Example #1 Civil Asset Forfeiture or the slow death of the 5th Amendment  

Page 1 / 2
 

The Evil Genius
Admin
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 1425
23/09/2018 2:23 pm  

The red pill experience is one of rebirth into a true reality; but seeing the world as it really is presents staggering contradictions. How does an awakened man achieve self-fulfillment and personal sovereignty in a world where the deck is stacked against him?  My purpose with these articles is to aid men in negotiating their way through the labyrinth of the illogical and the irrational. As a Independent man facing the true realities of life can be daunting. One of these contradictions is the fact that the “law” and “justice” are often two different things.

We begin with civil forfeiture, or as it is often called civil asset seizure. It is a legal process in which law enforcement officers seize assets from persons suspected of involvement with crime or illegal activity without necessarily charging the owners with wrongdoing. While civil procedure, as opposed to criminal procedure, generally involves a dispute between two private citizens, civil forfeiture involves a dispute between law enforcement and property such as a pile of cash or a house or a boat, such that the thing is suspected of being involved in a crime. To recover the seized property, owners must prove it was not involved in criminal activity. In 2015, Eric Holder ended "adoptive forfeiture" which occurred "when a state or local law enforcement agency seizes property pursuant to state law and requests that a federal agency take the seized asset and forfeit it under federal law. Although states proceeded to curtail the powers of police to seize assets, actions by the Justice Department in July 2017 have sought to reinstate police seizure powers that simultaneously raise funding for federal agencies and local law enforcement. HERE is the key: the burden of proof has shifted from the authorities to YOU.  

The fifth amendment to the Constitution states: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” This amendment was imposed upon the states through the auspices of the fourteenth amendment.

For example. As an Independent man you will acquire assets and use them as you see fit. So you might be cruising down the road in your car on your way to buy something expensive and you have several thousand dollars in cash on your person. A police officer pulls you over and a search reveals the cash, which he then confiscates under the civil forfeiture statute of the state. The only way to get you money back is to sue in court. Well how do we square this use of government power with the express language of the fifth amendment?       

The Supreme Court has addressed this issue first in 1827 and as recently as 1996. The case cited below is the 1996 case—oddly a Rehnquist majority opinion. I read it; I offer it to you and frankly I’m astounded by the breathtaking disregard for logic and justice.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/94-8729.ZO.html

The key reasoning Justice Rehnquist relied upon is from the Palmyra decision of 1827. In Palmyra we have some men who own a ship and presumably lease it to another group who use it to sail around and engage in piracy. Well the government takes a dim view of piracy and ultimately caught up with the pirates and in the process seized the vessel. The owners of the ship demanded its return once the pirates had been dealt with, and the government refused. The owners sued of course and the case ended up in front of the Supreme Court. Justice Story held: “The thing is here primarily considered as the offender, or rather the offence is attached primarily to the thing.” The “thing” he is referring to is the ship.

And here is where we go off the rails of rationality. If you read through the cases following this precedent you find that the “attachment” relationship between the “thing” i.e. property and the “offence” has been so broadened as to include ANYTHING no matter how tangentially related. In the case I cite above (Rehnquist) A man is in his car copulating with a prostitute. Obviously an illegal act under state law. He is arrested and the CAR is seized under the state’s civil forfeiture statute. Thus the CAR is somehow attached to the crime---in theory.

What I find interesting is that all of the cases after Palmyra involved issues of taxes–government revenue. i.e. liquor, smuggled drugs etc. That is for example seizing cars illegally transporting booze during prohibition. So it was the lust for revenue on the part of the government fueling this issue. And as we know the government’s lust for $$$ knows no limits.

Please note also how Rehnquist and the court cherry picked Justice Story’s opinion omitting the following:

“The forfeiture did not, strictly speaking, attach in rem; but it was a part, or at least a consequence, of the judgment of conviction. It is plain from this statement, that no right to the goods and chattels of the felon could be acquired by the crown by the mere commission of the offence; but the right attached only by the conviction of the offender. The necessary result was, that in every case where the crown sought to recover such goods and chattels, it was indispensable to establish its right by producing the record of the judgment of conviction. In the contemplation of the common law, the offender’s right was not de-vested until the conviction.” WHOOOPS! So much for precedent. Maybe Rehnquist didn’t read that part. Or dismissed it as mere "dicta" because Story was quoting the English common law principle. 

So the logical question is: (given the case law) does the relationship of a ship used to pirate equate to a car used by a guy banging a prostitute? In my view the Court ignores and erases the obvious distinction between necessary and sufficient conditions. A necessary condition for the occurrence of an event is one without which the event cannot occur.  Whereas a sufficient condition for the occurrence of an event is one that cannot guarantee that the event occurs but MAY result in the occurrence of the event.

To engage in pirating, the ship (subject to confiscation/forfeiture) CAN possibly be used for piracy AND if one is pirating one MUST have a ship, thus the ship is both necessary and sufficient in order to carry out piracy. But the car used by the guy banging the hooker is NOT necessary it is only sufficient. Is the car a necessary component in order to bang the hooker? No of course not–he could bang the hooker anywhere. Is it sufficient? In other words could the event have occurred without the car? Without the car could the event have occurred at all? Of course, thus the car is not a necessary condition for the event to have occurred. But the court has abandoned logical reasoning. In essence the court has subsumed sufficient into what is necessary and determined that ALL property however loosely associated is now necessary for the offence to have been committed.

This my friends and brothers is how the court has eradicated the protections of the 5th amendment. This is how the Constitution dies. In the 17th century, English philosopher John Locke wrote about freedom, life, liberty, property and the “pursuit of happiness.” The latter quoted from his 1693 Essay Concerning Human Understanding that “the highest perfection of intellectual nature lies in a careful and constant pursuit of true and solid happiness.” These were his concepts of inalienable rights.

But were Locke alive today he would have thought that we live in total anarchy. With “liberty” he meant sticking to the rules that governed social class mobility and with “happiness” he meant gathering property and riches without being bothered by government. In June 1776, George Mason reiterated the right to property in the Virginia Deceleration of Rights. But a few days later, on July 4th, Thomas Jefferson – penning the United States Deceleration of Independence – changed Locke’s original call for “life, liberty, and property” to: “We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” So in the Declaration of Independence the word property was dropped. But 13 years latter it was expressly stated in the Constitution.  

