-12 votes

Why does the liberty movement abhor justice?

Why is that the Liberty movement seems to abhor equal justice for the criminal bureaucrats?

The criminals claiming to be 'government' have destroyed countless individuals and families across the country with their drug war and unequal application of law upon the population. Nearly all criminal actions in America have no accuser who invoked the agency of government to perform on their behalf which violates our most supreme law; Governments derive their just (lawful) powers from consent of the governed.

Nearly every action the government performs leads to the destruction of someone's peace and never had consent of the governed issued as the accuser who will face the accused in court, which means the LEO's and courts are operating in breach of law. However, the liberty movement doesn't seem to understand this. It seems the Liberty movement wants to stick with the statutory code manipulation game where all law is enforced without ever having consent of the governed issued through an accuser from the governed who will face the accused.

It is my understanding in law that without consent of the governed issued in the form of all elements in a valid cause of action alleging actual injury in each individual action taken by government that the action is not lawful and only color of law. Even the maxims in law state explicitly

"An action is not given to one who is not injured."

"An action is not given to him who has received no damages"

Yet our 'courts' ignore this daily and actually perform very serious injury upon the people constantly every working day and if anyone tries to bring them to justice then each request for redress is answered only with repeated injury.

Why does it seems that the liberty movement does not want to pursue justice against these most egregious criminals who openly violate the law and injure people without just cause? Why is it that the only path to remedy pursued is politics, that from all investigation only keeps expanding the amount of institutionalized injury?

Can anyone explain to me why justice is not pursued and only politics is pursued within the liberty movement?



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

You should place them under citizens arrest...

or file a civil suit.

huh?

I thought the liberty movement DID want the leaders brought to justice...They violate the Constitution nearly every day.

At the very least, our leaders should be tried as war criminals for their crimes against humanity.

We may want justice but we are not pursuing justice

I waited till the end of 'election' to come to the DP even because I already knew their are no elections in America. I thought maybe the single largest movement in modern American history would be smart enough to see the crime and then realize that we are going to have to change our tactics and get real if we want the rule of law restored.

If so many people rallied around Ron Paul in such a large way why can't this same group rally with the same vigor around justice. Instead of campaigning why not criminally investigate and work with our Grand Juries to indict every last criminal who is doing the actual injury? Are we too intellectually bankrupt to that we cannot understand how to use the protections of law for proper remedy against criminals who injure us? They have levied an entire drug war on the population and gotten away with it. Levying war on the People is TREASON. They openly levy war and we think we need modify some statutes? What the hell is wrong with us? Why do we openly support a candidate who wants to restore the rule of law and follow the Constitution but we do not want to hold the criminal scumbags fraudulently claiming to be 'government' accountable to the bounded duty the contracted for?

I don't understand why we can't have the Ron Paul revolution with all it's vigor and organic asymmetric organization turn the attention to actual justice. We don't need to change statutes we need to remove those people who think that they can arbitrarily apply statutes to the people from society through actual justice. It seems everyone thinks we need to elect the right person to office who will then change the 'laws' when that is ridiculous because it is not lawful for our servants to levy war on the people or to do anything without consent of the governed. The injury we are experiencing is from individual men and women who refuse to be uphold the Organic laws and seek to exert their will over people without consent from the people requesting their services.

What the 'government' is doing right now with citations and arrests for victimless 'crimes' is the equivalent of Walmart sending a security guard to kidnap you and make you shop at Walmart. The criminals claiming to be 'government' forcing 'justice' upon people who never asked for it is literally as insane as Walmart making us shop at their store. For some reason it seems even the intelligent people of the liberty cannot comprehend this fact.

We keep complaining and put time, energy and treasure into politics that keeps failing all while criminal injury is being committed against by individual men and women who work in 'law enforcement' and 'courts'. Anyone who is going to force 'justice' upon someone who does not need it is a criminal operating under color of law and we NEED to bring those men and women to justice so that they remedy from their on-going crime can be had. They are the ones doing the injury they are criminals who have usurped the people's power. All of laws are for naught until We the People exercise our power and bring these psychos to justice. They keep destroying people's lives for no reason. They keep thinking they can tell us what we have to do when real law is actually exactly the opposite.

