
04-07-2008, 10:59 AM
|
|
Mental Jujitsu
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 632
|
|
|
paraphrase
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WizordofOZ
I just find it very humerous Mr. Lawdog here thinks he's so great. are you a Bar member? if so I really believe what you say has no standing, ground, or relevance based upon your oath. And let's say certain laws that pertain to the ability for you to mistrue the law as you deem fit. However, in all actuality any court case is garbage bull**** that nobody has to succumb to on grounds of FRAUD, because of the simple factor you are never placed under notice or told a true reason and explanation of the charges, or the fact that you are having the Bankruptcy proceedings of the bankrupt corporate US carried out against you. Without prior knowledge of that information or notice of that information makes it FRAUD anyways so the whole system is cracked up bull crap with meaningless, seemingly intelligent, yet deemingly stupid, word play that likes to juggle around any statute code or whatever. See all in all it's bull****, and they want to play their maritime admiralty game on everyone, so just play their game back with them, they come at you operating under the UCC, as that is the groundwork for all their skull-duggery, just reserve your rights under section 1-207 and 1-103, seeing as they wanted to change from the common law to UCC for many reasons one being the obligation of contract, under the common law you have to knowlingly and voluntarily enter into contract and the UCC pretty much removed that obligation. So all in all for everyone the best thing to do is learn as much as you can and play their game back, because that is one thing that really makes them mad, when a commoner takes them at their own game. and I believe that's all I have to say on that matter.
|
To paraphrase John Hillerman's character in the movie "Blazing Saddles": That's some mighty fine authentic frontier gibberish there, Gabby.
__________________
We reject Skurdal's argument that he is a "free man" exempt from the laws because he has "no contracts" with either the state or federal governments...No persons in Montana may exempt themselves from any law simply by declaring they do not consent to it applying to them...Accepting Skurdal's assertion of exempt status is an invitation to anarchy. We decline that invitation. - State v. Skurdal, Supreme Court of Montana, 235 Mont. 291, 767 P.2d 304 at 308 (1988).
|