Clearly civil forfeiture has mutated into a mere governmental cash grab. A government’s lust for money can never be quenched BUT 27 states have abandoned asset forfeiture since 1996. In response, the federal government plans to reinstate civil forfeiture at the federal level. I can only assume subjectively that it is ultimately meant to be a “soft” coercion. That is a means of centralizing power further and using this as a potential weapon against perceived adversaries. But then I’m something of an alarmist.

So in conclusion we see that the “law” has little to do with “justice” particularly where money is concerned. I will address the issue of individual rights and government power in future essays. Thanks for reading, and I hope this information helps guide you through the “labyrinth” of reality.  

 

 


Quote
The Evil Genius
Admin
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 1425
23/09/2018 2:49 pm  

Addendum: I have to give credit where credit is due. The idea for this "Paper Chase"  forum was hatched by Travis3000. Good call brother--applause! 


ReplyQuote
MG-ɹǝʍo┴
Founder..
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 2924
23/09/2018 4:00 pm  

My persons, property, and tangible goods are already under seizure by law, order, and equity, and ongoing litigation since 1999 when claims were made in courts of law. Nobody is above the law, not even a judge, I cannot be condemned twice by the same law held over me illegally and negligently since 1974. 

Condemned, once and for all! That's the way the cookie crumbles when people conspire in contempt of a court order. 

I am a dismembered person from a Massachusetts condemned and mutilated corporate corpse and deceased body politic since 1974, established 1999.

We broke the justice system, it does't work anymore, they no longer respond, all legal claims and cases are still open and locked forever in litigation, all they can do to us at this point in time is add to the long standing pile of open cases awaiting answers from the justice.

True story,  big ass red pill! I live and dwell day to day criminally and recklessly endangered by law, order, equity, and lack of due process. We're the state's dirty little secret where it's all gone wrong and swept under the carpet with all the other dirty little secrets. 

I'm only biding my time when this illegal and neglect operation claims human life and or personal injury. 

We're locked down on the wrong side of the law and they not only know it, but they conspired to initiate it at every turn throughout our history. 

The government is now the criminals and the people are the victims, otherwise coined "the victims of justice". 

Upside down, backwards, and twisted was never the intention of the law, but somehow it just evolved that way. 

Marriage law and women's rights are the same tyranny, men are the "victims of justice" in that arena, no if and or buts about it! 

The law is no longer trustworthy and we each must navigate in new and unimaginable ways to avoid the predators of justice that know no remorse, or any other way! 

America is dead and long deceased where I live. The unique processes they created outside the law and over the court order is their claim to fame, I only have to ask, who's who when it comes to criminal activity in a lawfully condemned and closed place? 

The long arm of the law can fist-fuck itself as far as I'm concerned!   


ReplyQuote
The Evil Genius
Admin
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 1425
23/09/2018 4:24 pm  

I have a book recommendation for you Tower: Charles Dickens Bleakhouse.

 

Good grief Itsallbs! you have to do more than cite the law--you need to give us more information. What does the law state, how is it applied, what is its source of authority, what are some significant cases...etc. 


ReplyQuote
may72020
Founder..
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 749
23/09/2018 6:19 pm  

I had to think about forfeiture in a difference sense during the initial phases of my divorce. I was removed from my home and had to surrender car and house keys to the police officers who came to my home. Divorce court made me think about my possessions. I would probably have to pay the lawyer to fight for my possessions. I mentally added up the cost to replace my possessions versus time and costs associated with dividing the household, upsetting the kids, and what was I going to do with my possessions that I "won".  I gave it all away. I didn't want to fight for an old couch. Bitch wanted to cheat on me, and throw me away, fine, you keep all my stuff, you clean me out yourself. Clothing, toiletry items, shoes, tools, and stained glass supplies. I was working on repairing a window for a church, all of it signed over to the cunt. My kids told me she made Chad box up all my stuff and put it all in his truck to haul to Goodwill.

The state would have written the order compelling the cunt to divide up the household items, but at what cost. In the early stages I thought I would have a quick easy divorce. We settled on a custody schedule, I signed away the house and cars and that should have been it. 

 


ReplyQuote
MG-ɹǝʍo┴
Founder..
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 2924
23/09/2018 6:30 pm  

May, that's because they change their minds about love and decide to hate instead! And now the law puts clobbering muscle behind her hatred and disrespect of you, her husband. I can't imagine the living hell that is on one's mind, heart, and soul! 

I got a good taste of women and never married one, I only grew further apart and more indifferent as time went on and revealed these truths to me. 

I have no desire to endure their insanity and bizarre behavior, I've felt this way since since late last century, and all I got over and over again is confirmation through the suffering of others! 

Legally? They love to burn their men alive!  


ReplyQuote
uoSʎWodɹɐH
Founder.
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 685
23/09/2018 9:12 pm  

The Evil Genius  wrote:

Addendum: I have to give credit where credit is due. The idea for this "Paper Chase" forum was hatched by Travis3000. Good call brother--applause!

Thank you both for this read as  I have an addiction to knowing the difference between the  legality and lawfulness of governmental actions..

I have found this statement to be true and even the judicial system has agreed with it.. "Everything is legal in a lawless society"  (does not make it lawful)

I have established my own lawful jurisdiction as a replacement for this totally lawless society where everything is legal even immorality..

Please visit my latest two published legal terms as they are succinct and easy to understand..

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=true+civilization&defid=13211943

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=special+appearance&defid=13211985

 

I was bound to be misunderstood, and I laugh at the idiots who misunderstand me! Kind mockery toward the well-intentioned and unfettered cruelty toward all would-be prison guards of my creative possibilities. In this way I learn to revel as much in misunderstanding as in understanding and take pleasure in worthy opponents. Making language fluid, flowing like a river, yet precise and pointed as a dirk, contradicts the socialistic purpose of language and makes for a wonderful verbal dance—a linguistic martial art with constant parries that hone the weapon that is the two edged sword of my mouth.


ReplyQuote
Uly The Cunning
Admin
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 2183
24/09/2018 7:16 am  

The ability to well document your possessions and funds, but not broadcast them to be easily established by the greedy people that govern over us is very important.