These people are the biggest criminals on the planet and we act like we need to play politics for remedy when politics was never designed to solve a crime problem. The only conclusion can be is that the liberty movement abhors justice whether through ignorance of law or fear.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

well

You are speaking a level or two above my understanding but i agree that elections are mostly symbolic. Nothing changes until the system is abolished. Cancer cannot be co-opted, it must be destroyed.

I dont know how these things get done but am listening for ideas.

fucking

Shut up

Pandacentricism will be our downfall.

Going all Billy O on me.

I guess I am making some progress.

Few have debate here and the debate is weak at best. The liberty movement could actually have a defined goal to achieve with tactics to get to the destination but it seems everyone just wants to bitch and play politics instead of actually achieving liberty through upholding the law.

Sorry I am not going to shut up. I am going to see to it that either America maintains divine providence through adherence to our organic laws or that divine providence is revoked through consent via silence. I am not letting anyone off the hook anymore.

It's time to put up or lose everything. I am done with the bs.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

My first reaction was to ask

My first reaction was to ask the philosophical question: "what is justice?" But reading further along it seems to me that there is an important hidden assumption in the initial question that requires some discussion, and that once comletely understood, may nullify the question.

The hidden assumption is that Americans actualy have standing in law to call for and demand justice. I do not believe this to be the case. I've talked about aspects of this in other comments, but I will try to be comprehensive and succinct.

Most Americans (save a very few) have federal nationality, the nationality of US citizen, not indevidual state nationality.

Washington and Jefferson held state nationality. They were Virginians. There was no such thing in law as a US citizen until the adoption of the 14th Amendment.

It is a falicy to believe that there is such a thing a dual citizenship. One cannot serve two masters or pledge elegence to two states. The 14th Amendment states: all persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens thereof and of the state in which they reside. An American can be a resident of France, but he retains his United States nationality and citizenship. The same is true within the Union. Regardless of the state in which they reside, US citizens retain their US nationality and citizenship. The federal nationality always takes precedence.

Also, the states of the American Union are truely nations with nationality. They preexist the Union and the Constitution. There is no evidence that their existence as nations has ever been diminished.

So, Article 4 states that no two states can occupy the same territory. Massachusetts (and every other state) is a member of the Union, but the government called The United States has no jurisdiction there except for that which Massachusetts (or the other states as the case may be) grant to it. All the territory within the boarders of Massachusetts belongs to Massachusetts not The United States.

The United States exists solely in the District of Columbia.

The District of Columbia is not a state.

The Constitution is only in force within the Union.

As federal nationals, U S citizens homeland, thier national territory, is the District of Columbia.

Because the District of Columbia is not part of the Union, US citizens have no access to the Constitution.

Back to state nationals. Washington and Jefferson were the closest to being "We the People" as one could get because they held, with all other Virginians, the the colective sovereignty of their state as members of its lawful body politic. US citizens, on the other hand, have abdicated their natural rights as members of the states' bodies politic, whose natural rights are protected by common law and state constitutions, in favor of the federal nationality that comes with the status of US citizen with its civil rights.

I argue therefore that US citizens, those with federal nationality, do not have standing in law to demand justace of any kind against the crimes of the political elite because they have volutarily embraced a status in law which is that of subject under the direct jurisdiction of Congress and its statutory law.

The 13th Amendment may have abolished private slavery through involuntary servitude, but the 14th Amendment instituted public slavery through voluntary servitude.

Read THE RED AMENDMENT (link below) to understand the power you can have in law by correcting you nationality and political status. The chioce is yours.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

The 14th Amendment

is one of the most misunderstood piece of legislation ever written. Most of us have it all wrong.

http://www.originalintent.org/edu/14thamend.php

As soon as some one says

"all persons.... born in the... and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are"

criminals are at work.

In fact such a statement ending up in the US Constitution reveals that criminals' who believe and want slavery and despotism are at work to apply legal status title to everyone within a certain geographically interpreted bounds. This legal status is then used by criminals as plausible deniability.

