New Yawk Citee Inc.

[mrg]

This, for myself I can well work with, and if mine, it certainly would not look like that for long, for it is you see, that I have values, and a sense of esthetics that would transform what you see there.

I see treasure, where you cannot.

For, it is, you see, you live in a rigidly defined illusory realm of "winners" and "losers," "haves" and "have nots."

What you picture above is that which YOU fear.

So it is, you see, that you do not "see."

All your "winning" is hollow, vain, and, ultimately, but Pyrrhic.

At the end of the day all that drives your base DESIRE to "win" (a GAME at CHANCE, no less), is a mortal FEAR of "losing," and both, you see, are illusion.


This is yours and that is all you will ever know or have, unless you choose to let it go.

There are your "values," or lack thereof, defined, and spread out before you.

That is a carcass, and when it is gone, you will have to scavenge (first choice) and/or hunt and kill, and feed and consume.

I will take the first picture.

It would easily be transformed into a living, and livable work of art.

For it is, you see, that is what I do, and that is what I am, and no one can ever take that from me.

I create.

You scavenge, kill, and feed.

You ARE the second picture, and what you see is all that will ever be for you.






Look at the eyes.

Let us go then, you and I,
When the evening is spread out against the sky
Like a patient etherized upon a table;
Let us go, through certain half-deserted streets,
The muttering retreats
Of restless nights in one-night cheap hotels
And sawdust restaurants with oyster-shells:
Streets that follow like a tedious argument
Of insidious intent
To lead you to an overwhelming question . . .
Oh, do not ask, "What is it?"
Let us go and make our visit.

In the room the women come and go
Talking of Michelangelo.

The yellow fog that rubs its back upon the window-panes,
The yellow smoke that rubs its muzzle on the window-panes
Licked its tongue into the corners of the evening,
Lingered upon the pools that stand in drains,
Let fall upon its back the soot that falls from chimneys,
Slipped by the terrace, made a sudden leap,
And seeing that it was a soft October night,
Curled once about the house, and fell asleep.

And indeed there will be time
For the yellow smoke that slides along the street,
Rubbing its back upon the window-panes;
There will be time, there will be time
To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet;
There will be time to murder and create,
And time for all the works and days of hands
That lift and drop a question on your plate;
Time for you and time for me,
And time yet for a hundred indecisions,
And for a hundred visions and revisions,
Before the taking of a toast and tea.

In the room the women come and go
Talking of Michelangelo.

And indeed there will be time
To wonder, "Do I dare?" and, "Do I dare?"
Time to turn back and descend the stair,
With a bald spot in the middle of my hair--
[They will say: "How his hair is growing thin!"]
My morning coat, my collar mounting firmly to the chin,
My necktie rich and modest, but asserted by a simple pin--
[They will say: "But how his arms and legs are thin!"]
Do I dare
Disturb the universe?
In a minute there is time
For decisions and revisions which a minute will reverse.

For I have known them all already, known them all:--
Have known the evenings, mornings, afternoons,
I have measured out my life with coffee spoons;
I know the voices dying with a dying fall
Beneath the music from a farther room.
So how should I presume?

And I have known the eyes already, known them all--
The eyes that fix you in a formulated phrase,
And when I am formulated, sprawling on a pin,
When I am pinned and wriggling on the wall,
Then how should I begin
To spit out all the butt-ends of my days and ways?
And how should I presume?

And I have known the arms already, known them all--
Arms that are braceleted and white and bare
[But in the lamplight, downed with light brown hair!]
Is it perfume from a dress
That makes me so digress?
Arms that lie along a table, or wrap about a shawl.
And should I then presume?
And how should I begin?
. . . . .
Shall I say, I have gone at dusk through narrow streets
And watched the smoke that rises from the pipes
Of lonely men in shirt-sleeves, leaning out of windows? . . .

I should have been a pair of ragged claws
Scuttling across the floors of silent seas.

. . . . .

And the afternoon, the evening, sleeps so peacefully!
Smoothed by long fingers,
Asleep . . . tired . . . or it malingers,
Stretched on the floor, here beside you and me.
Should I, after tea and cakes and ices,
Have the strength to force the moment to its crisis?
But though I have wept and fasted, wept and prayed,
Though I have seen my head [grown slightly bald] brought in upon a platter,
I am no prophet--and here's no great matter;
I have seen the moment of my greatness flicker,
And I have seen the eternal Footman hold my coat, and snicker,
And in short, I was afraid.

And would it have been worth it, after all,
After the cups, the marmalade, the tea,
Among the porcelain, among some talk of you and me,
Would it have been worth while,
To have bitten off the matter with a smile,
To have squeezed the universe into a ball
To roll it toward some overwhelming question,
To say: "I am Lazarus, come from the dead
Come back to tell you all, I shall tell you all"--
If one, settling a pillow by her head,
Should say: "That is not what I meant at all.
That is not it, at all."

And would it have been worth it, after all,
Would it have been worth while,
After the sunsets and the dooryards and the sprinkled streets,
After the novels, after the teacups, after the skirts that trail along the
floor--
And this, and so much more?--
It is impossible to say just what I mean!
But as if a magic lantern threw the nerves in patterns on a screen:
Would it have been worth while
If one, settling a pillow or throwing off a shawl,
And turning toward the window, should say:
"That is not it at all,
That is not what I meant, at all."