I remember that when I was once charged for a debt that was not legitimate. They 'held' a court case where I was found liable to pay for this made up debt. I had an official visit me at my apartment, to see what they could take of value, and they walked away with nothing, saying I had nothing of value to take. I had money, things of value, but nothing on display and boasted about. As such, they assumed it was barking up the wrong tree. Several weeks later, the judgment against me was lifted as erroneous, as it was someone else with the same name, as their excuse. If they had taken what they assumed would be theirs, I would never see those things again and never properly reimbursed. This was about 15 or so years ago.

It isn't the exact same as connecting it to a crime, but my point is, do your best to not give them ideas of what they can take, and hopefully it will help in the long run. In the end of the day, the only real thing that we own is our bodies, and even that has to be carried in the way that is governed for us. 

"Remember, you're fighting for this woman's honor, which is probably more than she ever did."
Groucho Marx: Duck Soup (1933)


ReplyQuote
The Evil Genius
Admin
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 1425
24/09/2018 11:25 pm  

Excellent responses---I especially liked Harpo's "special appearance". 

Uly also makes a great point---what would have happened IF when they show up at the door and confiscate stuff they discover later he is the wrong guy? Does he get his stuff back? Is he compensated for his stuff? NO doesn't sound very just to me. 


ReplyQuote
may72020
Founder..
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 749
25/09/2018 6:36 am  

Until I have full resolution, all accounts paid in full, I will have an empty home, minimal possessions and deep in debt. I have nothing, and can have nothing taken from me. I owe 19 months of time $8,873. Waiting is the hard part. Cunt makes this much money in about 3 weeks. Such a joke. The last European trip she took lasted 2 weeks, and she probably spent this much. 

Evil genius, is the civil forfeiture related to eminent domain? I remember there was an outrageous Supreme Court ruling on eminent domain in the last 10 years? but my memory fails me. 


ReplyQuote
uoSʎWodɹɐH
Founder.
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 685
25/09/2018 1:45 pm  

The Evil Genius wrote:

Excellent responses---I especially liked Harpo's "special appearance". Uly also makes a great point---what would have happened IF when they show up at the door and confiscate stuff they discover later he is the wrong guy? Does he get his stuff back? Is he compensated for his stuff? NO doesn't sound very just to me. 

Thanks Evil one.  I have studied our upside down system for years, because as I get older I am getting more and more in debt to those "BAD GUYS DRESSED AS THE GOOD GUYS" It  became imperative that I establish myself as completely looted and without anything of value. I decided to answer my fathers call and move into heaven because that puts the burden on them to justify taking the property of an Honorably discharged Navy Veteran who is and has been buried in a national cemetery for 18 years. That property being my living flesh and the future product thereof.

My strategy was inspired by my father anyhow who once told me this:   :Son if you ever get crossways with the law, JUST grab the truth, accept the truth and Marry the truth and GOD becomes YOUR father in law..

With his spiritual help we attacked the weakest area of our corrupt judicial system. That being CASELOAD. They cannot possibly remember everyone who appears before them in the courtroom.

I only had my case to work on and only appeared before the corrupt judge twice. Knowing he probably would never remember my first appearance because it was many years ago I made my second appearance very memorable by acting the crazy man.  (speaking in the spirit of my father) Now he is trapped by the words of his own laws. One more appearance and a dead man will get credit for exposing and busting a federal child support enforcement scam.

I am being spiritually guided.   I asked for one small thing in Jesus name and have been getting a continuing answer ever since..

I JUST said:  In Jesus name what would Bud Mckinney do in this situation and clearly heard my fathers voice say "JUST hand everything to me son."

Now The state said I was broke and I felt it was a good time to establish my vow of poverty.  I choose to give all the praise,Honor,and glory as well as my life, along with all the future product thereof as a gift to my chosen GOD.  I figured the government wants to own everything so I give everything to someone they say is higher in authority than everyone in this nation.   ONE NATION UNDER GOD.

My most prized PAPER CHASED  is a signed (By a magistrate) order of commitment commanding that any agent authorized by law take CUSTODY of said defendant and hold HIMorHER until they are legally discharged. It came to me in a jail cell unsigned by the county Sheriff or the jailer. I signed it with my Father's name establishing my father in heaven to be my highest custodial agent.  I flipped it over and created a marriage license naming Jesus the Husband and Me the bride. I took my husbands last name as then my married name would be Christ and my earthly father would become the father in law to Jesus. I then filed this document and established (the honorable lord Winston McKinney's kingdom of heaven on earth where My Husband and I shall honeymoon forever.)

Seek ye first his kingdom and all this will be given unto you.  I own nothing but my father owns everything.  Is he dead?  I think not. 

Now I will never speak in a public courtroom again (effectively taking the 5th)  My father in spirit will challenge the courts jurisdiction with his claim that I could only be domiciled in his heavenly Kingdom and ask the Judge:  "who has  burden of proof your honor a man presumed innocent or the prosecution?" 

My Legal domicile  is self evident and my father's testimony is void of any lies, Who has the burden your honor has anyone evidence otherwise?

I keep all my legal paperwork with me at all times, and my fathers expired Drivers license proves we are both in a HEAVENER place. He is my defender in public (public defender) They cannot force a lawyer on me now who would toss me under the bus.

My father and I have become agents for the people, not the court. A man of faith is not a preacher of his own beliefs but a teacher of his own self evident truth.

Love and respect to all

I was bound to be misunderstood, and I laugh at the idiots who misunderstand me! Kind mockery toward the well-intentioned and unfettered cruelty toward all would-be prison guards of my creative possibilities. In this way I learn to revel as much in misunderstanding as in understanding and take pleasure in worthy opponents. Making language fluid, flowing like a river, yet precise and pointed as a dirk, contradicts the socialistic purpose of language and makes for a wonderful verbal dance—a linguistic martial art with constant parries that hone the weapon that is the two edged sword of my mouth.


ReplyQuote
uoSʎWodɹɐH
Founder.
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 685
25/09/2018 2:32 pm  

May72020 wrote:  Until I have full resolution, all accounts paid in full, I will have an empty home, minimal possessions and deep in debt. I have nothing, and can have nothing taken from me. I owe 19 months of time $8,873. Waiting is the hard part. Cunt makes this much money in about 3 weeks. Such a joke. The last European trip she took lasted 2 weeks, and she probably spent this much.                                                  Evil genius, is the civil forfeiture related to eminent domain? I remember there was an outrageous Supreme Court ruling on eminent domain in the last 10 years? but my memory fails me. 