We can use the 14th to find both the corrupt and intellectually bankrupt. That is why it is there, divinely revealed for all those who understand real law.

I-C-U!

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

Everything needs to get easy and simple so everyone can

participate in law. We can talk about the details but the only we need to realize in all of that is the 14th Amendment does not lawfully exist and people have equal protections of under common law.

The Constitution is the law for government and is not within the scope of such a document to place rules on the People because that law serves a very specific function of binding government not the people. The People ordained the document to apply to government fictional capacity not to themselves. The Constitution was never intended to apply to the People at all and by the intrinsic nature of the hierarchy of law the derived code is not applicable to the People who created the entity it is only applicable to those within its capacity; those on duty.

The People already had common law as equal people who had the power accusation against another and if he/she was a Citizen then was able to invoke the agency of government when needed for paying for that relation. The People enabled the Constitutional entity to hear common law cases and therefore this was a service accessible to commoners (full liability men and women not within the Citizen capacity). This was the difference between commoner and the Citizen. The Citizen was one who participates in Government but this gave no one special rights because the whole premise of enlightened law is everyone is born equal and free of any contracts or obligations. As people enter into contracts the full liability man/woman enters into a capacity or veil with binding contract law restricting the rights while in that capacity. The very nature of any capacity is that it has bounded duty within constrained rights and therefore can NEVER be lawfully granted rights superior to what a natural man already has, the contractual capacity will always be less by the intrinsic nature of law itself. This the key fact in law that the crats are missing. They think they are in some supra capacity with supra rights because of their limited liability while in the capacity of what they see as the Sovereign, all while this capacity has no super rights only has bounded rules of engagements. Because all law has an intrinsic hierarchy with the Organic laws being the pinnacle source any logic contradiction with the source law would not be lawful, which means consent of the governed being the only source of lawful power means that if they don't have a principal for the action then they cannot have lawful agency thus they stand fully liable for their actions. This is exactly why peace officers where/are bonded because of the nature of potentially breaching their bounded duty when interacting with the public. m The bond was the insurance for errors outside of lawful agency.

This is the simple root in our law that nearly everyone can grasp IF they were to see the fact that a liable principal accuser is required for any lawful action

and while the usurpers tried to use 'law' as a social control tool that is not what law is AT ALL. Law is a set of non-conflicting truths that make up the impartial process for determining justice and remedy from injury among parties in a non-violent forum. If any one harms you without just cause then one is due remedy. It doesn't matter who the party is. The BAR has worked very hard to build a system that obfuscates the process of identifying the liable party in criminal cases.

Any bureaucrat claiming monopoly over the law is a criminal. Those are the control freak tyrants who are easy to find once one knows and upholds the law.

As far as not having standing because of status, the law is no respecter of persons and the fact that the 14th amendment does not lawfully exist and all elements of a valid cause of action against those who assert such fraud of personhood as the basis of the statutory code application then it is those criminal men injuring us with their fraud and extortion racket who give us standing.

Also if you think the 14th amendment person is voluntary servitude you have lost your mind. I know they think that it is voluntary but that is exactly what We the People need to bring them to justice over; they keep saying its voluntary while they also say we will face the consequences of fines and imprisonment for non-compliance. This is a usurpation of the Common Law and this crime is the target for removal from our society. If the People can't understand that then no they will never have standing and they are slaves to criminals through their own consent. This is the battle we face and we can see that even most in the liberty movement have their heads so far up their ass that they can't see the light of day to even know what the problem or even know what criminal activity vs lawful behavior actually is. It is through the individuals own ignorance that they abhor justice and their downvotes here help validate the psychopaths crimes but most in the liberty movement are self-consenting slaves who complain about the problems that arise from the crimes that enslave themselves but are not willing to bring justice.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

I agree that the all the

I agree that the all the evidence suggests that the 14th Amendment was not properly ratified, but the truth is that is in force and effect - particularly if you are a US citizen and claim protections and benefits under it.Merely claiming to be a US citizen is acquiescence to the legitimacy of the 14th Amendment.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

Agreed - until

new information comes to light for the individual who has been defrauded.