. . . . .

No! I am not Prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be;
Am an attendant lord, one that will do
To swell a progress, start a scene or two,
Advise the prince; no doubt, an easy tool,
Deferential, glad to be of use,
Politic, cautious, and meticulous;
Full of high sentence, but a bit obtuse
At times, indeed, almost ridiculous--
Almost, at times, the Fool.

I grow old . . .I grow old . . .
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.

Shall I part my hair behind? Do I dare to eat a peach?
I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each.

I do not think that they will sing to me.

I have seen them riding seaward on the waves
Combing the white hair of the waves blown back
When the wind blows the water white and black.

We have lingered in the chambers of the sea
By sea-girls wreathed with seaweed red and brown
Till human voices wake us, and we drown.

[Steel]

Originally Posted by netwrkranger

You have any case cites or historical evidence to this "tacit consent to be bound by its laws" allegation?

It is considered as TACIT CONSENT when no resistance is offered.

So he is not off base and actually as most of his resistance is towards this forum and not the US it seems fair to say he has given his TACIT CONSENT

[robhalford88]

Originally Posted by netwrkranger

You have any case cites or historical evidence to this "tacit consent to be bound by its laws" allegation?

Who cares if he does? Didn't the founding fathers say that if government becomes oppressive, it is your duty to go to DC and remove them by force?
His crap is totally contrary to what they intended and is the doctrine of a coward and collaborator.

[Lawdog]

Originally Posted by Little Brother 192

So who have you removed from office by force?

Exactly. Rob talks big, but he doesn't have the guts or the power to remove even his local school superintendent by force.

[Lawdog]

Originally Posted by netwrkranger

You have any case cites or historical evidence to this "tacit consent to be bound by its laws" allegation?

The case cited in my signature line is a good example. Mr. Skurdal (who once got indicted and arrested over the same scheme as DiM...ask him for details) basically was told by the Supreme Court of Montana, "If you don't want to abide by our laws, you need to get the hell out of Montana."

Here's the full paragraph from which my sig line is taken:

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. Skurdal is a "person" as defined by § 61-1-307, MCA, and bound by the statutes in Montana which he violated. Consent to laws is not a prerequisite to their enforceability against individuals. City of Salina, 737 P.2d at 983. No persons in Montana may exempt themselves from any law simply by declaring they do not consent to it applying to them. We must all abide by the valid laws, even the ones with which we do not agree, or justice will be served against us for the violation. Accepting Skurdal's assertion of exempt status is an invitation to anarchy. We decline that invitation.

[Emphasis added]

Presence in a place means you are subject to the jurisdiction of the laws of that place. Burnham v. Superior Court of Marin County (495 U.S. 604), a U.S. Supreme Court case from 1990, reaffirms this ancient principle.

[netwrkranger]

Thank-you, Lawdog.

Now, you called it an 'ancient principle'. Would you happen to have the historical information on this? Does it stem from English jurisprudence? Roman jurisprudence? Roman legal history? Are there any legal treatises on 'tacit consent' or consent in general?

- netwrkranger

[mrg]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

Exactly. Rob talks big, but he doesn't have the guts or the power to remove even his local school superintendent by force.

But you have a Glock
Where your C*ck ought to be
Out looking for a "jerk"
"On his" "face" "look" "to see?"

Big "talk," big man?

[ThomPaine]

as usual, this thread has completely run amuck and is filled largely with garbage, bantering, insults and BS... guess some will never learn..

good to see mr. james back on the board, how ya been man??

I have done the following: citation was accepted for value upon proof of claim and sent back to NY DMV with a three page explaination/brief.

will post back with results. worse case scenario i have to pay the 90 FRNs,

carry on with your antics...

Thom

[mrg]

The thread went straight into the toilet on page 1, at post #10,

Practice Makes Perfect

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 474
shaking head

Originally Posted by Lawdog

Haha, they most certainly do when you're in one of the five boroughs that comprise the City of New York (Manhattan, Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island).

Quote:

You're not a person? Then what are you, an ape who learned how to type English, or a visitor from another planet?

Person = human being. You, me, everyone still breathing who is a member of the species homo sapiens.

and you, yourself, joined in the "antics," left, and now you are back.

So what have you "learned?"

I held off until post #24.

Once its that far into the toilet its a whole different thread.

I didn't put it into the toilet.

I did flush it a couple of times I suppose.

By that time it was already full of it.

Sorry if you find T.S. to be BS.

If you take it apart word by word and put it back together again after you OWN each word and how each functions in context to the whole, I think you will discover that there is far more law there than you will find in all the DC "code" and the entire repetoire of the caterwauling songs of the "Supremes."

Do you want to learn law or play in traffic?

Do you really want to learn about lawful, legal, and law?

Learn German and learn Kafka's Der Prozeß, and Das Schloß, backwards and frontwords, upside down and inside out.

There is law 101 for you.

Pettifogging BAR Esquires, Scheißters, and puffed up justiciars and "professors" have their noses stuck so far up the nether regions of the political machinery that they have long since lost any sense of what law is, if they ever had any to begin with.

[David Merrill]

Please try to understand that I am not a reserve bank.

What do you mean?

According to the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, §16 and its codification in Title 12 U.S.C. §411 I have never endorsed private credit from the Fed.

No subject matter jurisdiction in any government court.




Regards,

David Merrill.