Civil forfeiture is not related to eminent domain because Civil forfeiture does non require the government to compensate  you for the property they take. An example of Eminent domain is when a new highway project  is planned that routs itself right through your house. They will take your house but they are required to compensate you for it. The compensation may or may not be enough, but still you get something in return and you are not being accused of criminal activity.

Civil forfeiture is theft outright, as they claim no requirement to compensate you for what they take. Nothing about it is lawful or civilized. They just judge your property guilty and take it. They are exempting themselves from providing evidence of your guilt by skirting around accusing you of anything at all. Your property is the criminal not you..This leaves you having to defend your property from an accusation.  How absurd is that? 

I was bound to be misunderstood, and I laugh at the idiots who misunderstand me! Kind mockery toward the well-intentioned and unfettered cruelty toward all would-be prison guards of my creative possibilities. In this way I learn to revel as much in misunderstanding as in understanding and take pleasure in worthy opponents. Making language fluid, flowing like a river, yet precise and pointed as a dirk, contradicts the socialistic purpose of language and makes for a wonderful verbal dance—a linguistic martial art with constant parries that hone the weapon that is the two edged sword of my mouth.


ReplyQuote
GregBO
Admin
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 2133
25/09/2018 2:43 pm  

TEG, Great post and I look forward to further posts.  Cannon would have smiled at this thread!

<HERE is the key: the burden of proof has shifted from the authorities to YOU. >  The burden of proof has always been upon men whenever they are placed before the court.  Lower courts have become inherently biased in their self-made charge to protect "Public Justice", notice I did not say "Public Good".

<nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” T>  Check, however the founding fathers had no concept of the monies and resources that would become available from the rise of illegal drug traffic, weapons sales, anything ATF or DEA these days.  

"If the property subject to forfeiture is no longer available, the court can enter a money judgment or order the forfeiture of substitute assets.  

<"The AFF reported $1,586.4 million in forfeiture revenue in FY 2017 and $1,886.9 million in FY 2016.">  This is why the type and rate of forfeitures will only increase to offset the funding G'ment agencies receive.

"<Though it is an enforcement tool, asset forfeiture can assist in the budgeting realm by helping to offset the costs associated with fighting crime. Doing what it takes to undermine the illicit drug trade is expensive and time-consuming. Forfeiture can help agencies target these difficult problems, sometimes without the need to seek additional outside resources to offset their costs.">  The continued support for forfeiture will continue to move from those true criminals, to those individuals who have significant tangible assets yet lack the legal support or knowledge to defend their assets.

​"What we have done for ourselves alone dies with us; what we have done for others and the world remains and is immortal." -Albert Pike

​"​My father didn't tell me how to live; he lived, and let me watch him do it.​" - Clarence Buddinton Kelland


ReplyQuote
uoSʎWodɹɐH
Founder.
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 685
28/09/2018 10:14 pm  

Secret Cannons of Judicial Behavior  

Meant to be humorous but oh so true in most cases..

I fell under the abuses associated with cannon 11 until they realized I had some intellectual understanding.

Now I fall under the jurisdiction of my chosen God..I used the term "VENUE SHOPPING" to my best advantage.

There are no policemen lawyers or Judges who are familiar with The Honorable Lord Winston McKinney's

Kingdom  of Heaven on earth until They find themselves before the spirit of My Father in heaven and have the burden of proving

otherwise.

 

SECRET CANON 1 ATTORNEY GENERAL AND PUBLIC DEFENDER

1  Prosecutorial Discretion
1(A)  We hold the prudent practice of "see, hear and speak no evil" essential as related to the office of the Attorney General [secretly called the "power structure's Mafia"]. Therefore:
  • 1(A)(i)  We hold the latitude we give the Public Defender's office compensates for any inequality of justice or prosecutorial misconduct and
  • 1(A)(ii)  We ignore the practice of overcharging by the Attorney General regardless of how many are forced into false admissions or plea bargains.
  • 1(A)(iii)  We hold overcharging can assist bar members with revenue enhancement and improves efficiency by reducing demands for jury trials and we shall not consider
    • any guidelines stating otherwise or
    • the devastation in the lives of those so affected.
  • 1(A)(iv)  Since it is the job of the Attorney General to "get" people, any means they use to do so is acceptable since they are the will and voice of the people.
  • 1(A)(v)  If the Attorney General's Office violates laws, rules or ethics while "getting" people then let the trial process sort it out.  To hell with the following:
    • those who can't afford effective counsel, a trial or those having a Public Defender and
    • those who get a Judge skilled in the use of judicial discretion who covers up or ignores prosecutorial misconduct citing "judicial efficiency" and the "duty of the state."
  • 1(A)(vi)  Having a bold aggressive Attorney General is of greater benefit to Society than any possible damage to individual life and liberty.
1(B) Public Defender
  • 1(B)(i)  The importance we place on justice can always be measured by the amount of resources given the Public Defender in proportion to the amount of resources given the Attorney General.
  • 1(B)(ii)  Under staffing and under funding of the Public Defender:
    • enhances Judicial efficiency and eases the court calendar by promoting plea bargains, suicides, breakdowns, despair, fleeing etc. and
    • can give us more bang for our buck by turning the Public Defender into an extension of the Attorney General's office and
    • can demonstrate effective use of the "good cop (Public Defender)" "bad cop (Attorney General)" scenario and
    • can assist members of the bar with property acquisition and other revenue enhancements.
  • 1(B)(iii)  Any uncooperative Public Defender making an issue of judicial or prosecutorial misconduct or ethics violations shall be removed as quickly as possible.