That is nature of fraud. At some point new information comes to light that demonstrates indeed one's pervious understanding was based on not only insufficient disclosure of facts but in this case also upon actual warfare and extortion that led to the fraud of loss of rights through deceptive loss of lawful status being committed upon you by other men who intentionally ignored the facts to keep the ongoing criminal tyranny through fraud in place.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

True

"Agreed - until new information comes to light for the individual who has been defrauded."

True, but proving fraud is a very difficult task, especially without having corrected the status that you have found fraudulent. For once you discover that you have a fraudulent status it is your obligation to correct it, or, through your inaction, you accept the jurisdiction of that status as being legitimate and you loose standing to declare fraud.

It's a tough row to hoe. Much easier to just correct your status and have a solid footing to stand on.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

have you "corrected your status"

and prevailed in any kind of litigation where this legal theory was validated?

I am walking the path.. the

I am walking the path.. the point is to know the law so you don't have to go to court. In my limited experience those that enter into litigation are better off controlling the prosess by being pro-active rather than being reactive and defencive. Also the court system will avoid any ruling that exposes the true nature of American's lawful status. All the cases I'm aware of are stuck in an internal administrative loop that will never be fully adjudicated or see the light of day. Innocent before proven guilty. This is the fate of suits brought by those who, not only know the law, but know the answer to all the anticipated questions that will be asked in court.

Also, the leagal "theory" is validated throught the process of withdrawl as one interacts with the federal beuacracy.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

I get the knowing the law part, but there would be evidence

and documentation of successful interactions.
Do you have or anyone you know have such evidence to proffer?

Like Pete Hendrickson's "Every which way but loose" series that documents hundreds of peoples "administrative loops" that result in agency withdrawal.

I don't know if Pete is right or not (legally) but I know he thinks he's right and doesn't hide documentation that demonstrates why he thinks he's right.

If you really think you have the silver bullet, and have evidence that is works, please let us know!

Also, I talked with the man who wrote the red amendment and he gave a whole lot of additional information about the practical side of living the argument. It essentially amounted to being completely off the radar. Everything under the table, owning nothing in one's name, and not advertising if one is in business.

But that was 5 years ago or so. I don't know his current thinking on such things.

L.B. Bork wrote the Red

L.B. Bork wrote the Red Amendment. He uses the phrase "civilly dead" to describe the condition one achieves as a State National who has withdrawn his consent to be governed by the federal government, and has, through lawful and demonstrable action, disconected all contractual (and other ties) to the federal government. The proof is in the resulting irrefutable documentation that you receive from them of your seperation (expatriation).

There is no question that the NWO elites designed the system as it is to make it as difficult as possible to leave. There are no incentives other than to achieve true freedom, and retake your rightful place with others as the lawful body politic of your state. One does not have to hide, one is already civily invisible. The important thing is to NOT reenage with the beast. One can get really hurt that way.

If you haven't read THE RED AMENDMENT, you should. There's a lot of great history and law in there. During that process contact L.B. at PAC and talk to him in depth about about what ever questions you may have. I've found him helpful and pleasant as long as I'm not agressive or arrogant, or present myself as a "know-it-all." He knows a lot more than I do.

Good luck.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

Yes I've read it, but it was years ago and I spoke with the man

and agree with your assessment of him. He was a generous and sincere fellow.

Here is my synopsis of the book. The individual subjects oneself to the legislative jurisdiction of the federal government and the state governments by different legal mechanisms. Registering to vote...doing biz with a social security number...and the like admits one is a 14th amendment citizen of the federal government. One must expatriate from the federal government and retain his state citizen status to relieve himself of federal legislative burdens.
-Am I close?

The results you speak of are not sufficient to validate the legal efficacy of the theory.

See what I'm saying...Is it corollary or is it causative?

There could be a number of reasons why this works. If one disappears/goes off the grid/goes underground/how ever you want to phrase it...then that in and of itself could be the reason why one doesn't get more trouble.

