction and Perspective)...this escaped from the "Artist View" when making the Layered CGI Planes...
I just can not believe nobody noticed this major mistake in a Rushed CGI Video, to make it "On Time" to the Press Broadcasting Media...
Original Video by CNN here at normal speed, same error...:
2nd Plane WTC - facebook.com/autonomous.anonymous - YouTube
I asked myself where all this great and Infamous UFO Video Debunkers were instead of Debunking this Criminal Act?
Critcal Review of WTC "No Plane" Theories
"New York. Remembering 9/11"
AlComment
-
00:48:50 Don't question it, Wacko!
00:48:54 Take it on faith.
Don't question it, Vaako | The Chronicles of Riddick quotes
The right-wing glitches invalidate the above yellow-flight-path rendering.
AlComment
-
Originally posted by aljhoa View PostBoehner warns Obama on minimum wage, executive actions - YouTubeOriginally posted by aljhoa View Post
@ mark 1:25 - YouTube
AlComment
-
Courts issues. Also, Boehner needs legal help!
Some of you guys don't get it; if you end up in a federal courthouse the judge is going to find that any and all of the various arguments are, frivolous. In the ruling the same judge will cite Lonsdale v. US and possibly a string of other cases that refer or cite that case and that is the end of that tune. Period. If appealed, it will be upheld. There will probably be sanctions imposed.
Has there been any successful rulings on any of these issues by the courts? So another sacrificial lamb of sorts will get creamed. And I suspect out there someone attempted to work around that line of cases by carefully pointing out their argument(s) were completely different... If so I can predict what happened: they lost and somewhere Lonsdale and/or the cases following it were thrown right back at the Defendant's/Respondent's face! Think you've got deeper pockets and are smarter than Al was? Tax Cheat Sentenced to 6 Years for Defying I.R.S. - NYTimes.com Here's his side of the story:Thompson News Here's a choice quote you'll love:
If you want to see what he has to say now-a-days: Very Dumb Government If you want more, no problem, he's written at least 9 books!I had also informed the "judge" that the internal revenue laws were repealed in 1939 and never re-enacted again. He didn't care. He said something to the effect, "the only law that you need to worry about is my law and that you obey my order.
Oh and in that Boehner video didn't you notice he referred to the "Constitution" and "...is the basis of our Republic"?
So what now? Is the corporation "...our Republic" too? Maybe someone from here well versed on these subjects can enlighten him on the true state of the Union? On the NEW Constitution and that calling the country a republic was a mistake!Comment
-
-
Dan Meador tells you how it worked out for him!
Here, in excruciating detail, Dan Meador (deceased) left an affidavit that spells out exactly how things played out for him (and others) IN THE REAL WORLD. While the whole document is well worth a read, the details of his woes start at page 9.
Dan Meador : compla~1Comment
-
Zap Zap
I fully understand what your saying. I have similar thoughts to this thing Rick is talking about; the 'jurisdictional Gov't.', in which the culmination is going to be around 566 people showing up in D.C., and telling the various 'corporate officers' of the U.S. Gov't. corporation (Senators, Representatives and Pres.) to vacate their offices. 566, (or 567, if you count the Vice-Prsident) peoplethat 'no one' has ever heard of, and that only a relatively small % of the people voted for, and that the vast # of people don't understand the rationale for why te people think they are 'in the right'.
The 'Justice Dept.' is like MOST branches of Gov't.; reverse the name (Injustice Dept.), and you get much closer to the truth. Dept. of Social INsecurity, Un-affordable Don't Care Act, etc.
Occasionally it CAN be used in a 'David v. Goliath' kind of fight against the Gov't., or other 'Big' interests, and David CAN prevail. There is the link I posted earlier, of the small company in Texas which succesfully fought of local officials AND the FDA, in their attempt to shut him down. The website pretty clearly details HOW he fought them off, and appears to have won, using these same argumentyou are dismissing, I believe.
There is the story Rick posted earlier, where the Bank wrongly tried to repossess this guys home, andfter he got judgement against the bank, they refused his repeated attempts to collect; so he got a coart order, and 'repossesed' the BANK!!
Its going to e interesting to see what happens as Obummercare goes into its 'death spiral', and the final nail in the coffin may well be a court decision, ruling that the 'Tax' (Insurance premium) and/or the 'penalty' are 'too onerous'. IN the SCOTUS decision, I believe they left that door open.
Myself, I'm not going to be charging to the courthouse, and certainly anyone like 5150 contemplating using these 'arguments' in court needs to carefully consider the consequences, etc. You can be a 'prisoner of consciounce' if you want, just think long and hard before you 'leap'.
On that score, Snowden is interesting. I THINK the public opinion has turned, and most people wouldn't think it was 'right' if he got 20-30 years. Most think he IS a 'whistle-blower', that he had no 'legitimate' alternative way to make his objections known, and that some of these programs are just plain wrong.
Point being, Public Opinion can playt a role, and the high #'s of those disaproving of the Gov't.has got to be 'worrying' to TPTB.
Perhaps SOME of the sheeple are just starting to wake up from theoir long slumber?? JimComment
-
By the by
Had an article in the local paper this weekend. In Arizona, the # of registered independents surpassed the # of registered Dems. some time back. May not seem surprising in a 'conservative state', (home of s.b.1070, etc.) BUT, the # of registered Independents is or soon will surpass the of registered Repubs, as well! Wondering what the 'stats' are in other states, and if this is a national trend??
Could be another sign of stirrings of discontent among the sheeple??JimComment
Comment