 

SECRET CANON 2 JUDICIAL BEHAVIOR TOWARDS LITIGANTS

2(A)  Confident Litigants
Any litigant appearing confident can be baffled by minutia or Judicially enhanced procedural criteria.
2(B)  Judicial Dominance
Occasionally we encounter a litigant who doesn't know we are king.  We hold the following tools effective in forcing a resistant litigant into submission:
  • intimidation by any means
  • condescending looks, gestures or comments
  • expressing or instigating anger, outrage or shock
  • obvious impatience
  • rushing the proceedings
  • frequent checks of the time
  • cautionary glances toward the Bailiff
  • appearing distressed or uncomfortable like one needing to go to the bathroom
  • yelling the magic word "NEXT!"
  • raising unrelated, irrelevant or confusing issues and
  • loud bangs using the gavel.
2(C)  The Need For Attorneys
We shall continue to stress the need to have an Attorney without addressing the fact the overwhelming majority of Americans can not afford them. This is effective in keeping the unresourceful and ineffective at bay.
2(D)  The Ultimate Authority
Citizens must be continually led to believe that the Judiciary is the final or ultimate authority in our system of Government.
2(E)  Practice Of Law Forbidden
We shall try as best we can to confuse clarifying issues with our inability to give advice. This makes us less apt to stick our foot in our mouth.
2(F)  Sincerity Of The Judiciary
We shall never appear insincere when stating absurdities, untruths, mistruths or nonsense. We shall always act like the hearer is unknowledgeable, naive or unseasoned.
2(G)  Judicial Fairness
We shall always remember when deciding the significance of an individual to consider money, connections, power, politics and the ability to get media attention in deciding how fair we need to be.
2(H)  Judicial Response To Criticism
We forever hold the response to valid or invalid criticism should be indignance.
2(I)  Judicial Efficiency
We hold instigating outrage, frustration, anger or other emotions in litigants can be an effective tool to rid ourselves of the unwanted litigant.
2(J)  Judicial Handling Of The Ignorant
The client demanding Justice and the full respect of their rights shall be treated with pity and patience.
2(K)  Judicial Authority
Due to the authoritative nature of black robes, we shall continue to resist their removal.

SECRET CANON 3 EXPERTS AND EXPERT TESTIMONY

3(A)  Efficiency Of Experts
We hold one of the greatest innovations for eliminating ineffective and unresourceful litigants is the ever expanding use of expert testimony.
3(B)  Evolution Of Experts
This innovation will reach maturity when we routinely use levels of experts on experts to testify on the validity and expertise of each expert.

SECRET CANON 4 JUDICIAL AND PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION

4(A)  Discretion Defined
We maintain judicial and prosecutorial discretion is doing whatever we damn well please within the judicially prudent guidelines we happen to be following at the time.
4(B)  Review Of Discretionary Acts
We shall never promulgate awareness of the real legal issue regarding the use and review of judicial and prosecutorial discretion which is the process of reasoning used in the discretionary act's decision making process. We shall convert the process of reasoning argument into an argument regarding the validity of doing or not doing the discretionary act.

SECRET CANON 5 JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT

5(A)  Oversight Immunity
The immunity of everyone overseeing the Judiciary must be maintained to prevent witch hunts and the overzealous from affecting the independence of the Judiciary. The Judiciary does not require the vulnerable or corrective oversight of the masses.
5(B)  Judicial Objectivity
We shall always remember the real symbolic reason behind the woman with the blindfold and scale. Objectivity and independence means remaining as blind as possible to wrong doing committed by the Judiciary, members of the bar, and the resourceful and effective.
5(C)  Judicial Self-Evaluation
To maintain the independence of the Judiciary, we hold each others rulings to be legally and factually correct regardless of the injustice that results, the facts or the law.
5(D)  Judicial Opinions Of Judges
To insure effective oversight of the Judiciary, we shall never criticize each other regardless of the severity of the wrong or the injustice.
5(E)  Trust Us, We're Judges
We hold self monitoring and absolute immunity as foolhardy, ineffective and unworkable for everyone except the Judiciary and judicial oversight committees.
5(F)  Judicial Job Performance
To allows us to remain unconcerned about upsetting the status quo, we shall keep the public convinced their interference will negatively affect the independence of the Judiciary making Judges afraid to do their jobs.  
5(G)  The Judicial Mosaic Tablet
We shall forever speak of centuries of Judicial immunities as proof of Judicial immunities' necessity and effectiveness without ever mentioning Judicial wrongdoing has been around as long as Judges.
5(H)  Delay = Denied
We hold admission of any Judicial wrongdoing delayed is admission of Judicial wrongdoing denied.
5(I)  Complete And Through Review
We hold there is no judicial wrongdoing which can not be diminished by time, levels of hearings and precise dissection , categorization and delegation of related facts and responsibilities.

SECRET CANON 6 JUDICIAL THOUGHT AND LEGAL REASONING

6(A)  Judicial Zen
    • 6(A)(i)  We hold the logic for our legal reasoning is embodied in the following statement which is understood only by the enlightened: "Because we open a window to the outside of this room does not mean we order, allow, permission or induce any air, dust, molecules, light waves, solar radiation, atoms, or any known or unknown wave or particulate matter from outside to enter this room and are not responsible if
      • said events occur due to the contextual basis of our decisions."

      • 6(A)(ii)  We believe in the existence of the metaphysical "third eye."  This enables us to selectively avoid looking out our other two eyes.
      • 6(A)(iii)  In the beginning was our word. Our word was with God, our word IS God.
      • 6(A)(iv)  To think is to be right.
      • 6(A)(v)  There is no issue that cannot be split into parts, and there is no part that can't be considered as the whole issue.
      6(B)  The Dangers Of Common Sense And Factual Integration
      • 6(B)(i) The consideration of the end result our decision has when integrated with the "outside world" can lead to decisions based on "common sense" and must be avoided.
      • 6(B)(ii)  "Common Sense" lessens the highly specialized analytical and intelligent nature of the Judiciary creating the undesirable illusion we think like the masses.
      • 6(B)(iii)  "Common sense" must not be part of legal proceedings because it cannot be objectively verified.
      • 6(B)(iv)  Large scale factual integration with realities of the outside world can negatively affect the perfection of our written word.
      6(C)  Judicial Self Esteem
      We endeavor to remain forever impressed with each other, our performance and our status irregardless of the availability or affordability of Justice.
      6(D)  Lip Service
      We hold the consideration and realities of the quality or delivery of Justice should be given lip service faithfully.
      6(E)  The Third Person
      We hold the "system" shall always be spoken of in the third person as if it operates independently from individuals.
      6(F)  Judicial Secret Mantra
      We may think but not say, "I am the closest thing to God you will ever know."
      6(G)  Protection Of Status Quo
      We shall remember "separate but equal" was around for 100 years.  If we hadn't listened to the masses it might still be good law. Therefore we shall keep the shades drawn so reality won't affect or disturb the independence of our decision making process or the Status Quo.
      6(H)  The Written Word
      We hold what looks good on paper must be good.
      6(I) The Primary Concern
      We shall never consider the end result of our decisions unless it could result in professional embarrassment, loss of status or media attention.
      6(J) Public Ignorance
      Arrogance is how Citizens define us when they are not fully aware of the nature or scope of our position.
      6(K) Judicial Discretion
      Judicial Discretion means we can do what we damn well please and is a great tool for denying appeals and judicial wrongdoing.
      6(L) The Ultimate Truth
      We irreversibly hold reality must conform to our decisions.
      6(M)  Judicial Precision
      We shall forever work on perfecting the art of the polite, dignified, respectful, orderly administered and well twisted screw.
      6(N) The Judicial Last Laugh
      As related to the Judiciary, the term "over my dead body" is not a cliche but factually correct.