However, if one has documentation of administrative victories/a paper-trail of wins/or of the gov relenting...then that would be much better evidence that the status correction is causative. Amazing evidence would be a dismissal by a judge, or a finding of law by a judge (which I agree would be extraordinary), or an appellate court decision (again extraordinary).

Having evidence that it is causative would be fantastic.

Yes, I'd say you have a

Yes, I'd say you have a pretty good idea of the basic nugget. As I've said, I'm walking my path and have a great deal to learn along the way. I'm not sure that there's much more I can help you with. I suggest you reengage with LB for the greater clarification you desire.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

tell you what-how about I reread the book and we stay in contact

We could be study buddies.

I have been reading and studying civics for a number of years and am dedicated to achieving individual liberty in my lifetime.

If this is a way...so be it. The sooner the better as far as I'm concerned.

My current understanding of civics doesn't comport with his position, but I would like to revisit the material again.

I'd like that. :-)

I'd like that. :-)

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

There is a problem with all of the "status correction" angle

The 14th amendment corporate person was born of fraud and warfare. It is clear that most do not even realize the corporate person is a legal entity they created to put you into regulatory applicable entity.

So for one to have to go through the process to 'correct the status' is like asking for your property back from a criminal who robbed you. The entity was never valid to begin with. They committed fraud to make such a legal entity and it is slavery if one has to perform involuntary servitude to satisfy the criminals' requirements to exit a status that one never consented to creating in the first place.

This is the part that really bugs me about the red amendment- it does not suggest remedy for the on-going crime and the criminals who carry out such crimes. This is why I am calling for justice. Those psychopaths in the 'courts', 'prosecutors', BAR, and 'law enforcement' should all be put on trial for their criminal racketeering and warfare against the people. These criminals should be removed from society for good for their on-going crimes. They are the single largest threat to safety and security of the people that exists but even the liberty movement seems hopelessly lost in their individual slavery that they have no idea that any of this exists thus are unaware of the criminal fraud being committed against them.

It all seems obvious to me that these people are dangerous criminals that need to be brought to justice but most seem to think that we just need other people in congress to 'fix' things all while the people are so hopelessly lost that they don't know what is wrong so there is no way they can possibly know how to fix things.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

your fiction argument seems loosely based on this quote-is it?

"Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary - having neither actuality nor substance - is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. therefor can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them." Penhallow v. Doane's Administrators, 3 U.S. 54; 1 L. Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54

Revealing yourself?

Interesting you chose that--
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lawmen/-QlZpdUiewo
Not looking good here... You might be phishin...

There is a completely different way to look at how law naturally has either congruent or conflicting facts and real case law only reflects that congruency. The case law are some of the trees but once one can see the whole forest it is a like a groove of truth that is naturally the pathway of least resistance and once the congruency is found then conflicts with that congruency will manifest themselves predictably within the neural patterns that seek to maintain congruency.

Lots more to say but no time. The psychopaths are taking all of that.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

that's exactly why i asked, Larry had just debunked this

quote that I know was the cornerstone to the "legal fiction can only interact with legal fiction position"...but since your position does not rely on cases, it doesn't matter.

You have got to tone down the paranoia, just don't share anything you don't want known.

I've made it perfectly clear why I don't agree with your position, and that I hold Becraft in high regard.

Tone down paranoia?

I am looking for the psychopaths to crawl out of the woodwork. I ride the line so that they will be attracted.

"legal fiction can only interact with legal fiction position"

This is not my position. Clearly from all case law one can consent to interact with legal fiction. The distinction I am making is that to apply a legal fiction status to real full liability man that the man had to consent to entering that capacity, otherwise, through pure natural logic, many fallacies have to be committed that, if continue, will result in all elements of crimes/violations being committed by the party/parties attempted to apply a legal fiction status to the man who never consented to entering into such status. This is an issue of the logical structure naturally intrinsic to law itself.

