The courts are against us

[Judge Roy Bean]

Originally Posted by mrg

I think JRB is actually afraid of David Merrill.

No more than I fear chemtrails or bigfoot.

[mrg]

So, these nutjobs have been spewing nonsense for over forty years now, and Ford is still in his flivver, and all is still well with the world, right?

Was not the so called "Great Depression" but a shot out of the blue devoid of the random-generated spewings of nutcase doom and gloom absurdities prior to that unfortunately unanticipated turn of events?

There, of course, were no wingnuts in Germany spouting forth sturm und drang tinfoil hat nonsense prior to the realization of the Zenith of Nazi aspirations of the thirties and forties?

Another "surprise," ja?

"History" consists of academic subject matter comprised of solidly factual recordings of static events, rather than an effective causal contiuum, yes?

If there were no truth to that which third-string propagandist wannabees like the Brickyards, Shuntrooths, Beanhides, Sugarfoots, and Septics, et al, so ardently and vehemently attempt to blow smoke at, it is quite doubtful they would be posting their acerbic little barbs and blurbs that take little time or physical energy to compose and, apparently, even less actual mental energy or capacity.

If one spends time and effort to methodically analyze and forensically examine the issuing propaganda, aside from lack of substance, one is apt to notice largely spurious, specious, virulent, inflammatory, presumptuous, and apologistic name calling, obfuscation, distortion, misinformation, disinformation, journalistic sleight of hand, flim flam, and, perhaps on occaision, outright lies.

Yet these characters purport to speak to "law" without credible evidence demonstrating any validly verifiable knowledge pertaining to what "law" actually is, much less any demonstrable comprehension of how little quantifiable "law" has been existentially proven by the simple methodology of discovery.

There are a number of legitimate and knowledgeable people here who attempt to apprise the more apt to err seekers of a quick fix to research thoroughly and carefully all applications of research, theory and knowledge (including the more esoteric and specialized) to practice in their own specific situations.

There are also a few bullying cyber pavement artists deceptively passing themselves off as mere fools living in denial, who thus seek to sow seeds of discord under the aegis of "helping" ignorant suckers from being taken in by the conniving PAYtriots that they insinuate are legion, and lay in wait herein.

I have observed in my short time here, that these bullying pavement artists have apparently driven away some decent folks who otherwise could help provide reasonable study guides and alternative approaches to the utterly decadent, corrupt and morally and materially bankrupt system these pathetic apologists represent and believe they profit from.

(BTW, there is absolutely no truth to any of the current and past rumors that mrbean, shunray, septik and brickyard are feds trolling for "homeland.")

[mrg]

Originally Posted by mrg

I think JRB is actually afraid of David Merrill.

Just kidding.

[idknow]

Originally Posted by B Rookard

The problem with the tax protest / IMF / CFR / Federal Reserve / UCC / wingnut crowd is their simple inability (as Judge has noted) to accept reality.

This stems from an utter inability to admit that they're simply wrong about the law.

When confronted with the evidence to refute their theories, the wingnuts bury their heads in the sand and will never admit their error. This inability to admit error results from the fear that all their "studies" and "research" will have been for naught should they fess up and admit the error. It is born of the shame that would result in adhering to false beliefs for what amounts to years. In effect, they would be forced to admit that they were duped ... that they are susceptible to being easily fooled by the charlatans. The solution, throw up the wall of denial ... defend the "theories" at any cost ... no matter how evident that the theories espoused by the wingnuts are ridiculous.

Fringe on a flag has some talismanic power to confer admiralty jurisdiction (although jurisdiction is founded upon the constitution and statutes - not on a piece of cloth).

Definitions never include the common meaning ... even though the definition of "includes" specifically says it doesn't exclude what is otherwise within the meaning of the term defined (and the fact that every court ever to hear such an argument has rejected it doesn't deter the tax protestor crowd).

Somehow spelling your name in all caps creates some fictional character which tax protestors think they can attach a security interest to ... not surprisingly, no court has ever bought into such whacked out theories ... and if the dupes had ever read the statute relating to UCC filings, they would realize such filings are ineffective (and downright silly).

The phrase "United States" doesn't include the State of the Union ... how ridiculous. If the wingnuts actually read the article mentioned in the Hooven case they would see that neither of the geographic definitions of "United States" excludes the States ... the States are always part of the normal understanding of what the "United States" means.

I could go on at great length illustrating the absurd theories of the wingnuts ... but there's really no point ... like I said, there will now be a parade of posts exhibiting the denial of the tax protest crowd ... they'll never admit error ... much less the possibility that they could be wrong.

Want a good analogy ... you can compare tax protestors to the Flat Earth Society ... no matter how often you try to reason with them and show them the irrefutable proof ... they don't WANT to find the truth ... their theories are more important than the truth ... and they'll defend their theories to the death ... no matter how ridiculous they look in doing so.

I KNOW the land is flat, what yer pernt?

None of the ‘Brickyards, Shuntrooths, Beanhides, Sugarfoots, and Septics, et al’ have shown any material fact that admiralty-insurance law has not been shoved down people’s throat, against thier contrary to their birthright, the common law of the land.

King George did the same to the colonists with the Colonial Courts of Admiralty only the people were a whole lot wiser then as they recognized that they were being subjected to A JURISDICTION FOREIGN TO OUR CONSTITUTION; hence the 'Declaration of Independence’ … A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, IS UNFIT TO BE THE RULER OF A FREE PEOPLE.

So, nothing much as changed as …. ATTEMPTS BY THEIR LEGISLATURE TO EXTEND AN UNWARRANTABLE JURISDICTION OVER US continues on to this very day and yet it is recognized by their own courts, and in their own words “… the common law courts succeeded in establishing the general rule that the jurisdiction of the admiralty was confined to the high seas and entirely excluded from transactions arising on waters within the body of a county, such as rivers, inlets, and arms of the sea as far out as the naked eye could discern objects from shore to shore, as well as from transactions arising on the land, though relating to marine affairs. U.S. Supreme Court NEW ENGLAND MUT. MARINE INS. CO. v. DUNHAM, 78 U.S. 1 (1870)78 U.S. 1 (Wall.) INSURANCE COMPANY v. DUNHAM. December Term, 1870 http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...78&invol=1#t16

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm

He has combined with others to SUBJECT US TO A JURISDICTION FOREIGN TO OUR CONSTITUTION, and UNACKNOWLEDGED BY OUR [common] LAWS; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

FOR ABOLISHING THE FREE SYSTEM OF ENGLISH LAWS in a neighbouring Province, ESTABLISHING THEREIN AN ARBITRARY GOVERNMENT, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. WE HAVE WARNED THEM FROM TIME TO TIME OF ATTEMPTS BY THEIR LEGISLATURE TO EXTEND AN UNWARRANTABLE JURISDICTION OVER US. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred. to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.