SECRET CANON 7 JURIES AND JURY TRIALS

7(A)  Constitution Typo
We hold the right in the Constitution to jury trials in civil matters is a typo.
7(B)  Evidence Seen By Jury
We hold the illusion of justice can be created by thoughtful selection of the evidence seen by the Jury.
7(C)  Evolution Of Jury Trials
Except for criminal matters for the wealthy, we secretly maintain the elimination of jury trials and continue searching for ways to get that goddamn Constitution out of our way.
7(D)  Jury Nullification
We shall remember to act outraged at any mention of the vulgar practice called Jury Nullification.
7(D)(i)  Judicial View On Jury Nullification And Instruction
We hold the public does not have the intellectual sophistication to handle the power that comes with jury nullification. This power should only be in the hands of the Judiciary.
7(D)(ii)  Jury Instruction
In our continuing efforts to protect the public we must continue to "persuade" juries, via involuntary neurological suppression, into believing:
  • 7(D)(ii)(1)  they can only do what we say and
  • 7(D)(ii)(2)  they are not allowed to vote their conscience and
  • 7(D)(ii)(3)  they should only vote regarding facts and judicially selected evidence, not facts and the law.
7(E)  Jury Selection
We must continue to use the word "random selection" when describing the jury selection pool since "random selection" can mean a non specific selection of any group.

SECRET CANON 8 JUSTICE

8(A)  The Value Of Justice
We forever hold Justice as the precious and proper administration of laws filtered by legal analysis and unaffected by the end result, even when the end result is the improper administration of laws.
8(B)  The Privilege Of Justice
We hold Justice to be more of a privilege than a right. As a result, Justice should never be dispensed casually, freely or indiscriminately.
8(C)  Appeals Insure Justice
We hold a denial of justice is an impossibility due to everyone's right of appeal. We hold this to be true irregardless of a litigant's time, money or resources.
8(D)  Justice For All
We hold Justice is for all , but only after first deciding which standard of law we will apply, the "spirit of the law" or the "letter of the law" and after;
    • 8(D)(i)  the exact terminology and the exact questions are used to describe the injustice in the exact manner we require at the time and
    • 8(D)(ii)  said terminology is precisely used with other precise terminology in the exact manner we happen to be requiring at the time and
    • 8(D)(iii)  the exact form is used in the exact manner we happen to be requiring at the time and
    • 8(D)(iv)  said form is exactly prepared with other exactly prepared forms which we are requiring at the time and
    • 8(D)(v)  time requirements are exactly followed with respect to a host of issues that we
      • happen to be requiring at the time and

      • 8(D)(vi)  all tools of eliminating litigants have been judiciously attempted such as overcharging, plea bargain, premature dismissals, expert testimony, res judicata,etc. and
      • 8(D)(vii)  we can't possibly find a way to use the great catch all "judicial discretion" to eliminate a litigant and
      • 8D(viii)  we have made litigants go through as many possible steps as we can conjure up irregardless of the litigant's time or financial resources and
      • 8(D)(ix)  any other judicially prudent, meticulous and painstaking attempt at finding a reason to avoid granting Justice unnecessarily.
      8(E)  Due Process Defined
      First, decide how we want the case to go.  Second, formulate a legal logic to support our decision.  Third, manipulate, dissect or eliminate the facts and evidence to support our decision.  Then the rubber stamp doctrine of "judicial discretion" will prevent most decisions from being overturned

      SECRET CANON 9 LAW

      9(A)  The Nature Of Law
      We hold the nature of the law similar to "silly putty". We may bend, stretch or reshape the law to say what fits our purpose.
      9(B)  The Flexibility Of Law
      We hold the law is like the Bible, it can be made to say anything we want with enough quotes, viewpoints and cross references.
      9(C)  The Standards Of Law
      The "letter of the law" and the "spirit of the law" are two different legal standards of Justice and the Law. We may choose the standard that suits our fancy.
      9(D)  The Equal Application Of Law
      We hold the law must always be equally applied, depending on the circumstances and the litigant.
      9(E)  No One Above The Law
      We hold no one is above the law.  [Tee hee hee, wink wink]

      SECRET CANON 10 ON AND OFF THE RECORD

      10(A)  Purpose Of Back Room Meetings
      We will make ample use of back room meetings to keep litigants in the dark. They can not and should not see or understand the process of litigation.
      10(B)  Back Room Meetings Enhance Justice
      •  
      10(B)(i) We hold injustice can not result from back room meetings because if wrongdoing occurs, clients can sue their Lawyers for malpractice.
      •  
      10(B)(ii)  To avoid complications, we avoid mentioning or considering the resources required for or the near impossibility of finding a lawyer to sue another lawyer.
      •  
      10(C)  Health Benefits Of Back Room Meetings
      We hold the practice of moving to and from back room meetings can assist with circulation, constipation, rectal itch, gaseous emissions, breathing and caloric consumption.
      10(D)  Back Room Meetings Are Open Court
      We shall go off the record as much as possible being careful to maintain the illusion of "open court."
      10(E)  The Unmentionable Contract
      We prefer clients not be present in back room meetings while never mentioning we hold theclient to whatever their lawyer agrees to in these meetings.
      10(F)  Accuracy Of Record
      We resist new equipment that transcribes immediately. We prefer to have the option of making corrections to insure accuracy before the record is transcribed.
      10(G)  Consequences Of Clients At Back Room Meetings
      We hold a client's presence at back room meetings can result in inappropriate evaluations of Judicial and Attorney conduct and expertise.