Knowing that law is all about PROTECTIONS then we can use the logic of law to have them reveal their criminality/errors/violations TO THEMSELVES. They will admit to these in direct conflict to their own conclusion just a minute before on a slightly different but subset of applicability f topics. Knowing these conflicts exist right now inside their neural structures means we can simply guide them through their own conflicts and then point them out them. The weighted importance/severity of the conflict is directly proportional to the corresponding emotional/motor function response of the human body. In the experiments I have conducted in courtrooms it is clear EXACTLY where a motor function response will generate from a thread of logic with revealed conflict. It is so clear that I could write down branches of potential logical outcomes and pinpoint the exact moment an answer will generate a certain type of motor response (a squirm, a sigh, blushing, anger, a scoff, an authoritarian assertion etc) then with this written down I could seal it in a letter mail it to myself for date time stamp and keep it unopened and then give them the letter after the 'case' has taken place and they could compare video to the predictions and they would see the EXACT predicted motions occur. This is why I call it REAL LAW. Even the types of motor functions response are 100% predictable. I observed, divine inspiration delivered me a hypothesis and then I applied the scientific method to see if the hypothesis is valid and it has been confirmed 100% of the time.

That is why I find this path similar to the logical reductions and corresponding motor functions shown in the fictional Columbo tv series. Columbo knows that the emotional breakdown will occur after- 'oh just one more thing' because all other logical outcomes have been eliminated. The Columbo is one fictional representation of the real logic taking place inside of all criminal investigations. We can investigate them and have them reveal conflict after conflict until the point that their peers start to question their 'leaders' competency. Once this happens the first sign of the split between the criminals and the true believers begins to occur.

The logic of law makes neural patterns in very specific manners inside the people's electrical informational processing of the brain. They have not seen the conflicts yet because of the mass intellectual bankruptcy amongst the population of slavery through ignorance crowd all pervasive. They are not challenged hence they never see the conflicts that already reside in the neural processing because the conflicting threads have never been revealed at the same time. This means they can maintain cognitive dissonance in their own processing indefinitely but once one finds the conflicts then that one can steer all discovery through those conflicts repeatedly until the one with dissonance corrects the fallacious reasoning OR the peers lose faith in their competency. This is just one aspect of natural law that provides protections to those who seek to live as a law abiding man.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

you can write me a novella every time we speak

and i do read it, but damn is it redundant.
I know your position, i've read it a hundred times now. Excuse my not being exactly precise with my words. I was trying to respect my time and yours.

Sorry. It's not just for you.

There is more information there for whoever may connect with it. Not asking for anyone's support just to think and be real about shi'.

Think of me what you will but in this forum I am never just speaking to just you or anyone else I respond to; I (PHREEDOM) am projecting into the whole in this forum, unbridled logic that is built on consistency of logic a and abhorrence to conflict in stated truth.

The reason it is repetitive is because it seems we can't have the conversation about what happens when perfect congruency within the logic of law is pursued, obtained and maintained, a place where no fraud or false advertisements by 'government' is required.

It seems every foundational logic is one of the current criminal paradigm. I do not limit my possibilities to the current criminal overlords with brainwashed minion law enforcement psychopaths paradigm. I realize free will means that we can choose to observe exactly how nature works learn from it and then exercise our free will to maintain congruency of the communication that is occurring such that the facts in nature are exactly what is happening. If one man is in error and another man is not then there is the opportunity to reveal error by the man who can see the error. Seeing and reporting error however has turned from nerd into arrogance.

Consistency has not been maintained and now the root is rotting because there seems to be a state of total confusion, an existence untethered to common sense and logical consistency. Ya know the land of 'legal crime' ;) A dance in the funion garden of lamppost earrings and a wirewheel shamu shampoo to shine our shitshow with! Just a novel tea time on a rocket ride to nonsense. Hooray!

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

The way I see it is if you

The way I see it is if you remain a US citizen you have already lost the battle because you are consenting to the fraudulant system that you acknowledge exists. In law, if you find that you have made a mistake (having an unlawful status, for example) you are obligated to correct that mistake and set the record strait, or knowingly become complicit with it, and validate its legitimacy.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

saw this and thought of you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjZAiuMVaq4

maybe it can help your cause?