SECRET CANON 11 PRO SE'S, THE POOR AND INDIGENTS

11(A)  The Protection Of The Public
11(A)(i) We hold the need to protect the public from the dangers of self representation far outweighs the fair impartial administration of Justice. To protect the public from the dangers of self representation we shall:
  • 11(A)(i)(1)  approach the Pro Se, poor or indigent's complaint from this objectively protective and compassionate position, "Is there anyway I can deny this petition?"
  • 11(A)(i)(2)  use Judicially prudent unbiased techniques to intimidate, frustrate, anger, nit pick, postpone, play with or in any other way rid ourselves of a Pro Se, poor or indigent litigant.
  • 11(A)(i)(3)  assist the Pro Se, poor or indigent in a resolution by bending or ignoring the rules on ex parte communications.
  • 11(A)(i)(4)  nurture an unfriendly environment in a dignified and polite manner.
  • 11(A)(i)(5)  minimize or ignore Judicial, Court or Attorney errors while magnifying any errors of the Pro Se, poor or indigent litigant.
  • 11(A)(i)(6)  politely move on to the next case before the Pro Se, poor or indigent is finished. This will assist eliminating them later with arguments such as Res Judicata.
11(B)  Disposition Before Written Decisions
  • 11(B)(i)  It is best to be rid of a Pro Se, poor or indigent litigant before having to render a decision requiring written legal analysis.
  • 11(B)(ii)  If forced to render a written opinion on a Pro Se , poor or indigent case, we will stick to or switch to the arguments that validate our desired position.
  • 11(B)(iii)  In Pro Se poor or indigent cases, we prefer unpublished opinions. This makes it easier to perpetuate non sequiturs and pseudo-justice while maintaining the illusion of due process.
  • 11(C)(iv)  We hold "giving the dog a bone" occasionally is good practice and gives us some ammunition when our integrity is questioned.
11(C)  The Superiority Of Bar Members
When dealing with a Pro Se, poor or indigent litigant, we shall always give credence to members of the Bar's arguments, regardless of how absurd or off point they are.
11(D)  The Superiority Of The Status Quo
In cases involving the system, member of the bar or the status quo versus the Pro Se, poor or indigent litigant make sure the system, member of the bar or the status quo prevail regardless of how you must ignore or pervert the issues .
11(E)  Irrebuttable Presumption Of Pro Se Ignorance
We hold the Pro Se, poor or indigent litigant does not or can not understand the complex issues of litigation.
11(F)  Methods For Smart Alec Pro Se, Poor Or Indigent Litigants
If a Pro Se, poor or indigent does understand the issues we shall:
  • 11(F)(i)  repeatedly bait them to go off point or
  • 11(F)(ii)  convince them they don't understand or
  • 11(F)(iii)  diligently look for and focus on a point they don't understand clearly or
  • 11(F)(iv)  continue until they err, running with the error to make a touchdown.
11(G)  Attitude Toward Naive Pro Se, poor or indigent Litigant
We shall always take a patient but condescending attitude with a Pro Se, poor or indigent litigant that is so naive as to demand and expect fair, impartial Justice and the law applied as written.
11(H)  The Inability To Practice Law
Our inability to give legal advice or advocate is restricted to Pro Se, poor or indigent litigants, not members of the bar, the fictitious corporate person or the State.
11(I)  The In Forma Pauparis Hearing
We hold when questioning a litigant attempting to file In Forma Pauparis regarding what they own to never reveal the legal definition of "own" is to have and hold title. This effectively eliminates the unresourceful and ineffective and our ass is covered.
11(J)  The Judicial Nightmare
The nightmare of having the public believe they have a chance of receiving justice without a lawyer must be avoided at all costs. The Courts are best operated as a "members only" organization.

SECRET CANON 12 PUBLIC AND THE MEDIA

12(A)  Appeasing The Public
  • 12(A)(i)  Exemplifying one case where the system worked can cover a multitude of sins.
  • 12(A)(ii)  Occasional written opinions regarding concern about justice for the poor are effective in perpetuating the myth that we are continually and aggressively working on this issue.
  • 12(A)(iii)  When all else fails, schedule future hearings.
12(B)  Handling Of Liability
We hold where liability of the privileged, the system or the status quo is involved, admission of wrong doing or error causes more harm than good. However, occasionally throwing the dog a bone can cover a multitude of sins.
12(C)  Objective Public Image Maintained
We will continue to resist equipment in legal proceedings that can record emotion, attitude or personality traits which can affect the course of proceedings.
12(D)  High Profile Trials
High profile trials are an opportunity to show Americans the way the system should work. This is advantageous to the overwhelming majority of Americans who would never see it otherwise. This also minimizes complaints of the non-existence of an effective judicial system.
12(E)  The Priority Of The Public Trust
We hold the public trust must be maintained regardless of how we have to lie, cheat or steal to maintain it.
12(F)  Media Focus and Public Attention
We hold hearings on any judicial wrongdoing should never be conducted when media attention or public awareness is high.
12(G)  Judicial Verbal Equivalents To The Finger
When dealing with the public and the media, we shall never forget the power of the statements,
  • "You don't understand the intricacies and operations of law" and
  • "It would be inappropriate for me to comment" and
  • "Many times Judges have knowledge of details not known by the public."

SECRET CANON 13 RULES AND PROCEDURES

13(A)  Value Of Justice
We hold Justice should always be fought for, never freely handed out.
13(B)  The True Essence Of Procedure
We shall strive to find the breaking point in each individual.
13(C)  Productivity
To create the illusion of productivity we shall forever hold Justice in front of litigants like a carrot on a stick.
13(D)  Administration Of Justice
We hold the selective and selectively meticulous application and adherence to rules and procedure can be used to override the administration of Justice if the administration of Justice requires it.
13(E)  The Obstacle Course Objective
We shall always remember the amount of Citizens we have to deal with is contingent on the number of hoops we require they go through.
13(F)  Time Of The Essence
We shall remember time is on our side and the passage of time can create the illusion of thoroughness.
13(G)  Due Process
We hold the term "due process" can imply the payment of money.

SECRET CANON 14 THE SUPREMACY OF THE CORPORATE PERSON

14(A)  The Corporate Person v. The Individual
  • 14(A)(i) The fictitious Corporate person shall be held in higher esteem than the individual.
  • 14(B)(ii)  We hold individuals are better represented by a corporate entity. This is more efficient and results in fewer demands for Rights or Justice.

SECRET CANON 15 LYING AND TRUTH TELLING

15(A) The Ethics Of Lying
  • 15(A)(i) To maintain the ethical nature of legal proceedings, the word "lie" is considered vulgar as related to statements from the Judiciary or members of the bar.
  • 15(A)(ii)  We shall use terms like misspoke, spoken in error, inadvertent utterance, involuntary neurological transmission, spontaneous somnambulistic manifestation or some terminology denoting non deliberate intent when describing the statements in question.
  • 15(A)(iii)  We hold the near impossibility of the existence of the lie because objective reality can have countless varied creative interpretations and constructive descriptions. Calling another's view of objective reality a lie shows a lack of intelligence, creative viewpoints and critical thinking skills.
15(B) The Ethics Of Truth
15(B)(i) We hold truth is that which is least damaging to the status quo.

I was bound to be misunderstood, and I laugh at the idiots who misunderstand me! Kind mockery toward the well-intentioned and unfettered cruelty toward all would-be prison guards of my creative possibilities. In this way I learn to revel as much in misunderstanding as in understanding and take pleasure in worthy opponents. Making language fluid, flowing like a river, yet precise and pointed as a dirk, contradicts the socialistic purpose of language and makes for a wonderful verbal dance—a linguistic martial art with constant parries that hone the weapon that is the two edged sword of my mouth.


ReplyQuote
c^Pig
Founder..
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 746
29/09/2018 1:45 pm  

The "Justice System" is nothing more than a weapon wielded by various stripes of socio and psychopaths.  One day, thanks to these fucksticks and their blue pill enablers a criticality will occur.  A dark millennium will dawn.  The great reset will begin.   

Thanks Pete, you make us think.

🙂 🙂 🙂 Happy thoughts make happy slaves 🙂 🙂 🙂


ReplyQuote
MG-ɹǝʍo┴
Founder..
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 2924
01/10/2018 12:23 pm  
Posted by: C-Pig

 One day, thanks to these fucksticks and their blue pill enablers a criticality will occur.  A dark millennium will dawn.  The great reset will begin.   

 

"That day" (the end of the United States of America) for myself and others came and went on July 18, 1997, when the government and all it's minions ceased to exist after a long train of endless and ongoing abuse that started on January 10, 1974, when by judicial decree the Commonwealth of Massachusetts created a foreign, separate, and isolated state within it's own state, outside the United States and that nation's Constitution and due process as so stated therein. I'm in a foreign nation more detached than any Indian nation created by the United States of America. A nation of reprobate reputation, separation, isolation, and lawful damnation.  

Welcome to Brookhaven Condemned Family Campground, with homes landlocked within and condemned by law with the whole under legal injunction with official orders to CEASE AND DESIST, on and after July 18, 1997. 


ReplyQuote
The Evil Genius
Admin
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 1425
01/10/2018 8:11 pm  

I think I triggered Harpo and Tower! OH SHIT


ReplyQuote
uoSʎWodɹɐH
Founder.
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 685
02/10/2018 1:21 am  

Evil Genius  I have chained my emotions and have no juice buttons within your reach .

I just enjoy spreading the hidden truth about the incredible accusation industry who wrap themselves in the EDGAR suits of the judiciary.

I cannot speak for MGtower, but I am sure we have a similar understanding as to what that reset button he speaks about is..

When enough people exit as we have then the government will have to turn away and ignore the exclusively private populous. (hopefully a majority)

The regulation of private rights is unlawful.  Sounds like a coming rapture to me.

As a prisoner of this spiritual war.

I have a duty to escape and liberate as many as possible on my way out.

If the people cannot find there own kingdom I will show them mine.

If they refuse to make a dash through this small door, then

I cannot help them when they are herded like sheep  through those

wide gates that lead to destruction.

Those who govern the least govern the best.

My fathers jurisdiction is not open to the public but only for exclusively private faithful believers.

Now I understand why people will gladly accept the mark of his  government. 

A small lawful jurisdictional refuge is preferable to the large lawless federation we have now. 

Sad that so many good people will be unable to unchain themselves from a lifetime of indoctrination.

Many are called but few will be chosen.

Blessings, love and respect

 

 

 

 

 

I was bound to be misunderstood, and I laugh at the idiots who misunderstand me! Kind mockery toward the well-intentioned and unfettered cruelty toward all would-be prison guards of my creative possibilities. In this way I learn to revel as much in misunderstanding as in understanding and take pleasure in worthy opponents. Making language fluid, flowing like a river, yet precise and pointed as a dirk, contradicts the socialistic purpose of language and makes for a wonderful verbal dance—a linguistic martial art with constant parries that hone the weapon that is the two edged sword of my mouth.


ReplyQuote
MG-ɹǝʍo┴
Founder..
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 2924
02/10/2018 11:53 am  
Posted by: The Evil Genius

I think I triggered Harpo and Tower! OH SHIT

Where does a flowing stream have a "trigger"? 

Where is the "trigger" to waves breaking on a beach? 

My solidarity is eternal and whole, I forsake the system I was taught to trust and obey. Their ends deliver to certain geo-judicial-sociological-political death, I'm dead to them and they're dead to me.

R.I.P. The United States of America. 


ReplyQuote
Uly The Cunning
Admin
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 2183
02/10/2018 12:52 pm  
Posted by: MG-Tower
Posted by: The Evil Genius

I think I triggered Harpo and Tower! OH SHIT

Where does a flowing stream have a "trigger"? 

Where is the "trigger" to waves breaking on a beach? 

My solidarity is eternal and whole, I forsake the system I was taught to trust and obey. Their ends deliver to certain geo-judicial-sociological-political death, I'm dead to them and they're dead to me.

R.I.P. The United States of America. 

Well, according to our current government, citizens can no longer own anything. That is why we constantly have to pay tax, which is just rent, to the government. They can come and take any possession should they feel you owe them more. We are nearly at a point where the next step is spending and earning regulations to ensure no one becomes too wealthy to break out of the system. 

"Remember, you're fighting for this woman's honor, which is probably more than she ever did."
Groucho Marx: Duck Soup (1933)


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 2
Advertisements